A Chung1, A Gangi2, F Amersi2, S Bose3, X Zhang4, A Giuliano2. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. alice.chung@cshs.org. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the impact that the release of consensus guidelines for margins in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) had on re-excision rates. METHODS: A retrospective review examined a prospectively maintained database of patients who had operable invasive breast cancer treated with BCS at the authors' institution. The patients were divided into two groups: (1) those with a diagnosis determined from 1 July 2011 to 31 July 2013 (before release of the guidelines) and (2) those with a diagnosis determined from 1 February 2014 to 31 July 2014 (after release of the guidelines). The groups were evaluated with respect to patient and tumor characteristics, re-excision rates, and reasons for re-excision. RESULTS: A total of 846 cases of BCS were managed: 597 in group 1 and 249 in group 2. Re-excision rates were significantly reduced after release of the consensus guidelines (p = 0.03). Re-excisions were performed for 115 (19 %) of 597 patients in group 1 and 32 (13 %) of 249 patients in group 2. After release of the guidelines, re-excisions were performed for positive margins, as defined by the consensus statement, in 25 (78 %) of 32 cases. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, tumor size, grade, nodal status, estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Group 1 had more tumors of mixed ductal and lobular histology than group 2, and group 2 had more lobular tumors than group 1 (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The consensus guidelines on margins for BCS were applied for 78 % of the patients who underwent re-excision and resulted in a significant reduction in re-excision rates.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the impact that the release of consensus guidelines for margins in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) had on re-excision rates. METHODS: A retrospective review examined a prospectively maintained database of patients who had operable invasive breast cancer treated with BCS at the authors' institution. The patients were divided into two groups: (1) those with a diagnosis determined from 1 July 2011 to 31 July 2013 (before release of the guidelines) and (2) those with a diagnosis determined from 1 February 2014 to 31 July 2014 (after release of the guidelines). The groups were evaluated with respect to patient and tumor characteristics, re-excision rates, and reasons for re-excision. RESULTS: A total of 846 cases of BCS were managed: 597 in group 1 and 249 in group 2. Re-excision rates were significantly reduced after release of the consensus guidelines (p = 0.03). Re-excisions were performed for 115 (19 %) of 597 patients in group 1 and 32 (13 %) of 249 patients in group 2. After release of the guidelines, re-excisions were performed for positive margins, as defined by the consensus statement, in 25 (78 %) of 32 cases. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, tumor size, grade, nodal status, estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Group 1 had more tumors of mixed ductal and lobular histology than group 2, and group 2 had more lobular tumors than group 1 (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The consensus guidelines on margins for BCS were applied for 78 % of the patients who underwent re-excision and resulted in a significant reduction in re-excision rates.
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: 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: Jennifer Yu; Leisha C Elmore; Amy E Cyr; Rebecca L Aft; William E Gillanders; Julie A Margenthaler Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-04-14 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Monica Morrow; Paul Abrahamse; Timothy P Hofer; Kevin C Ward; Ann S Hamilton; Allison W Kurian; Steven J Katz; Reshma Jagsi Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Kathryn Ottolino-Perry; Anam Shahid; Stephanie DeLuca; Viktor Son; Mayleen Sukhram; Fannong Meng; Zhihui Amy Liu; Sara Rapic; Nayana Thalanki Anantha; Shirley C Wang; Emilie Chamma; Christopher Gibson; Philip J Medeiros; Safa Majeed; Ashley Chu; Olivia Wignall; Alessandra Pizzolato; Cheryl F Rosen; Liis Lindvere Teene; Danielle Starr-Dunham; Iris Kulbatski; Tony Panzarella; Susan J Done; Alexandra M Easson; Wey L Leong; Ralph S DaCosta Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 6.466