Using a mobile device for margin assessment of specimen mammography in breast-conserving surgery

To compare the performance of margin assessment of specimen mammography (SM) in patients with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) on mobile devices and 5-megapixel (5M) thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) monitors based on the safety margin for pathologic results.This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and the requirement for informed consent was waived. A total of 105 consecutive breast cancer SM samples from 104 women who underwent BCS were included in the study. The SM were independently reviewed by two radiologists using mobile devices and by two additional radiologists using 5M TFT-LCD monitor. Each reader was asked to measure the shortest distance between the lesion and the lesion margin. The interpretation time was recorded. The sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were analyzed.In total, 19% (20/105) breast specimens had a positive surgical margin (<1 mm). The mean absolute difference from the pathologic margin was 0.60 ± 0.57 cm and 0.54 ± 0.47 cm using the 5 M TFT-LCD monitor and the mobile device, respectively (without any statistical significance, P = .273). The mean interpretation time was 49.5 and 47.6 s for the 5M TFT-LCD monitor and the mobile device, respectively (P = .012). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 60% and 74% for 5M TFT-LCD monitor, and 60% and 69% for the mobile device (P = 1.00 and P = .190, respectively). The kappa coefficient indicated moderate agreement for both the displays.The diagnostic performance for margin assessment of SM in BCS patients on mobile devices and 5M TFT-LCD monitors are showed not statistically difference. The findings of the study provide evidence of the benefit of the mobile device for SM interpretation in patients who underwent BCS. However, a large sample size study is warranted before using a mobile device for margin evaluation on SM.The mobile device showed comparable diagnostic performance with 5M TFT-LCD monitor in the evaluation of SM margin in patients with BCS and could be used as a display tool for immediate assessment when a dedicated LCD monitor is unavailable.

Breast reconstruction and radiation therapy: An Italian expert Delphi consensus statements and critical review

Breast conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiation therapy (RT) or mastectomy have shown comparable oncological outcomes in early-stage breast cancer and are considered standard of care treatments. Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) targeted to both the chest wall and regional lymph nodes is recommended in high-risk patients. Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS) represents a significant recent improvement in breast surgery. Nevertheless, it represents a challenge for radiation oncologists as it triggers different decision-making strategies related to treatment volume definition and target delineation. Hence, the choice of the best combination and timing when offering RT to breast cancer patients who underwent or are planned to undergo reconstruction procedures should be carefully evaluated and based on individual considerations. We present an Italian expert Delphi Consensus statements and critical review, led by a core group of all the professional profiles involved in the management of breast cancer patients undergoing reconstructive procedures and RT. The report was structured as to consider the main recommendations on breast reconstruction and RT and analyse the current open issues deserving investigation and consensus. We used a three key-phases and a Delphi process. The final expert panel of 40 colleagues selected key topics as identified by the core group of the project. A final consensus on 26 key statements on RT and breast reconstruction after three rounds of the Delphi voting process and harmonisation was reached. An accompanying critical review of available literature was summarized. A clear communication and cooperation between surgeon and radiation oncologist is of paramount relevance both in the setting of breast reconstruction following mastectomy when PMRT is planned and when extensive glandular rearrangements as OBCS is performed. A shared-decision making, relying on outcome-based and patient-centred considerations, is essential, while waiting for higher level-of-evidence data.

A survey of Canadian breast health professionals’ recommendations for high-risk benign breast disease

Summary

The management of high-risk benign breast disease (BBD) is changing because of improvements in radiological and pathological analysis. We sought to determine the current practice recommendations of breast health professionals in managing patients with high-risk BBD. We surveyed members of the Canadian Society of Surgical Oncology, Canadian Association of General Surgeons and Canadian Association of Radiologists. The survey contained demographic and case-based questions concerning management of high-risk benign breast lesions. Participants were asked for their recommendations and opinions regarding future risk of breast cancer as well as the role of chemoprevention. There was no consistency among the 41 respondents in the treatment recommendations for any of the high-risk benign conditions, and the lifetime risk associated with classic lobular carcinoma in situ was vastly underestimated. Education and evidenced-based guidelines are urgently needed to ensure more uniform practice nationally.

Margins in breast cancer: How much is enough?

The appropriate negative margin width for women undergoing breast-conserving surgery for both ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma is controversial. This review examines the available data on the margin status for invasive breast cancer and DCIS, and highlights the similarities and differences in tumor biology and standard treatments that affect the local recurrence (LR) risk and, therefore, the optimal surgical margin. Consensus guidelines support a negative margin, defined as no ink on tumor, for invasive carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy. Because of differences in the growth pattern and utilization of systemic therapy, a margin of 2 mm has been found to minimize the LR risk for women with DCIS undergoing lumpectomy and radiation therapy (RT). Wider negative margins do not improve local control for DCIS or invasive carcinoma when they are treated with lumpectomy and RT. Re-excision for negative margins should be individualized, and the routine practice of performing additional surgery to obtain a wider negative margin is not supported by the literature. Cancer 2018;124:1335-41. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Evaluating the Effect of Margin Consensus Guideline Publication on Operative Patterns and Financial Impact of Breast Cancer Operation

BACKGROUND

This study sought to evaluate re-excision rates, patient satisfaction with their breasts, and healthcare costs before and after publication of 2014 Society of Surgical Oncology/American Society of Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast conserving operation with whole-breast irradiation for stage I and II breast cancer at an academic institution.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with stage I and II invasive carcinomas who underwent partial mastectomy were divided into 2 groups based on whether they were treated before (PRE) or after (POST) guideline publication in March 2014. Groups were compared with respect to re-excision rates, conversion to mastectomy, specimen volumes, mean cost per patient of surgical care, and prospectively collected patient post-procedure quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients who underwent partial mastectomy were examined (n = 126 in the PRE group and n = 111 in the POST group). Patients in the POST group were less likely to require re-excision (9% POST vs 37% PRE; p < 0.001) and were less likely to undergo conversion to mastectomy (5% POST vs 14% PRE; p = 0.02). After consensus guideline publication, mean operative cost per patient decreased ($4,874 POST vs $5,772 PRE; p < 0.001), and patients had improved breast quality of life scores (77 out of 100 POST vs 61 out of 100 PRE; p = 0.03). On multivariable analysis, publication of the consensus statement was an independent predictor of decreased re-excision rates (odds ratio 0.17; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.38; p < 0.001) and operative cost per patient (odds ratio 0.14; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.30; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Widespread implementation of the consensus guideline on margins for breast conserving operation will likely lead to the intended improvements in operative and financial outcomes, as well as patient satisfaction with breast conserving operation.

