Monica Morrow1, Reshma Jagsi2, M Chandler McLeod3, Dean Shumway2, Steven J Katz4. 1. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 3. Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 4. Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Abstract
Importance: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z0011 study demonstrated the safety of sentinel node biopsy alone in clinically node-negative women with metastases in 1 or 2 sentinel nodes treated with breast conservation. Little is known about surgeon perspectives regarding when axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be omitted. Objectives: To determine surgeon acceptance of ACOSOG Z0011 findings, identify characteristics associated with acceptance of ACOSOG Z0011 results, and examine the association between acceptance of the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology negative margin of no ink on tumor and surgeon preference for ALND. Design, Setting, and Participants: A survey was sent to 488 surgeons treating a population-based sample of women with early-stage breast cancer (N = 5080). The study was conducted from July 1, 2013, to August 31, 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surgeons were categorized as having low, intermediate, or high propensity for ALND according to the outer quartiles of ALND scale distribution. A multivariable linear regression model was used to confirm independent associations. Results: Of the 488 surgeons invited to participate, 376 (77.0%) responded and 359 provided complete information regarding propensity for ALND derived from 5 clinical scenarios. Mean surgeon age was 53.7 (range, 31-80) years; 277 (73.7%) were male; 142 (37.8%) treated 20 or fewer breast cancers annually and 108 (28.7%) treated more than 50. One hundred seventy-five (49.0%) recommended ALND for 1 macrometastasis. Of low-propensity surgeons who recommended ALND, only 1 (1.1%) approved ALND for any nodal metastases compared with 69 (38.6%) and 85 (95.5%) of selective and high-propensity surgeons (P < .001), respectively. In multivariable analysis, lower ALND propensity was significantly associated with higher breast cancer volume (21-50: -0.19; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.02; >51: -0.48; 95% CI, -0.71 to -0.24; P < .001), recommendation of a minimal margin width (1-5 mm: -0.10; 95% CI, -0.43 to 0.22; no ink on tumor: -0.53; 95% CI, -0.82 to -0.24; P < .001), participation in a multidisciplinary tumor board (1%-9%: -0.25; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.05; >9%: -0.37; 95% CI, -0.63 to -0.11; P = .02), and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results site (-0.18; 95% CI, -0.35 to -0.01; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: This study shows substantial variation in surgeon acceptance of more limited surgery for breast cancer, which is associated with higher breast cancer volume and multidisciplinary interactions, suggesting the potential for overtreatment of many patients and the need for education targeting lower-volume breast surgeons.
Importance: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z0011 study demonstrated the safety of sentinel node biopsy alone in clinically node-negative women with metastases in 1 or 2 sentinel nodes treated with breast conservation. Little is known about surgeon perspectives regarding when axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be omitted. Objectives: To determine surgeon acceptance of ACOSOG Z0011 findings, identify characteristics associated with acceptance of ACOSOG Z0011 results, and examine the association between acceptance of the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology negative margin of no ink on tumor and surgeon preference for ALND. Design, Setting, and Participants: A survey was sent to 488 surgeons treating a population-based sample of women with early-stage breast cancer (N = 5080). The study was conducted from July 1, 2013, to August 31, 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surgeons were categorized as having low, intermediate, or high propensity for ALND according to the outer quartiles of ALND scale distribution. A multivariable linear regression model was used to confirm independent associations. Results: Of the 488 surgeons invited to participate, 376 (77.0%) responded and 359 provided complete information regarding propensity for ALND derived from 5 clinical scenarios. Mean surgeon age was 53.7 (range, 31-80) years; 277 (73.7%) were male; 142 (37.8%) treated 20 or fewer breast cancers annually and 108 (28.7%) treated more than 50. One hundred seventy-five (49.0%) recommended ALND for 1 macrometastasis. Of low-propensity surgeons who recommended ALND, only 1 (1.1%) approved ALND for any nodal metastases compared with 69 (38.6%) and 85 (95.5%) of selective and high-propensity surgeons (P < .001), respectively. In multivariable analysis, lower ALND propensity was significantly associated with higher breast cancer volume (21-50: -0.19; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.02; >51: -0.48; 95% CI, -0.71 to -0.24; P < .001), recommendation of a minimal margin width (1-5 mm: -0.10; 95% CI, -0.43 to 0.22; no ink on tumor: -0.53; 95% CI, -0.82 to -0.24; P < .001), participation in a multidisciplinary tumor board (1%-9%: -0.25; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.05; >9%: -0.37; 95% CI, -0.63 to -0.11; P = .02), and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results site (-0.18; 95% CI, -0.35 to -0.01; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: This study shows substantial variation in surgeon acceptance of more limited surgery for breast cancer, which is associated with higher breast cancer volume and multidisciplinary interactions, suggesting the potential for overtreatment of many patients and the need for education targeting lower-volume breast surgeons.
Authors: Monica Morrow; Kimberly J Van Zee; Sujata Patil; Oriana Petruolo; Anita Mamtani; Andrea V Barrio; Deborah Capko; Mahmoud El-Tamer; Mary L Gemignani; Alexandra S Heerdt; Laurie Kirstein; Melissa Pilewskie; George Plitas; Virgilio S Sacchini; Lisa M Sclafani; Alice Ho; Hiram S Cody Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Anne Fleissig; Lesley J Fallowfield; Carolyn I Langridge; Leigh Johnson; Robert G Newcombe; J Michael Dixon; Mark Kissin; Robert E Mansel Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2005-09-15 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Viviana Galimberti; Bernard F Cole; Stefano Zurrida; Giuseppe Viale; Alberto Luini; Paolo Veronesi; Paola Baratella; Camelia Chifu; Manuela Sargenti; Mattia Intra; Oreste Gentilini; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Giovanni Mazzarol; Samuele Massarut; Jean-Rémi Garbay; Janez Zgajnar; Hanne Galatius; Angelo Recalcati; David Littlejohn; Monika Bamert; Marco Colleoni; Karen N Price; Meredith M Regan; Aron Goldhirsch; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Umberto Veronesi Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Anthony Lucci; Linda Mackie McCall; Peter D Beitsch; Patrick W Whitworth; Douglas S Reintgen; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukumal Saha; Kelly K Hunt; Armando E Giuliano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-05-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Armando E Giuliano; Karla V Ballman; Linda McCall; Peter D Beitsch; Meghan B Brennan; Pond R Kelemen; David W Ollila; Nora M Hansen; Pat W Whitworth; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukamal Saha; Kelly K Hunt; Monica Morrow Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 56.272
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: Julia Frebault; Carmen Bergom; Chandler S Cortina; Monica E Shukla; Yiwen Zhang; Chiang-Ching Huang; Amanda L Kong Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Idam de Oliveira-Junior; Eliana Aguiar Petri Nahas; Ana Cristina Cherem; Jorge Nahas-Neto; René Aloisio da Costa Vieira Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Chandler S Cortina; Carmen Bergom; Morgan Ashley Craft; British Fields; Ruta Brazauskas; Adam Currey; Amanda L Kong Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-07-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Brooke Vuong; Jennifer R Dusendang; Sharon B Chang; Margaret Ann Mentakis; Veronica C Shim; Julie Schmittdiel; Gillian Kuehner Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2020-10-03 Impact factor: 6.113