PURPOSE: Current AJCC/UICC staging of early breast cancer defines tumor stage using the largest focus, adding the suffix "(m)" to indicate multiplicity. This method may underestimate the total tumor burden in multifocal and multicentric breast cancer (MMBC). This study examines other measures of tumor size in MMBC to determine which provides the best fit in a multivariate model for survival outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study used data from the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales Breast Cancer Treatment Group database to identify 812 women with ipsilateral invasive breast cancer; 141 of these women had MMBC. The pathology slides of all women with MMBC were reviewed and all foci of invasive breast cancer were re-measured. The measures of interest were the diameter of the largest deposit, the aggregate diameter and the aggregate volume. These measures of tumor size were included with other clinicopathological features of MMBC in a multivariate analysis to assess their relationship with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Tumor size was associated with PFS and OS in MMBC using any of the three measures; however, the diameter of the largest deposit provided the best fit in the multivariate model for OS. CONCLUSION: Tumor size is an important prognostic factor for MMBC, and the diameter of the largest deposit provides a better fit in a multivariate model for OS than aggregate diameter and aggregate volume. Therefore, tumor size in MMBC should continue to be measured using the diameter of the largest deposit.
PURPOSE: Current AJCC/UICC staging of early breast cancer defines tumor stage using the largest focus, adding the suffix "(m)" to indicate multiplicity. This method may underestimate the total tumor burden in multifocal and multicentric breast cancer (MMBC). This study examines other measures of tumor size in MMBC to determine which provides the best fit in a multivariate model for survival outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study used data from the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales Breast Cancer Treatment Group database to identify 812 women with ipsilateral invasive breast cancer; 141 of these women had MMBC. The pathology slides of all women with MMBC were reviewed and all foci of invasive breast cancer were re-measured. The measures of interest were the diameter of the largest deposit, the aggregate diameter and the aggregate volume. These measures of tumor size were included with other clinicopathological features of MMBC in a multivariate analysis to assess their relationship with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:Tumor size was associated with PFS and OS in MMBC using any of the three measures; however, the diameter of the largest deposit provided the best fit in the multivariate model for OS. CONCLUSION:Tumor size is an important prognostic factor for MMBC, and the diameter of the largest deposit provides a better fit in a multivariate model for OS than aggregate diameter and aggregate volume. Therefore, tumor size in MMBC should continue to be measured using the diameter of the largest deposit.
Authors: Ellen L Nutter; Julia E Weiss; Jonathan D Marotti; Richard J Barth; M Scottie Eliassen; Martha E Goodrich; Curtis L Petersen; Tracy Onega Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Hüseyin Kadioğlu; Serdar Özbaş; Alper Akcan; Aykut Soyder; Lutfi Soylu; Savaş Koçak; N Zafer Cantürk; Mustafa Tükenmez; Mahmut Müslümanoğlu Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Andrzej Lorek; Katarzyna Steinhof-Radwańska; Anna Barczyk-Gutkowska; Wojciech Zarębski; Piotr Paleń; Karol Szyluk; Joanna Lorek; Anna Grażyńska; Paweł Niemiec; Iwona Gisterek Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Nadine Norton; Pooja P Advani; Daniel J Serie; Xochiquetzal J Geiger; Brian M Necela; Bianca C Axenfeld; Jennifer M Kachergus; Ryan W Feathers; Jennifer M Carr; Julia E Crook; Alvaro Moreno-Aspitia; Panos Z Anastasiadis; Edith A Perez; E Aubrey Thompson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 3.240