David K Gaffney1, Alexander Tsodikov, Charles L Wiggins. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. david.k.graffney@hsc.utah.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of breast tumor location on survival in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated tumor location within the breast on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with invasive breast cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) registries in the United States. Effects on survival were evaluated according to age, stage, tumor site, tumor size, grade, axillary lymph node status, extent of surgery, and radiotherapy (RT). A multivariate model was used with complete data on 45,880 patients. The median follow-up was 59 months. RESULTS: Patients with outer tumor location demonstrated superior BCSS on Kaplan-Meier analysis for both local stage (node-negative, P <.001) and regional stage disease (node-positive, P =.0002). For BCSS, the hazard ratio (HR) for inner quadrant location compared with outer quadrant was 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19 to 1.37; P <.001); and for OS, the HR was 1.12 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.17; P <.001). When ER and PR status were included in the model, the HR for inner quadrant location compared with outer quadrant was 1.27 for BCSS (95% CI, 1.16 to 1.40; P <.001) and 1.11 for OS (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.19; P =.004). Patients treated by lumpectomy that received RT had a superior OS compared with patients that did not receive RT in both local (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.61; P <.001) and regional (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.72; P <.001) stage disease. Mastectomy patients with local stage disease that received RT had a diminished OS (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.50; P =.033). CONCLUSION: On multivariate analysis, incorporating data on age, stage, tumor site, tumor size, grade, ER and PR status, axillary lymph node status, extent of surgery, and RT, this SEER registry-based study demonstrates that medial tumor location adversely impacts BCSS and OS.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of breast tumor location on survival in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated tumor location within the breast on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with invasive breast cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) registries in the United States. Effects on survival were evaluated according to age, stage, tumor site, tumor size, grade, axillary lymph node status, extent of surgery, and radiotherapy (RT). A multivariate model was used with complete data on 45,880 patients. The median follow-up was 59 months. RESULTS:Patients with outer tumor location demonstrated superior BCSS on Kaplan-Meier analysis for both local stage (node-negative, P <.001) and regional stage disease (node-positive, P =.0002). For BCSS, the hazard ratio (HR) for inner quadrant location compared with outer quadrant was 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19 to 1.37; P <.001); and for OS, the HR was 1.12 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.17; P <.001). When ER and PR status were included in the model, the HR for inner quadrant location compared with outer quadrant was 1.27 for BCSS (95% CI, 1.16 to 1.40; P <.001) and 1.11 for OS (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.19; P =.004). Patients treated by lumpectomy that received RT had a superior OS compared with patients that did not receive RT in both local (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.61; P <.001) and regional (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.72; P <.001) stage disease. Mastectomy patients with local stage disease that received RT had a diminished OS (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.50; P =.033). CONCLUSION: On multivariate analysis, incorporating data on age, stage, tumor site, tumor size, grade, ER and PR status, axillary lymph node status, extent of surgery, and RT, this SEER registry-based study demonstrates that medial tumor location adversely impacts BCSS and OS.
Authors: Wolfgang Janni; Brigitte Rack; Harald Sommer; Maren Schmidt; Barbara Strobl; Dorothea Rjosk; Elisabeth Klanner; Wiebke Thieleke; Bernd Gerber; Klaus Friese; Thomas Dimpfl Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-18 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Elisabeth Bräutigam; Christine Track; Dietmar H Seewald; Johann Feichtinger; Kurt Spiegl; Josef Hammer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2009-10-06 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Elizabeth B Elimimian; Leah Elson; Hong Li; Hong Liang; Nadeem Bilani; Emily C Zabor; Abby Statler; Zeina Nahleh Journal: World J Mens Health Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 5.400
Authors: Cong Xue; Rou Jun Peng; Shu Sen Wang; Yan Xia Shi; Xin An; Fei Xu; Zhong Yu Yuan Journal: J Breast Cancer Date: 2015-03-27 Impact factor: 3.588
Authors: Yunan Han; Justin Xavier Moore; Marvin Langston; Lindsay Fuzzell; Saira Khan; Marquita W Lewis; Graham A Colditz; Ying Liu Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 2.506