| Literature DB >> 31703643 |
Shichao Li1, Wenting Yan1, Xinhua Yang2, Li Chen1, Linjun Fan1, Haoxi Liu1, Kun Liu3, Yi Zhang4, Jun Jiang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increase of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) has been found after surgery for various carcinomas but not confirmed for breast cancer, and whether endoscopic surgery confers identical effect to CTCs as open surgery did is not clear. The present study aimed to investigate whether CTCs increase after surgery and whether there is a difference between open surgery and endoscopic surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Breast neoplasms; Circulating tumor cells; Endoscopic breast surgery; Micrometastases; Neoplastic cells; Open surgery
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31703643 PMCID: PMC6842272 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-6158-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Characteristics of the recruited patients
| Characteristic | Endoscopic group ( | Open group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 45(33–60) | 48(32–60) | 0.245 |
| Menopausal status | 0.391 | ||
| Premenopausal | 34(64.15%) | 32(56.14%) | |
| Postmenopausal | 19(35.85%) | 25(43.86%) | |
| Tumor size | 0.100 | ||
| T1 | 44(83.02%) | 40(70.18%) | |
| T2 | 9(16.98%) | 15(26.32%) | |
| T3 | 0(0%) | 2(3.51%) | |
| Lymph node (pN) | 0.108 | ||
| pN0 | 33(62.26%) | 28(49.12%) | |
| pN1 | 15(28.30%) | 18(31.58%) | |
| pN2 | 4(7.55%) | 7(12.28%) | |
| pN3 | 1(1.89%) | 4(7.02%) | |
| Tumor stage | 0.180 | ||
| I | 29(54.72%) | 26(45.61%) | |
| II | 19(35.85%) | 19(33.33%) | |
| III | 5(9.43%) | 12(21.05%) | |
| Histology type | 0.194 | ||
| Invasive ductal | 49(92.45%) | 56(98.25%) | |
| Other | 4(7.55%) | 1(1.75%) | |
| Estrogen receptors status | 0.473 | ||
| ER(+) | 32(60.38%) | 30(53.57%) | |
| ER(−) | 21(39.62%) | 26(46.43%) | |
| Progesterone receptors status | 0.776 | ||
| PR(+) | 26(49.06%) | 29(51.79%) | |
| PR(−) | 27(50.94%) | 27(48.21%) | |
| HER-2 status | 0.216 | ||
| HER-2(−) | 27(50.94%) | 36(64.29%) | |
| HER-2(+) | 8(15.09%) | 7(12.50%) | |
| HER-2(++) | 11(20.75%) | 5(8.93%) | |
| HER-2(+++) | 7(13.21%) | 8(14.29%) | |
| Surgery duration, min | 220(146–479) | 125 (66–384) | <0.001 |
| Bleeding volume, mL | 100(30–800) | 100(30–400) | 0.766 |
Represented as “median (range)” or “frequency (percentage)”
Comparison between the two surgery groups was analyzed by Mann-Whitney test for continuous variable and ordinal variables, by Chi-square test or Fisher exact test for binomial variables
Comparison for the positive rate of CTCs before and after surgery in the endoscopic and the open group
| Study period | Endoscopic group (n = 53) | Open group (n = 57) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before surgery | 13(24.53) | 13(22.81) | 0.832 |
| After surgery | 15(28.30) | 19(33.33) | 0.568 |
| 0.804 | 0.327 |
aComparison between endoscopic group and open group by Chi-square test
bComparison between preoperation and postoperation period by McNemar test
Comparison for number of CTCs before and after surgery in the endoscopic and the open group
| Study period | Endoscopic group ( | Open group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before surgery | 0.27(0.004–0.93) | 0.21(0.0001–0.75) | 0.361 |
