Meena S Moran1, Stuart J Schnitt2, Armando E Giuliano3, Jay R Harris4, Seema A Khan5, Janet Horton6, Suzanne Klimberg7, Mariana Chavez-MacGregor8, Gary Freedman9, Nehmat Houssami10, Peggy L Johnson11, Monica Morrow12. 1. Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 2. Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Surgery, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 7. Department of Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 10. School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 11. Advocate in Science, Susan G. Komen, Wichita, Kansas. 12. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: morrowm@mskcc.org.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Jennifer R Bellon; Steven E Come; Rebecca S Gelman; I Craig Henderson; Lawrence N Shulman; Barbara J Silver; Jay R Harris; Abram Recht Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D E Wazer; R K Schmidt-Ullrich; R Ruthazer; C H Schmid; R Graham; H Safaii; J Rothschild; J McGrath; J K Erban Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Edward H Romond; Edith A Perez; John Bryant; Vera J Suman; Charles E Geyer; Nancy E Davidson; Elizabeth Tan-Chiu; Silvana Martino; Soonmyung Paik; Peter A Kaufman; Sandra M Swain; Thomas M Pisansky; Louis Fehrenbacher; Leila A Kutteh; Victor G Vogel; Daniel W Visscher; Greg Yothers; Robert B Jenkins; Ann M Brown; Shaker R Dakhil; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Wilma L Lingle; Pamela M Klein; James N Ingle; Norman Wolmark Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-10-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marieke E M van der Noordaa; Ileana Ioan; Emiel J Rutgers; Erik van Werkhoven; Claudette E Loo; Rosie Voorthuis; Jelle Wesseling; Japke van Urk; Terry Wiersma; Vincent Dezentje; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Frederieke H van Duijnhoven Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Laura S Dominici; Monica Morrow; Elizabeth Mittendorf; Jennifer Bellon; Tari A King Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 1.909
Authors: Stephane Zervoudis; George Iatrakis; Eirini Tomara; Anastasia Bothou; George Papadopoulos; George Tsakiris Journal: World J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-08-10
Authors: Anita Mamtani; Emily C Zabor; Laura H Rosenberger; Michelle Stempel; Mary L Gemignani; Monica Morrow Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Julia Krammer; Elissa R Price; Maxine S Jochelson; Elizabeth Watson; Melissa P Murray; Stefan O Schoenberg; Elizabeth A Morris Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Elena F Brachtel; Nicole B Johnson; Amelia E Huck; Travis L Rice-Stitt; Mark G Vangel; Barbara L Smith; Guillermo J Tearney; Dongkyun Kang Journal: Lab Invest Date: 2016-01-18 Impact factor: 5.662