Optimizing fresh specimen staining for rapid identification of tumor biomarkers during surgery

RATIONALE

Positive margin status due to incomplete removal of tumor tissue during breast conserving surgery (BCS) is a prevalent diagnosis usually requiring a second surgical procedure. These follow-up procedures increase the risk of morbidity and delay the use of adjuvant therapy; thus, significant efforts are underway to develop new intraoperative strategies for margin assessment to eliminate re-excision procedures. One strategy under development uses topical application of dual probe staining and a fluorescence imaging strategy termed dual probe difference specimen imaging (DDSI). DDSI uses a receptor-targeted fluorescent probe and an untargeted, spectrally-distinct fluorescent companion imaging agent topically applied to fresh resected specimens, where the fluorescence from each probe is imaged and a normalized difference image is computed to identify tumor-target distribution in the specimen margins. While previous reports suggested this approach is a promising new tool for surgical guidance, advancing the approach into the clinic requires methodical protocol optimization and further validation.

METHODS

In the present study, we used breast cancer xenografts and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate a wide range of staining and imaging parameters, and completed a prospective validation study on multiple tumor phenotypes with different target expression. Imaging fluorophore-probe pair, concentration, and incubation times were systematically optimized using n=6 tissue specimen replicates per staining condition. Resulting tumor vs. normal adipose tissue diagnostic performance were reported and staining patterns were validated via receptor specific immunohistochemistry colocalization. Optimal staining conditions were tested in receptor positive and receptor negative cohorts to confirm specificity.

RESULTS

The optimal staining conditions were found to be a one minute stain in a 200 nM probe solution (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.97), where the choice of fluorescent label combination did not significantly affect the diagnostic performance. Using an optimal threshold value determined from ROC curve analysis on a training data set, a prospective study on xenografts resulted in an AUC=0.95 for receptor positive tumors and an AUC = 0.50 for receptor negative (control) tumors, confirming the diagnostic performance of this novel imaging technique.

CONCLUSIONS

DDSI provides a robust, molecularly specific imaging methodology for identifying tumor tissue over benign mammary adipose tissue. Using a dual probe imaging strategy, nonspecific accumulation of targeted probe was corrected for and tumor vs. normal tissue diagnostic potential was improved, circumventing difficulties with ex vivo tissue specimen staining and allowing for rapid clinical translation of this promising technology for tumor margin detection during BCS procedures.

Current margin practice and effect on re-excision rates following the publication of the SSO-ASTRO consensus and ABS consensus guidelines: a national prospective study of 2858 women undergoing breast-conserving therapy in the UK and Ireland

INTRODUCTION

There is variation in margin policy for breast conserving therapy (BCT) in the UK and Ireland. In response to the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology (SSO-ASTRO) margin consensus ('no ink on tumour' for invasive and 2 mm for ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]) and the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) consensus (1 mm for invasive and DCIS), we report on current margin practice and unit infrastructure in the UK and Ireland and describe how these factors impact on re-excision rates.

METHODS

A trainee collaborative-led multicentre prospective study was conducted in the UK and Ireland between 1st February and 31st May 2016. Data were collected on consecutive BCT patients and on local infrastructure and policies.

RESULTS

A total of 79 sites participated in the data collection (75% screening units; average 372 cancers annually, range 70-900). For DCIS, 53.2% of units accept 1 mm and 38% accept 2-mm margins. For invasive disease 77.2% accept 1 mm and 13.9% accept 'no ink on tumour'. A total of 2858 patients underwent BCT with a mean re-excision rate of 17.2% across units (range 0-41%). The re-excision rate would be reduced to 15% if all units applied SSO-ASTRO guidelines and to 14.8% if all units followed ABS guidelines. Of those who required re-operation, 65% had disease present at margin.

CONCLUSION

There continues to be large variation in margin policy and re-excision rates across units. Altering margin policies to follow either SSO-ASTRO or ABS guidelines would result in a modest reduction in the national re-excision rate. Most re-excisions are for involved margins rather than close margins.

Toolbox to Reduce Lumpectomy Reoperations and Improve Cosmetic Outcome in Breast Cancer Patients: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Consensus Conference

BACKGROUND

Multiple recent reports have documented significant variability of reoperation rates after initial lumpectomy for breast cancer. To address this issue, a multidisciplinary consensus conference was convened during the American Society of Breast Surgeons 2015 annual meeting.

METHODS

The conference mission statement was to "reduce the national reoperation rate in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery for cancer, without increasing mastectomy rates or adversely affecting cosmetic outcome, thereby improving value of care." The goal was to develop a toolbox of recommendations to reduce the variability of reoperation rates and improve cosmetic outcomes. Conference participants included providers from multiple disciplines involved with breast cancer care, as well as a patient representative. Updated systematic reviews of the literature and invited presentations were sent to participants in advance. After topic presentations, voting occurred for choice of tools, level of evidence, and strength of recommendation.

RESULTS

The following tools were recommended with varied levels of evidence and strength of recommendation: compliance with the SSO-ASTRO Margin Guideline; needle biopsy for diagnosis before surgical excision of breast cancer; full-field digital diagnostic mammography with ultrasound as needed; use of oncoplastic techniques; image-guided lesion localization; specimen imaging for nonpalpable cancers; use of specialized techniques for intraoperative management, including excisional cavity shave biopsies and intraoperative pathology assessment; formal pre- and postoperative planning strategies; and patient-reported outcome measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

A practical approach to performance improvement was used by the American Society of Breast Surgeons to create a toolbox of options to reduce lumpectomy reoperations and improve cosmetic outcomes.

Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer

PURPOSE

To convene a multidisciplinary panel of breast experts to examine the relationship between margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and develop a guideline for defining adequate margins in the setting of breast conserving surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A multidisciplinary consensus panel used a meta-analysis of margin width and IBTR from a systematic review of 33 studies including 28,162 patients as the primary evidence base for consensus.

