Nehmat Houssami1, Robin M Turner2, Monica Morrow3. 1. Sydney School of Public Health (A27), Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, 2006, Australia. nehmath@med.usyd.edu.au. 2. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 3. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although there is no consensus on whether pre-operative MRI in women with breast cancer (BC) benefits surgical treatment, MRI continues to be used pre-operatively in practice. This meta-analysis examines the association between pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes in BC. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting quantitative data on pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes (without restriction by type of surgery received or type of BC) and using a controlled design. Random-effects logistic regression calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) for each surgical outcome (MRI vs. no-MRI groups), and estimated ORs stratified by study-level age. Subgroup analysis was performed for invasive lobular cancer (ILC). RESULTS: Nineteen studies met eligibility criteria: 3 RCTs and 16 comparative studies that included newly diagnosed BC of any type except for three studies restricted to ILC. Primary analysis (85,975 subjects) showed that pre-operative MRI was associated with increased odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.39 (1.23, 1.57); p < 0.001]; similar findings were shown in analyses stratified by study-level median age. Secondary analyses did not find statistical evidence of an effect of MRI on the rates of re-excision, re-operation, or positive margins; however, MRI was significantly associated with increased odds of receiving contralateral prophylactic mastectomy [OR 1.91 (1.25, 2.91); p = 0.003]. Subgroup analysis for ILC did not find any association between MRI and the odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.00 (0.75, 1.33); p = 0.988] or the odds of re-excision [OR 0.65 (0.35, 1.24); p = 0.192]. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative MRI is associated with increased odds of receiving ipsilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy as surgical treatment in newly diagnosed BC patients.
BACKGROUND: Although there is no consensus on whether pre-operative MRI in women with breast cancer (BC) benefits surgical treatment, MRI continues to be used pre-operatively in practice. This meta-analysis examines the association between pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes in BC. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting quantitative data on pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes (without restriction by type of surgery received or type of BC) and using a controlled design. Random-effects logistic regression calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) for each surgical outcome (MRI vs. no-MRI groups), and estimated ORs stratified by study-level age. Subgroup analysis was performed for invasive lobular cancer (ILC). RESULTS: Nineteen studies met eligibility criteria: 3 RCTs and 16 comparative studies that included newly diagnosed BC of any type except for three studies restricted to ILC. Primary analysis (85,975 subjects) showed that pre-operative MRI was associated with increased odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.39 (1.23, 1.57); p < 0.001]; similar findings were shown in analyses stratified by study-level median age. Secondary analyses did not find statistical evidence of an effect of MRI on the rates of re-excision, re-operation, or positive margins; however, MRI was significantly associated with increased odds of receiving contralateral prophylactic mastectomy [OR 1.91 (1.25, 2.91); p = 0.003]. Subgroup analysis for ILC did not find any association between MRI and the odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.00 (0.75, 1.33); p = 0.988] or the odds of re-excision [OR 0.65 (0.35, 1.24); p = 0.192]. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative MRI is associated with increased odds of receiving ipsilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy as surgical treatment in newly diagnosed BC patients.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Breast-conserving surgery; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mastectomy; Meta-analysis; Re-operation
Authors: K E Pengel; C E Loo; H J Teertstra; S H Muller; J Wesseling; J L Peterse; H Bartelink; E J Rutgers; K G A Gilhuijs Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2008-09-21 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Lindsay Turnbull; Sarah Brown; Ian Harvey; Catherine Olivier; Phil Drew; Vicky Napp; Andrew Hanby; Julia Brown Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-02-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lawrence J Solin; Susan G Orel; Wei-Ting Hwang; Eleanor E Harris; Mitchell D Schnall Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-01-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R M Mann; C E Loo; T Wobbes; P Bult; J O Barentsz; K G A Gilhuijs; C Boetes Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Richard J Bleicher; Robin M Ciocca; Brian L Egleston; Linda Sesa; Kathryn Evers; Elin R Sigurdson; Monica Morrow Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Meagan Elizabeth Brennan; Nehmat Houssami; Sarah Lord; Petra Macaskill; Les Irwig; J Michael Dixon; Ruth M L Warren; Stefano Ciatto Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amy J Lilly; Meredith Johnson; Cherie M Kuzmiak; David W Ollila; Siobhan M O'Connor; Johann D Hertel; Benjamin C Calhoun Journal: Ann Diagn Pathol Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 2.090
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Zheng Zhang; Thomas L Chenevert; Justin Romanoff; Averi E Kitsch; Lucy G Hanna; Sara M Harvey; Linda Moy; Wendy B DeMartini; Basak Dogan; Wei T Yang; Lilian C Wang; Bonnie N Joe; Karen Y Oh; Colleen H Neal; Elizabeth S McDonald; Mitchell D Schnall; Constance D Lehman; Christopher E Comstock; Savannah C Partridge Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-01-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Daniel S Hippe; Ahmed Alaa; Safia H Cheeney; Mihaela van der Schaar; Savannah C Partridge; Christoph I Lee Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2020-07-10