Stephanie M Wong1,2, Yoon S Chun3, Yasuaki Sagara2, Mehra Golshan1,2, Jessica Erdmann-Sager4. 1. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Breast Oncology Program, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. jerdmannsager@bwh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to explore national patterns in the uptake of breast reconstruction and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). METHODS: We used the National Cancer Database to identify all women who underwent mastectomy for stage 0-III breast cancer between 2005-2015. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with receipt of reconstruction, with subset analyses performed to determine trends and predictors of NSM in those who underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 395,815 women, 238,568 (60.3%) who underwent mastectomy alone and 157,247 (39.7%) who underwent mastectomy followed by reconstruction. The use of breast reconstruction increased from 22.3% of mastectomy cases in 2005 to 49.7% of mastectomy cases in 2015 (odds ratio [OR] 9.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3-12.8). Among those receiving reconstruction, the use of NSM increased from 1.7% in 2005 to 14.3% in 2015 (OR 9.4, 95% CI 7.1-12.5), with increased utilization among those with early-stage and locally advanced disease, such that by 2015, NSM was performed in 15.3% of mastectomies with reconstruction for DCIS, 14.3% of mastectomies with reconstruction for stage I-II breast cancer, and 10.7% of mastectomies with reconstruction for stage III breast cancer. Factors strongly predicting receipt of NSM included age < 45 years, smaller clinical tumor size, clinically node negative disease, use of neoadjuvant therapy, and facility type. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a dramatic increase in the use of breast reconstruction and NSM between 2005-2015. Further prospective studies evaluating oncologic outcomes of NSM in locally advanced breast cancer are warranted.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to explore national patterns in the uptake of breast reconstruction and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). METHODS: We used the National Cancer Database to identify all women who underwent mastectomy for stage 0-III breast cancer between 2005-2015. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with receipt of reconstruction, with subset analyses performed to determine trends and predictors of NSM in those who underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 395,815 women, 238,568 (60.3%) who underwent mastectomy alone and 157,247 (39.7%) who underwent mastectomy followed by reconstruction. The use of breast reconstruction increased from 22.3% of mastectomy cases in 2005 to 49.7% of mastectomy cases in 2015 (odds ratio [OR] 9.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3-12.8). Among those receiving reconstruction, the use of NSM increased from 1.7% in 2005 to 14.3% in 2015 (OR 9.4, 95% CI 7.1-12.5), with increased utilization among those with early-stage and locally advanced disease, such that by 2015, NSM was performed in 15.3% of mastectomies with reconstruction for DCIS, 14.3% of mastectomies with reconstruction for stage I-II breast cancer, and 10.7% of mastectomies with reconstruction for stage III breast cancer. Factors strongly predicting receipt of NSM included age < 45 years, smaller clinical tumor size, clinically node negative disease, use of neoadjuvant therapy, and facility type. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a dramatic increase in the use of breast reconstruction and NSM between 2005-2015. Further prospective studies evaluating oncologic outcomes of NSM in locally advanced breast cancer are warranted.
Authors: Zhen-Yu Wu; Hyun Ho Han; Hee Jeong Kim; Jong Won Lee; Il Yong Chung; Jisun Kim; Sae Byul Lee; Byung-Ho Son; Jin Sup Eom; Jae Ho Jung; Sung- Bae Kim; Gyungyub Gong; Hak Hee Kim; Sei -Hyun Ahn; BeomSeok Ko Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Vivian J Hu; Sean P McCleary; Carolyn P Smullin; Ricardo Rosales Morales; Andrew L Da Lio Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2022-04-18
Authors: Paulina Bajonero-Canonico; Ana S Ferrigno; Jorge A Saldaña-Rodriguez; David E Hinojosa-Gonzalez; Cristel G de la O-Maldonado; Carlos de la Cruz-de la Cruz; Brizio Moreno-Jaime; Mariela Hernandez-Pavon; Jose Moral-de la Rubia; Melina Miaja-Avila; Cynthia Villarreal-Garza Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 3.603
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
Authors: Michelle C Specht; Bridget N Kelly; Eleanor Tomczyk; Olivia A Ford; Alexandra J Webster; Barbara L Smith; Michelle A Gadd; Amy S Colwell; Eric C Liao Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 4.339