RESULTS

Positive margins (ink on invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ) are associated with a 2-fold increase in the risk of IBTR compared with negative margins. This increased risk is not mitigated by favorable biology, endocrine therapy, or a radiation boost. More widely clear margins than no ink on tumor do not significantly decrease the rate of IBTR compared with no ink on tumor. There is no evidence that more widely clear margins reduce IBTR for young patients or for those with unfavorable biology, lobular cancers, or cancers with an extensive intraductal component.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of no ink on tumor as the standard for an adequate margin in invasive cancer in the era of multidisciplinary therapy is associated with low rates of IBTR and has the potential to decrease re-excision rates, improve cosmetic outcomes, and decrease health care costs.

DEGRO practical guidelines: radiotherapy of breast cancer I: radiotherapy following breast conserving therapy for invasive breast cancer

Background and purpose

The aim of the present paper is to update the practical guidelines for postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy of breast cancer published in 2007 by the breast cancer expert panel of the German Society for Radiooncology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Radioonkologie, DEGRO). The present recommendations are based on a revision of the German interdisciplinary S-3 guidelines published in July 2012.

Methods

A comprehensive survey of the literature concerning radiotherapy following breast conserving therapy (BCT) was performed using the search terms “breast cancer”, “radiotherapy”, and “breast conserving therapy”. Data from lately published meta-analyses, recent randomized trials, and guidelines of international breast cancer societies, yielding new aspects compared to 2007, provided the basis for defining recommendations according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. In addition to the more general statements of the DKG (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft), this paper addresses indications, target definition, dosage, and technique of radiotherapy of the breast after conservative surgery for invasive breast cancer.

Results

Among numerous reports on the effect of radiotherapy during BCT published since the last recommendations, the recent EBCTCG report builds the largest meta-analysis so far available. In a 15 year follow-up on 10,801 patients, whole breast irradiation (WBI) halves the average annual rate of disease recurrence (RR 0.52, 0.48–0.56) and reduces the annual breast cancer death rate by about one sixth (RR 0.82, 0.75–0.90), with a similar proportional, but different absolute benefit in prognostic subgroups (EBCTCG 2011).

Furthermore, there is growing evidence that risk-adapted dose augmentation strategies to the tumor bed as well as the implementation of high precision RT techniques (e.g., intraoperative radiotherapy) contribute substantially to a further reduction of local relapse rates. A main focus of ongoing research lies in partial breast irradiation strategies as well as WBI hypofractionation schedules. The potential of both in replacing normofractionated WBI has not yet been finally clarified.

Conclusion

After breast conserving surgery, no subgroup even in low risk patients has yet been identified for whom radiotherapy can be safely omitted without compromising local control and, hence, cancer-specific survival. In most patients, this translates into an overall survival benefit.

Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery

CONTEXT

Health care reform calls for increasing physician accountability and transparency of outcomes. Partial mastectomy is the most commonly performed procedure for invasive breast cancer and often requires reexcision. Variability in reexcision might be reflective of the quality of care.

OBJECTIVE

To assess hospital and surgeon-specific variation in reexcision rates following partial mastectomy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS

An observational study of breast surgery performed between 2003 and 2008 intended to evaluate variability in breast cancer surgical care outcomes and evaluate potential quality measures of breast cancer surgery. Women with invasive breast cancer undergoing partial mastectomy from 4 institutions were studied (1 university hospital [University of Vermont] and 3 large health plans [Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Group Health, and Marshfield Clinic]). Data were obtained from electronic medical records and chart abstraction of surgical, pathology, radiology, and outpatient records, including detailed surgical margin status. Logistic regression including surgeon-level random effects was used to identify predictors of reexcision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Incidence of reexcision.

RESULTS

A total of 2206 women with 2220 invasive breast cancers underwent partial mastectomy and 509 patients (22.9%; 95% CI, 21.2%-24.7%) underwent reexcision (454 patients [89.2%; 95% CI, 86.5%-91.9%] had 1 reexcision, 48 [9.4%; 95% CI, 6.9%-12.0%] had 2 reexcisions, and 7 [1.4%; 95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%] had 3 reexcisions). Among all patients undergoing initial partial mastectomy, total mastectomy was performed in 190 patients (8.5%; 95% CI, 7.2%-9.5%). Reexcision rates for margin status following initial surgery were 85.9% (95% CI, 82.0%-89.8%) for initial positive margins, 47.9% (95% CI, 42.0%-53.9%) for less than 1.0 mm margins, 20.2% (95% CI, 15.3%-25.0%) for 1.0 to 1.9 mm margins, and 6.3% (95% CI, 3.2%-9.3%) for 2.0 to 2.9 mm margins. For patients with negative margins, reexcision rates varied widely among surgeons (range, 0%-70%; P = .003) and institutions (range, 1.7%-20.9%; P < .001). Reexcision rates were not associated with surgeon procedure volume after adjusting for case mix (P = .92).

CONCLUSION

Substantial surgeon and institutional variation were observed in reexcision following partial mastectomy in women with invasive breast cancer.

Are breast conservation and mastectomy equally effective in the treatment of young women with early breast cancer? Long-term results of a population-based cohort of 1,451 patients aged ≤ 40 years

To compare the effectiveness of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy, all women aged ≤ 40 years, treated for early-stage breast cancer in the southern part of the Netherlands between 1988 and 2005, were identified. A total of 562 patients underwent mastectomy and 889 patients received BCT. During follow-up, 23 patients treated with mastectomy and 135 patients treated with BCT developed a local relapse without previous or simultaneous evidence of distant disease. The local relapse risk for patients treated with mastectomy was 4.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4-6.4) at 5 years and reached a plateau after 6 years at 6.0% (95% CI 3.5-8.5). After BCT, the 5-, 10- and 15-year risks were 8.3% (95% CI 6.3-10.5), 18.4% (95% CI 15.0-21.8) and 28.2% (95% CI 23.0-33.4), respectively (P < 0.0001). Adjuvant systemic therapy following BCT reduced the 15-year local relapse risk from 32.9% (95% CI 26.7-39.1) to 16.1% (95% CI 9.1-23.1), (P = 0.0007). In conclusion, local tumor control in young patients with early-stage breast cancer is worse after BCT than after mastectomy. Adjuvant systemic therapy significantly improves local control following BCT and also for that reason it should be considered for most patients ≤ 40 years. Long-term follow-up is highly recommended for young patients after BCT, because even with systemic treatment an annual risk of local relapse of 1% remains up to 15 years after treatment.

