BACKGROUND: The effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) on the survival of patients with early-stage breast cancer remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the benefits of CPM using a propensity scoring approach that reduces selection bias from the nonrandom assignment of patients in observational studies. METHODS: A total of 3889 female patients with stage I to III breast cancer were identified who were treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 1997 to 2009. We assessed the association between CPM and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS), by using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs), and by matching patients in the CPM and no-CPM groups using propensity scores (n = 497 pairs). RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, CPM was associated with improved DFS (HR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.97) and OS (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99), adjusted for prognostic factors. The improved DFS was seen predominantly among hormone receptor-negative (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95) compared with hormone receptor-positive patients (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.58-1.10). For the matched patient cohort, stratified survival analysis also showed an improvement in DFS with CPM (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.22-1.01) in hormone receptor-negative patients that was nearly statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: CPM was associated with improved DFS for some patients with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, after reducing selection bias. Identifying subsets of patients most likely to benefit from CPM may have important implications for a more personalized approach to treatment decisions about CPM.
BACKGROUND: The effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) on the survival of patients with early-stage breast cancer remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the benefits of CPM using a propensity scoring approach that reduces selection bias from the nonrandom assignment of patients in observational studies. METHODS: A total of 3889 female patients with stage I to III breast cancer were identified who were treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 1997 to 2009. We assessed the association between CPM and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS), by using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs), and by matching patients in the CPM and no-CPM groups using propensity scores (n = 497 pairs). RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, CPM was associated with improved DFS (HR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.97) and OS (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99), adjusted for prognostic factors. The improved DFS was seen predominantly among hormone receptor-negative (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95) compared with hormone receptor-positive patients (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.58-1.10). For the matched patient cohort, stratified survival analysis also showed an improvement in DFS with CPM (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.22-1.01) in hormone receptor-negative patients that was nearly statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: CPM was associated with improved DFS for some patients with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, after reducing selection bias. Identifying subsets of patients most likely to benefit from CPM may have important implications for a more personalized approach to treatment decisions about CPM.
Authors: Lisa J Herrinton; William E Barlow; Onchee Yu; Ann M Geiger; Joann G Elmore; Mary B Barton; Emily L Harris; Sharon Rolnick; Roy Pardee; Gail Husson; Ana Macedo; Suzanne W Fletcher Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kelly Metcalfe; Henry T Lynch; Parviz Ghadirian; Nadine Tung; Ivo Olivotto; Ellen Warner; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Andrea Eisen; Barbara Weber; Jane McLennan; Ping Sun; William D Foulkes; Steven A Narod Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-06-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Rebecca Nash; Michael Goodman; Chun Chieh Lin; Rachel A Freedman; Laura S Dominici; Kevin Ward; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Ashish A Deshmukh; Scott B Cantor; Melissa A Crosby; Wenli Dong; Yu Shen; Isabelle Bedrosian; Susan K Peterson; Patricia A Parker; Abenaa M Brewster Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Peter Angelos; Isabelle Bedrosian; David M Euhus; Virginia M Herrmann; Steven J Katz; Andrea Pusic Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 5.344