Literature DB >> 28087389

Evaluation of Local Oncologic Safety in Nipple-Areola Complex-sparing Mastectomy After Primary Chemotherapy: A Propensity Score-matched Study.

Roberto Agresti1, Marco Sandri2, Massimiliano Gennaro3, Giulia Bianchi4, Ilaria Maugeri3, Mario Rampa3, Giuseppe Capri4, Maria Luisa Carcangiu5, Giovanna Trecate6, Egidio Riggio7, Laura Lozza8, Filippo de Braud4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nipple-areola complex-sparing mastectomy (NSM), extending the concept of skin-sparing mastectomy, allows for the provision of a better cosmetic result. Large operable T2-T3 breast cancer might theoretically appear suitable for this surgical option as an alternative to conventional mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery, when a good response to primary chemotherapy has been achieved. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2009 to May 2013, 422 patients with invasive breast cancer were progressively accrued to NSM. Of the 422 patients, 361 underwent NSM as first-line treatment (NSM group), and 61 underwent surgery after primary chemotherapy (NSM-PC group). A total of 151 breast cancer patients, who had undergone PC and conventional total mastectomy (TM-PC group) from 2004 to 2009 were evaluated as comparative group with respect to the NSM-PC group. Using propensity score matching, local disease-free survival (LDFS) was evaluated comparatively.
RESULTS: The rate of nipple-areola involvement in the NSM and NSM-PC groups was 13.3% and 9.8%, respectively (P = .539). The nipple-areola involvement in the NSM and NSM-PC groups was significantly associated with the tumor size (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.95; P = .004), plurifocal or pluricentric tumor (OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.72-5.89; P < .001), and the presence of an intraductal component (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.22-4.64; P = .011). The LDFS in the NSM-PC and TM-PC matched cohorts did not show a significant difference, with a 4-year LDFS of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.77-0.95) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.83-0.97), respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 0.40-4.35; P = .655). The NSM-PC cohort was also compared with the NSM cohort in terms of LDFS using 2 different matching criteria, with the tumor size before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the balancing covariate. In the first of the 2 comparisons, the hazards of local relapse were comparable between the 2 matched groups (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.37-4.04; P = .739). In the second comparison, the NSM-PC patients showed a significant greater hazard of local relapse than did the NSM patients (HR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.10-11.80; P = .035).
CONCLUSION: NSM might be a valuable option for large breast cancer treated by primary chemotherapy. The rate of local relapse seemed to be related to the disease stage, and no significant association with the type of surgery was detected.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Conservative mastectomy; Loco-regional recurrence; Nipple-sparing mastectomy; Primary chemotherapy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28087389     DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2016.12.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer        ISSN: 1526-8209            Impact factor:   3.225


  6 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Management of Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Authors:  Octavi Cordoba; Lourdes Carrillo-Guivernau; Carmen Reyero-Fernández
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 2.  Innovative Standards in Surgery of the Breast after Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy.

Authors:  Tal Hadar; Michael Koretz; Mahmood Nawass; Tanir M Allweis
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 3.  Overview of indications for nipple sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  Eleni Tousimis; Michelle Haslinger
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2018-06

4.  Effectiveness and Safety of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Locally Advanced Breast Carcinoma: A Matched Case-Control Study.

Authors:  René Aloisio da Costa Vieira; Luciana Machado Ribeiro; Guilherme Freire Angotti Carrara; Lucas Faria Abrahão-Machado; Ligia Maria Kerr; Afonso Celso Pinto Nazário
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 2.860

5.  Breast cancer robotic nipple sparing mastectomy: evaluation of several surgical procedures and learning curve.

Authors:  G Houvenaeghel; M Bannier; S Rua; J Barrou; M Heinemann; A Van Troy; E Lambaudie; M Cohen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  Factors Predicting Locoregional Recurrence After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Nipple-Sparing/Skin-Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Zhen-Yu Wu; Hee Jeong Kim; Jong Won Lee; Il Yong Chung; Jisun Kim; Sae Byul Lee; Byung-Ho Son; Jin Sup Eom; Jae Ho Jeong; Gyungyub Gong; Hak Hee Kim; Sei-Hyun Ahn; BeomSeok Ko
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 6.244

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.