Radiotherapy for invasive breast cancer: guidelines for clinical practice from the French expert review board of Nice/Saint-Paul de Vence

PURPOSE

While new strategies for the treatment of invasive breast cancer (BC) are emerging, radiotherapy (RT) modalities are still under debate. The French expert review board of Nice-Saint-Paul de Vence was asked firstly to conduct a qualitative evidence-based systematic review and then to establish clinical practice guidelines for the use of post operative RT in invasive BC.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A search to identify eligible studies was undertaken using the Medline® database. All phase III randomized trials and systematic reviews evaluating the role and modalities of RT in invasive BC were included, together with some noncontrolled studies if no randomized trials were identified. The quality and clinical relevance of the studies were evaluated to determine the level of evidence.

RESULTS

The maximum delay between surgery and RT should ≤8 weeks when chemotherapy (CT) is not indicated. This should not exceed 24 weeks when adjuvant CT is administered. Whole breast RT delivering 50 Gy in 25 fractions followed by a boost of 10-16 Gy remains the standard of care after conservative surgery (CS). In the elderly population, for certain cases presenting comorbidities associated with a limited life expectancy, RT indication (even hypofractioned) and boost delivery may be unnecessary in the light of an unfavourable risk/benefit ratio. RT technique and indications should not vary in case of neoadjuvant CT followed by CS. After total mastectomy, RT should be indicated in N+ and in N- patients with high risk of local recurrence. The experts recommend to initiate tamoxifen at the end of RT, while aromatase inhibitors could be administered either concomitantly or sequentially with RT. There is no consistent data to delay (or suspend) trastuzumab administration during RT. As for all patients, in case of concurrent RT-trastuzumab administration, reduction of cardiac tissues exposure is highly recommended. After breast reconstruction, RT should be delivered as after standard CS without boost.

CONCLUSION

Due to significant variations in practice in the treatment of patients with BC, our group aimed to provide guidelines for clinical practice. The systematic review of the literature formed the basis of our evidence-based recommendations; however expert agreements were necessary on those subjects that are still under debate. Our group will update these guidelines every 4 years, taking in consideration new advances in technology, new drugs administration, biologic tools and innovative therapeutic options.

What is an adequate margin for breast-conserving surgery? Surgeon attitudes and correlates

BACKGROUND

Re-excision is common in breast-conserving surgery (BCS), partly due to lack of consensus on margin definitions. A population-based surgeon sample was used to determine current attitudes toward margin width and identify characteristics associated with margin choice.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients treated from 2005 to 2007 were identified from Los Angeles and Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries. Pathology reports were used to identify their surgeons, who were surveyed (n = 418). Response rate was 74.6% (n = 312). Mean surgeon age was 51.9 years, 17.8% were female, and mean number of years in practice was 18.5.

RESULTS

Wide variation in margin selection was noted among surgeons, and did not differ for invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). In a scenario of T1 invasive cancer, 11% of surgeons endorsed margins of tumor not touching ink (TNTI), 42% of 1-2 mm, 28% of > or =5 mm, and 19% >1 cm as precluding need for re-excision before radiotherapy. On multivariate analysis, having 50% or more of practice devoted to breast cancer independently predicted smaller margin choice (p = 0.03). For a patient with a 1.4-cm grade 2 estrogen receptor (ER)-positive DCIS without radiotherapy (RT) planned, 3% of surgeons chose TNTI, 12% 1-2 mm, 25% > or =5 mm, and 61% >1 cm as sufficient without re-excision. In the scenario of DCIS without RT, breast specialization independently predicted larger margin choice (p = 0.03). Gender and years in practice were not predictive of margin choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation in BCS margin definition exists. Variation is similar for invasive cancer and DCIS with RT, with more specialized surgeons choosing smaller margins. In DCIS without RT, more specialized surgeons favored larger margins. A standardized margin definition may significantly affect re-excision rates.

Standardized and reproducible methodology for the comprehensive and systematic assessment of surgical resection margins during breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The primary goal of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is to completely excise the tumor and achieve "adequate" or "negative" surgical resection margins while maintaining an acceptable level of postoperative cosmetic outcome. Nevertheless, precise determination of the adequacy of BCS has long been debated. In this regard, the aim of the current paper was to describe a standardized and reproducible methodology for comprehensive and systematic assessment of surgical resection margins during BCS.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 204 BCS procedures performed for invasive breast cancer from August 2003 to June 2007, in which patients underwent a standard BCS resection and systematic sampling of nine standardized re-resection margins (superior, superior-medial, superior-lateral, medial, lateral, inferior, inferior-medial, inferior-lateral, and deep-posterior). Multiple variables (including patient, tumor, specimen, and follow-up variables) were evaluated.

RESULTS

6.4% (13/204) of patients had positive BCS specimen margins (defined as tumor at inked edge of BCS specimen) and 4.4% (9/204) of patients had close margins (defined as tumor within 1 mm or less of inked edge but not at inked edge of BCS specimen). 11.8% (24/204) of patients had at least one re-resection margin containing additional disease, independent of the status of the BCS specimen margins. 7.1% (13/182) of patients with negative BCS specimen margins (defined as no tumor cells seen within 1 mm or less of inked edge of BCS specimen) had at least one re-resection margin containing additional disease. Thus, 54.2% (13/24) of patients with additional disease in a re-resection margin would not have been recognized by a standard BCS procedure alone (P < 0.001). The nine standardized resection margins represented only 26.8% of the volume of the BCS specimen and 32.6% of the surface area of the BCS specimen.

CONCLUSION

Our methodology accurately assesses the adequacy of surgical resection margins for determination of which individuals may need further resection to the affected breast in order to minimize the potential risk of local recurrence while attempting to limit the volume of additional breast tissue excised, as well as to determine which individuals are not realistically amendable to BCS and instead need a completion mastectomy to successfully remove multifocal disease.

Swiss roll operation for giant fibroadenoma

BACKGROUND

Fibroadenoma 5 cm or more is called giant fibroadenoma. Giant fibroadenoma can distort the shape of breast and causes asymmetry, so it should be excised. There are several techniques for excision of giant fibroadenoma. In our technique we remove them through cosmetically acceptable circumareolar incision to maintain the shape and symmetry of breast. The objectives were to assess the cosmetic results of Swiss roll operation for giant fibroadenoma. The study was conducted for six years from January, 2002 to December, 2007.

METHODS

Seventy patients of giant fibroadenoma were included in this study. They were diagnosed on history and clinical examination supported by ultrasound and postoperative histopathological examination. Data were collected from outpatient department and operation theatre. Swiss roll operation was performed under general anaesthesia.

