Literature DB >> 28967559

Expanding the Criteria for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Patients With Poor Prognostic Features.

Priya Jadeja1, Richard Ha2, Christine Rohde3, Jeffrey Ascherman3, Robert Grant3, Christine Chin4, Eileen Connolly4, Kevin Kalinsky5, Sheldon Feldman6, Bret Taback7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In this study we aimed to review the outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) in the setting of expanded criteria: previous breast surgery/irradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), post-NSM irradiation, and to assess conversion to acceptable criteria after NAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-institution institutional review board-approved retrospective review, we identified patients who underwent NSM after previous breast intervention or NAC from January 2010 to February 2017. Clinicopathologic features, previous breast surgeries, response rate, complications, and recurrences were recorded.
RESULTS: Sixty-three patients underwent 106 NSMs. Among 63 patients, 39 (61.9%) received NAC, 30 (47.6%) previous lumpectomy, 4 (6.3%) with cosmetic implants, 4 (6.3%) with mastopexy, 5 (7.9%) with previous radiation therapy, and 21 (33%) underwent post-NSM radiation therapy. Transient epidermolysis occurred in 24 patients (38.1%), with 16 patients (66.6%) having complete flap recovery and nipple loss in 8 patients (12.6%). All 10 patients with central disease on pre-NAC imaging converted to acceptable criteria, with 9 having successful NSM. At mean 67.2-month follow-up, 56 patients (88.9%) were disease-free, 5 (7.9%) experienced a systemic recurrence, and 2 (3.2%) a local recurrence.
CONCLUSION: NSM is oncologically acceptable in this patient cohort. Patients with large central tumors who undergo NAC should be reconsidered after completion of chemotherapy because many might convert to successful nipple-areolar preservation.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Breast surgery; Conversion after chemotherapy; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Nipple-sparing mastectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28967559     DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.08.010

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


  3 in total

Review 1.  Implant Reconstruction in Nipple Sparing Mastectomy.

Authors:  Carrie K Chu; Matthew J Davis; Amjed Abu-Ghname; Sebastian J Winocour; Albert Losken; Grant W Carlson
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.314

2.  Tumor-Nipple Distance of ≥ 1 cm Predicts Negative Nipple Pathology After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Authors:  Tracy-Ann Moo; Carolina Rossi Saccarelli; Elizabeth J Sutton; Varadan Sevilimedu; Kate R Pawloski; Timothy M D'Alfonso; Mary C Hughes; Jill S Gluskin; Almir Bitencourt; Elizabeth A Morris; Audree Tadros; Monica Morrow; Mary L Gemignani; Virgilio Sacchini
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 4.339

3.  Breast conserving therapy for central breast cancer in the United States.

Authors:  Jiameng Liu; Xiaobin Zheng; Shunguo Lin; Hui Han; Chunsen Xu
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-01-29       Impact factor: 2.102

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.