RESULTS

Mean tumor size was 6.38 cm. Three cm and 4 cm incisions were used for tumour < or = 6 cm and > 6 cm in size respectively. Skin closed with Vicryl 3/0 subcuticular stitches. Sixteen out of 70 patients had no scar while others hadminimal scar. All patients had normal shape and symmetry of breast. On histopathology fibroadenoma was confirmed.

CONCLUSION

Giant fibroadenoma should be removed through cosmetically acceptable cicumareolar incision especially in unmarried young females who have small breast. Swiss-roll operation is superior in maintaining the shape and symmetry of breast. No major complication was found in our series except seroma formation in 10 patients.

American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria on conservative surgery and radiation: stages I and II breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND

During the past 2 decades, breast conservation therapy (BCT) has become firmly established as a standard therapeutic approach for eligible women with early-stage breast cancer. Breast radiation after conservative surgery is an integral component of BCT, resulting in comparable local control and equivalent survival to mastectomy. Successful breast conservation relies on understanding key elements for patient selection, evaluation, treatment contraindications, radiation therapy methods, and integration with systemic therapy.

METHODS

The Appropriateness Criteria Committee of the American College of Radiology convened an expert panel to examine BCT for early-stage breast cancer. By using a modified Delphi technique to generate consensus, the expert panel responded to questionnaires on 9 clinical cases that address various key elements of breast conservation. A literature review on BCT led to the generation of an evidence table to support the consensus and overview.

RESULTS

Consensus for appropriateness criteria for BCT was produced for various clinical scenarios commonly encountered in practice. These topics include radiation oncology management issues related to young patient age, sentinel node biopsy, elderly patients, other histology, positive margins, extensive intraductal component, node-positive breast cancer, genetic breast cancer, partial breast irradiation, and systemic therapy. Radiation methods for BCT are reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The Breast Cancer Panel has generated a consensus of up-to-date guidelines for the appropriate use of radiation for BCT by using a modified Delphi process for the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria.

Breast-conserving therapy for palpable and nonpalpable breast cancer: can surgical residents do the job irrespective of experience?

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of operative experience in obtaining tumor-free margins in breast-conserving therapy. In the case of palpable breast cancers, lumpectomies can safely be performed by any surgical resident. For nonpalpable breast cancers, lumpectomies should be treated only by senior residents or attending surgeons, even if supervision during the operation is given by an attending surgeon for junior residents. Radicality of breast carcinoma excision, defined by the tumor-free margin of the removed specimen has been determined to be the major prognostic factor for local recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of operative experience in obtaining tumor-free margins in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Can lumpectomy for breast carcinoma be performed by surgical residents safely?

Methods

All lumpectomies for breast carcinoma between 1999 and 2003 were included out of a prospective database of a single institution. Radicality of resection and patient and histopathologic tumor characteristics were analyzed for 660 lumpectomies. Operative experience of the surgeon performing the lumpectomy was staged as junior residents (JR, years 1–3 in residency), senior residents (SR; years 4–6 in residency), and attending surgeon (AS).

Results

A significant difference in obtaining tumor-free margins for palpable tumors was found between ASs (81%) vs. SRs assisted by another resident (92%). For nonpalpable tumors, a significant difference was found in two groups: (1) SRs assisted by another surgical resident (86%) vs. JRs assisted by another surgical resident (61%) and (2) ASs (83%) vs. JRs assisted by another resident (61%) or assisted by an AS (73%).

Conclusion

Surgical residents can safely perform BCT in patients with palpable breast cancer. The level of experience has no statistical significance for palpable tumors in a high-volume center. Nonpalpable lesions should be treated only by SRs or ASs.

Enhanced touch preps improve the ease of interpretation of intraoperative breast cancer margins

Positive margins and the resulting multiple operations are a major problem for breast conservation therapy. Accurate assessment of intraoperative tumor margins can limit multiple re-excision procedures. Intraoperative touch preparations have been used in the past but can be difficult to interpret without an experienced cytopathologist. The objective of this study is to examine the reliability of enhanced intraoperative touch preps (EIOTP) compared with final pathologic margins. We prospectively performed EIOTP on 20 tumors in women undergoing breast conservation therapy. Six margins and the main tumor were touched onto poly-L-lysine coated slides. The slides were stained with anti MUC1 and anti-E-cadherin antibodies, and Hoechst nuclear stain. A parallel set of slides were stained with hematoxylin and eosin for comparison. The EIOTP results were compared with pathologic interpretation of paraffin embedded permanent sections. A total of 120 margins underwent EIOTP in 20 patients. We found a sensitivity equal to 80 per cent, specificity 100 per cent, positive predictive value 100 per cent, and negative predictive value 99 per cent. EIOTP in conjunction with MUC-1 and E-cadherin by immunofluorescence is a sensitive and highly specific mechanism to identify cancer cells at breast tissue margins. The immunofluorescence stains may help the pathologist to identify cancer cells in fresh breast tissue and limit breast re-excisions in the future.

Intra-operative touch preparation cytology; does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy?

OBJECTIVE

Breast carcinoma is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women of North America. The combination of breast conservation surgery and radiotherapy has become a standard of treatment for the majority of breast cancers. It is critical to obtain clear margins to minimize local recurrence. However, avoiding multiple re-excisions for margin clearance helps optimize cosmetic results in patients undergoing breast conservation surgery. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology (IOTPC) may decrease the need for multiple re-excisions and thereby improve cosmesis. The literature suggests that IOTPC can be useful in evaluation of margins. Klimberg et al. evaluated the touch preparation technique prospectively in 428 patients undergoing breast biopsy for undiagnosed breast masses. Margin evaluation was correct in 100% of the lesions and was used to re-excise the margins when touch prep results were positive. They reported a diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 100% for the touch prep technique. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no published data on the role of IOTPC for evaluation of margins in re-excision cases. This report describes our experience with IOTPC for margin assessment for re-excision partial mastectomy at Beth Israel Medical Center (BIMC). The purpose of this study is to determine whether IOTPC is reliable for evaluating margins in patients undergoing re-excision for involved or close margins.

METHODS

A prospective study of 30 patients, who have undergone re-excision partial mastectomy for involved or close margins after breast conservation surgery with the use of IOTPC for margin assessment at BIMC was performed. The re-excision lumpectomy specimens were oriented by the surgeon intra-operatively and were submitted fresh to pathology for cytologic assessment. The touch prep method consisted of touching the corresponding margin onto the glass slide. The principle of this technique is that if cancer cells are present they will stick to the slide, while fat cells will not. A slide was prepared for each re-excision specimen. Air-dried samples were stained immediately using the Diff-Quik method and examined under the microscope by a cytopathologist.

RESULTS

Thirty patients underwent re-excision lumpectomy for involved or close margins with touch preparation cytology for assessment of 68 margins. Twenty-six patients had invasive ductal carcinoma and/or ductal carcinoma in situ, three patients had invasive lobular carcinoma and the remaining one patient had a combination of invasive lobular and ductal carcinoma. There was a correlation between touch prep cytology and final pathology in 56/68 margins, which accounts for 82.4% of the cases.

CONCLUSION

Intra-operative touch preparation cytology for assessment of margins in patients undergoing re-excision lumpectomy for involved or close margins has a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 82.8%, positive predictive value of 21.4%, and negative predictive value of 98.2%. This high negative predictive value and a single false negative margin are quite significant. Therefore, based on our experience, IOTPC can be a useful tool for intra-operative assessment of margins for patients undergoing re-excision partial mastectomy.

[The importance of surgical margins in conservative surgery for breast cancer]

In the last few decades, conservative surgery has become an option in the surgical treatment of breast cancer. The success of conservative surgery depends not only on appropriate patient selection but also on the combination of adequate surgical margins and an acceptable cosmetic result. Obtaining negative surgical margins in conservative breast surgery influences the incidence of local disease recurrence and probably overall survival. Therefore, it is essential to optimize intraoperative examination of margins as well as to explore new techniques that would achieve the greatest possible percentage of negative margins.

Safety and feasibility of breast conserving therapy in Indian women: Two decades of experience at Tata Memorial Hospital

PURPOSE

The NIH consensus statement on the management of breast cancer has highlighted the paucity of outcome data in non-Caucasian women. Treatment outcome and factors determining it in a large cohort of ethnic Indian women treated with breast conserving therapy (BCT) at Tata Memorial Hospital are reported here.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During 1980-2000, 1,022 pathological Stage I/II breast cancer patients (median age 43 years) underwent BCT (wide excision, complete axillary clearance, whole breast radiotherapy with 6 MV photons plus tumor bed boost, +/-systemic therapy). Median pathological tumor size was 3 cm (1-5 cm). Axillary node metastases were found in 39% women. Of the 938 patients with IDC, 70% were Grade III and in patients where receptor status was known, 209/625 (33%) were ER positive and 245/591 (41%) were PR positive.

RESULTS

The 5- and 10-year actuarial overall survival was 87% and 77% and disease-free survival was 76% and 68%, respectively. Actuarial 5-year local and locoregional control rates were 91% and 87%, respectively. Cosmesis was good or excellent in 78% women. Independent adverse prognostic factors for local recurrence were, age<40 years, axillary node metastasis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and adjuvant systemic therapy; for locoregional recurrence-inner quadrant tumor, axillary node metastasis, and LVI; for survival-LVI and axillary node metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Compared to Caucasians, these Indian women undergoing BCT were younger, had larger, higher grade, and receptor negative tumors. Comparable local control and survival was obtained by using stringent quality assurance in the diagnostic and therapeutic protocol. BCT, a resource intense treatment is safe for selected and motivated patients undergoing treatment at centers with adequate facilities and expertise even in countries with limited resources.

Accuracy of intraoperative frozen-section analysis of breast cancer lumpectomy-bed margins

BACKGROUND

My colleagues and I have been using intraoperative frozen-section analysis (FSA) to evaluate lumpectomy margins in an attempt to reduce the number of additional operations that patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or stage I and II breast cancer would have to endure. We review our experience in breast-conservation therapy (BCT) at the University of Florida (Gainesville) to determine the effectiveness of this approach.

STUDY DESIGN

Operative reports, operative logs, and pathology reports were retrospectively reviewed for patients who had BCT from January 2001 to January 2004. Ninety-seven patients (116 operations) were reviewed.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients required an additional operation (19.6%). Forty-three patients had positive margins on paraffin-embedded histologic analysis (44.3%). Accuracy of FSA was 84% when evaluated on a per-case basis, and 96% on a per-slide basis. False negatives were identified in 22 patients, affecting the operative pathway of 19 patients (19.6%) and were identified more frequently in cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (p < 0.001). There were no false positives. Additional operative time required for FSA was approximately 13 minutes per case. Eighty-four (86.6%) patients had successful BCT and 13 patients (13.4%) required mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative analysis of margins using FSA is effective at minimizing the number of additional operations, with 19 patients benefiting from immediate intervention in this study. The authors believe that the number of second operations prevented and the high BCT rates justify performing FSA. Ductal carcinoma in situ is more difficult to identify in FSA. Preoperative discussions with the patient should reflect these findings.

[Wound infection and infection-promoting factors in breast cancer surgery -- a prospective multicenter study on quality control]

INTRODUCTION

The quality of treatment of cancer of the female breast is reflected not only in such parameters as local recurrence rate and survival times, but also in the development of surgical complications. Within the framework of a study investigating the performance and quality assurance in surgical treatment of breast cancer, therefore, the wound infection rate (WIR) and factors influencing it were analysed in a large patient population.

METHODS

In the period between 1.1.2000 and 31.12.2000, 84 surgical departments participated in a prospective multicenter study to investigate primary surgery for breast cancer. A total of 1 416 patients were recruited to the study, the organization and conduction of which was in the hands of the former surgical department 1 of the University of Leipzig under the patronage of the East German Working Group for Performance and Quality Control in Surgery in cooperation with the An Institute for Quality Control in Operative Medicine of the Otto-von-Guericke University in Magdeburg. In addition to parameters characterizing patients, tumors and diagnostic work-up, we also analysed the surgical treatment and its possible complications with the aid of a questionnaire. The definition of wound infection was based on the criteria of the "Hospital Infection Control Practice Advisory Committee".

RESULTS

The overall WIR was 4.5 % (n = 65). 21 (32 %) of the wound infections (WI) were diagnosed exclusively on a clinical basis without establishing the responsible pathogens. In 44 (68 %) of the WI, a search for the pathogen was undertaken which in 3 cases (7 %) was negative, and in 41 cases (93 %) positive. 118 (8.3 %) of the patients received perioperative antibiotic cover. The following parameters were found to have a significant influence on WIR: local drainage, blood transfusion, the time lapse between biopsy and definitive surgery, and the size of the primary tumor.

DISCUSSION

Some of the above factors (transfusion, time lapse, drainage) can be influenced by the therapist. The wound infection rate is a marker for treatment quality.

Accuracy of intraoperative gross examination of surgical margin status in women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy

Margin status is an important prognostic factor for local recurrence after partial mastectomy for breast malignancy. Options for intraoperative evaluation of margin status include gross examination of the specimen, frozen section, and "touch preparation" cytology. This study evaluates the accuracy of gross examination without other intraoperative pathological analysis as a method of determining margin status. Records of 254 consecutive patients undergoing partial mastectomy for 255 breast malignancies (199 invasive, 56 DCIS) over 6 years were analyzed retrospectively. All women underwent en bloc excision of the primary lesion with gross examination of margin status by the surgeon and pathologist. All suspicious areas were reexcised, and the specimen was inked, serially sectioned at 2-3 mm intervals and examined with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stains. Specimens with tumor <2 mm from a margin were considered margin-positive and those with all tumor > or =2 mm from the margin were designated margin-negative. One hundred fourteen (45%) of the 255 segmental resections were considered to have grossly tumor-free margins, and intraoperative reexcision was not performed. Ninety-six (84%) of these specimens had histologically negative margins. Gross examination prompted intraoperative reexcision in 141 (55%) cases. Ninety-five (67%) of these 141 resections had tumor-free margins on histopathology. Overall, the final margin was involved in 64 of the 255 partial mastectomies. Seventeen (27%) women with initially margin-positive resections underwent mastectomy, while 46 (72%) underwent reexcision, which was margin-negative in 41 (89%). After a median follow-up of 42 months, there have been eight (3.5%) local recurrences. The initial margin-positive rate was similar in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (30%) and invasive carcinoma (24%). Margin status was correlated with nodal status; there was no correlation with age, tumor size, grade hormone receptor status, or type of diagnostic biopsy. Gross examination of the resection specimen does not reflect margin status in at least 25 per cent of women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy. Other techniques for evaluation of margin status should be considered to reduce the need for reexcision of involved margins. We are currently designing a prospective clinical trial to examine the efficacy of new techniques for intraoperative evaluation of margin status.

Current issues in the surgical management of breast cancer: a review of abstracts from the 2002 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, the 2003 Society of Surgical Oncology annual meeting, and the 2003 American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting

Three areas of development in the surgical management of breast cancer received significant attention in 2003--breast-conserving surgery, sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, and ductal lavage. Provocative investigations focusing on these controversial aspects of surgical care were presented at major national oncology meetings throughout the year. The recently published 20-year updates by the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) and the Italian National Cancer Institute confirm the survival equivalence of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in early stage disease. Data reveal, however, that this strategy is underutilized in the United States when compared with other countries. A meta-analysis of close to 70 published trials on the use of SLN biopsy has revealed an overall SLN identification rate of greater than 90%, with a false-negative rate of 8.4%. Two major controversies remain to be resolved: Is there a subset of sentinel node-positive patients who may safely avoid complete axillary lymph node dissection? What is the best way integrate lymphatic mapping into neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols? The strength of ductal lavage as a risk assessment adjunct is related to the ability to detect cellular atypia, a feature associated with a three- to fivefold increased risk for breast cancer. This technique continues to be rigorously evaluated in a number of ongoing studies.

Effect of cavity margin shavings to ensure completeness of excision on local recurrence rates following breast conserving surgery

AIMS

The presence of residual disease at the excision margin after breast conserving surgery is the most important risk factor for local recurrence. One method for assessing tumour margin involvement is to take shavings from the wall of the resulting cavity following wide excision of the lesion.

METHODS

We have reviewed our experience of shaving the margin of the cavity as our method to ensure completeness of excision.

RESULTS

Of 351 patients treated with breast conservation 61 patients had residual disease in the cavity margin biopsies. Younger age, axillary lymph node status, multi-focal tumours and high grade tumours were significantly correlated with margin involvement. In patients who had clear margins eight patients (2.8%) had developed a local recurrence at follow-up of 55 months (25-89 months).

CONCLUSIONS

In our hands the use of cavity margin shavings allows us to achieve an acceptable rate of local control.

Viewpoints on oncoplastic surgery in invasive breast cancer

Breast conserving therapy is the best method to the breast cancer treatment when concerning the psychological sequelae to the patient. Cosmetic results after conservative surgery are not always acceptable: about 20% of patients need a revision operation and correcting the residual defect of the breast or asymmetry of the breasts afterwards. Oncoplastic surgery means that the methods familiar to plastic surgeon are used to increase the number of patients treated with conservative surgery without compromising the oncologic results. Even wider margins than in normal breast conservation can be gained, if local glandular flaps, musculocutaneous latissimus dorsi flaps or microvascular free TRAM flaps are used to immediately preserve the shape and symmetry of the breasts. With plastic surgery it is possible to reshape the breast, replace the nipple and gain breast symmetry. As we know every tenth woman will have a breast cancer during her lifetime, and 80% of breast cancer women will survive. It is important to operate breast cancer immediately to save costs and help a patient feel that her breasts are still a part of her own body.

Pathology of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: current status

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) now accounts for around 20-25% of mammographically detected breast cancers. There is strong evidence to show that classification schemes for DCIS should be based primarily on nuclear grade and necrosis as these two features have been shown to be prognostically important as well as having high interobserver reproducibility among pathologists. Newer classifications of DCIS that employ these features, such as the Van Nuys DCIS Classification, are of prognostic importance in predicting recurrence of DCIS after breast conservation and show high levels of reproducibility. For treatment of DCIS via breast conservation a high pre-operative diagnostic rate is desirable, only achievable via needle-guided core biopsy. If local excision without radiotherapy is to be given there is strong evidence to support the requirement for a 10 mm tumour-free margin. Assurance that a margin is tumour-free requires sequential specimen processing which is both time consuming and costly, but which can be justified in cost and morbidity terms as radiotherapy may not be required for those patients with a 10 mm tumour-free margin. Other methods of specimen examination involve examination of mammographically directed tissue slices or alternative methods of excision margin assessment such as "onion skinning" of the specimen. Endocrine therapy will doubtless become more important for adjuvant therapy of DCIS as well as chemoprophylaxis in the future.

Variations in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in a multicentre, randomized clinical trial (EORTC 10853) investigating breast-conserving treatment for DCIS

AIMS

To evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures which were followed in a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) randomized clinical trial investigating the role of radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment (BCT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast.

METHODS

The medical files of 824 of the 1010 randomized patients (82%) were reviewed during site visits to 30 participating institutes.

RESULTS

Large variations occurred, particularly in the surgical procedures and histopathological work-up which were performed. Important risk factors like tumour size and margin status were poorly quantified in the medical files.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings emphasize the need for establishing uniform guidelines for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for DCIS, and for clearly defined risk factors for recurrence after BCT for DCIS. Because of its randomized nature, the main question of the trial, i.e. the effect of radiotherapy on the risk of local recurrence, will not be influenced by variation. The risk of local recurrence in itself, and hence the success of BCT for DCIS, may however be influenced by the quality of the initial procedures that were conducted.

The unsatisfactory margin in breast cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical margin involvement with breast cancer usually results in obligatory reexcision or mastectomy. While unalterable occult host and pathologic factors may interfere with margin clearance during the initial excision, it is possible that alterations in surgical technique might increase the likelihood of obtaining satisfactory margins.

METHODS

Two hundred and thirty-five patients who were candidates for breast conservation therapy were identified for 1991 and 1996 using the Tumor Registry. Margins were defined as "unsatisfactory" if there was microscopic involvement with tumor or the margin was close at initial excisional biopsy and the surgeon opted for reexcision. Multiple logistic regression analyses of factors associated with margin status were performed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two (56%) patients had positive or close (unsatisfactory) margins; this rate increased from 51% in 1991 to 59% in 1996. Patients with unsatisfactory margins underwent more procedures (mean 2.0 versus 1.2; P <0.0001) than patients whose margins were satisfactory. The breast conservation rate for patients with unsatisfactory margins was 64% compared with 99% for patients with satisfactory margins. A multiple logistic regression demonstrated that patients with unsatisfactory margins were 67 times more likely to have a mastectomy than patients whose margins were satisfactory after adjusting for other significant factors (P <0.0001). The practice of fine needle aspiration biopsy, orientation of specimen margins by the surgeon, and reexcision of tumor at the first operation were statistically significant technical factors in obtaining satisfactory margins. Significant pathology factors were extensive intraductal component (EIC), lobular or ductal extension, and tumor size.

CONCLUSION

These data show that technical factors in the surgical management of breast cancer, as well as biological factors such as EIC, can influence the success of breast conservation.

Radiation therapy to the breast: practical aspects

The use of conservative surgery and radiation therapy in the treatment of early stage breast cancer is increasing. Several prospective randomized trials have reported survival rates for patients treated with conservative surgery and radiation therapy equivalent to those of patients treated with mastectomy. This paper will review the evidence supporting the use of conservative surgery and radiation therapy, discuss the process of patient selection, review the technique and complications of radiation treatment, and outline follow-up for women after conservative surgery and radiation therapy.

Radiation therapy and breast preservation: past achievements, current results, and future prospects

In this overview the historical development of breast-conserving therapy is sketched briefly from its origins in the second and third decades of this century, and current radiotherapeutic techniques are described. All randomized trials thus far conducted using modern radiotherapy indicate that total mastectomy provides no survival advantage compared with breast-conserving techniques. In patients suitable for such treatment, macroscopically complete local tumor excision followed by appropriate radiotherapy will lead to 90-96% local control in the breast at 5 years, and 81-93% at 10 years. It is likely that the strategy of reserving total mastectomy for treatment of intramammary failures will result in ultimate local control of disease on the chest wall which is superior to that provided by primary total mastectomy. Future prospects include the use of primary chemotherapeutic approaches for larger tumors, extending the possibilities of breast conservation to a majority of patients with tumors classically considered unsuitable for lumpectomy. In this context an increase in the use of radiotherapy in the primary treatment of breast cancer is anticipated.

Breast tumor recurrence following lumpectomy with and without breast irradiation: an overview of recent NSABP findings

The latest findings from the NSABP B-06 trial on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) continue to demonstrate that through 9 years of follow-up more patients treated with radiation remained IBTR free as compared to those receiving no radiation (P less than 0.001), regardless of age, nodal status, or tumor size. There is no significant difference in distant disease-free survival (DDFS) or survival between the two lumpectomy groups despite the highly significant difference in their probability of remaining IBTR free. A recent analysis shows that when a patient is diagnosed with an IBTR, the risk of distant metastatic disease increases, indicating that an IBTR is a marker for, not a cause of, distant metastatic disease. An IBTR indicates a greater risk for distant disease when the primary tumor was removed. Mastectomy or breast irradiation following lumpectomy eliminates or reduces the opportunity for identifying a marker of risk for distant disease, thus emphasizing the importance of an IBTR beyond the need for its removal. Since an IBTR is associated with a relative risk of 3.41 for the development of distant metastatic disease, systemic therapy subsequent to an IBTR should be considered. Evidence presented from recent NSABP studies indicates the value of systemic therapy for lowering the incidence of IBTR following lumpectomy and breast irradiation.

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and survival following lumpectomy and irradiation: pathological findings from NSABP protocol B-06

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) occurred in 42 of 488 (9%) pathologically evaluable patients enrolled in NSABP protocol B-06 with a mean potential follow-up of 103 months (range 68-161 months) following treatment for Stage I and II invasive breast cancer by lumpectomy and local breast irradiation (LXRT). IBTR were observed at or close to the same quadrant as the index cancers and their histologic types and nuclear grades were similar if not identical in 95 and 93%, respectively. This information confirms our earlier findings which indicated that multicentricity is of little or no clinical significance in the treatment of breast cancer by LXRT; breast cancers rarely if ever change their biologic potential once clinically detected; and lastly, most if not all IBTR represent residual cancer. Cox regression analyses revealed only a patient age less than 35 years to be significantly related to IBTR. No relationship between IBTR and so-called extensive intraductal component (EIC) or 31 other pathologic features of the index cancers was found. Overall survival was significantly related to nodal status (P = 0.01), nuclear grade (P = less than 0.001) histologic tumor type (P = 0.01) and IBTR (P = less than 0.001). This latter was considered as an indicator rather than instigator of distant disease and reduced survival since the latter is no different in patients treated by LXRT, lumpectomy alone after which IBTR is much more frequent, or mastectomy, which precludes its expression. We conclude that there are as yet no viable markers which would contraindicate treating patients with breast cancer by LXRT.