| After surgery | 0.36(0.002–1.10) | 0.43(0.02–1.43) | 0.515 |
| 0.717 | 0.122 |
The number of CTCs was represented as “median (25th and 75th percentiles)”
aComparison between endoscopic group and open group by Mann-Whitney test
bComparison between preoperation and postoperation period by Wilcoxon signed rank test
The association between surgery type and micrometastatic risk: multi-variate analysis
| Variable | Model 0 a | Model 1 b | Model 2 c | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | ||||
| Surgery type | 2.39 (0.93, 6.13) | 0.070 | 2.60 (0.99, 6.80) | 0.052 | 3.19 (1.05, 9.65) | 0.040 |
| Menopausal status | 0.64 (0.25, 1.65) | 0.355 | 2.16 (0.79, 5.87) | 0.131 | 0.15 (0.02, 1.12) | 0.064 |
| Age | 1.07 (0.68, 1.67) | 0.769 | 0.18 (0.03, 1.21) | 0.077 | 2.23 (0.79, 6.28) | 0.130 |
| Pre-surgery CTC status | 0.37 (0.10, 1.35) | 0.131 | – | – | 6.31 (0.10, 418.40) | 0.389 |
| Tumor size | 1.15 (0.46, 2.87) | 0.761 | – | – | – | – |
| Lymph node | 1.42 (0.86, 2.33) | 0.173 | – | – | – | – |
| Tumor stage | 1.41 (0.78, 2.55) | 0.261 | – | – | – | – |
| Histology type | - e | 0.999 | – | – | – | |
| ER | 1.84 (0.72, 4.73) | 0.205 | – | – | – | – |
| PR | 1.33 (0.54, 3.28) | 0.529 | – | – | – | – |
| HER-2 | 0.91 (0.61, 1.38) | 0.669 | – | – | – | – |
| Interaction d | – | – | – | – | 0.15 (0.01, 2.56) | 0.191 |
| Final model | – | – | – | 0.057 | – | 0.025 |
OR indicates odds ratio
aUni-variate logistic analysis
bAnalyzed variables included: surgery type, menopausal status, age, tumor size, lymph node, tumor stage, histology type, estrogen receptors status, progesterone receptors status and HER-2 status. Analyzed by binary logistic regression (backward likelihood method). Only the variables remained in the final model were listed in the table
cAdditionally included pre-surgery CTC status and its interaction with surgery type based on model 1. Surgery type, pre-surgery CTC status and their interaction were enforcedly remained in the model
dThe interaction of surgery type and pre-surgery CTC status
eThe range was too large to be appropriately represented
Review of 16 published studies of CTC before and after surgery therapy
| Author | Year | N | Detection rate preoperatively | Time interval after surgery | Detection rate postoperatively |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhang Y et al. [ | 2017 | 286 | 62/286(22%) | 3d | 81/286(28%) |
| Maltoni R et al. [ | 2015 | 48 | 13/48(27%) | Immediately | 9/43(21%) |
| Pierga JY et al. [ | 2015 | 42 | 3/42(7%) | 3-4w | 5/38(13%) |
| van Dalum G et al. [ | 2015 | 403 | 75/403(19%) | 1w | 66/367(18%) |
| Banys M et al. [ | 2012 | 209 | 26/209(12%) | 2-3d | 34/209(16%) |
| Daskalakis M et al. [ | 2011 | 104 | 2/104(2%) | Immediately | 4/104(4%) |
| Sandri MT et al. [ | 2010 | 56 | 16/56(29%) | 5d | 14/47(30%) |
| Biggers B et al. [ | 2009 | 41 | 10/41(24%) | 14d | 9/30(30%) |
| Thepjatri N et al. [ | 2008 | 30 | 10/30(33%) | 14d | 8/22(36%) |
| Krawczyk N et al. [ | 2008 | 130 | 17/130(13%) | Immediately | 22/130(17%) |
| Ismail MS et al. [ | 2004 | 41 | 20/41(49%) | Immediately | 24/41(59%) |
| Hu XC et al. [ | 2003 | 49 | 4/49(8%) | 1d | 10/49(20%) |
| Galan M et al. [ | 2002 | 59 | 4/59(7%) | 1d | 10/59(17%) |
| Krag DN et al. [ | 1999 | 21 | 18/19(95%) | 2 h | 15/18(83%) |
| Choy A et al. [ | 1996 | 18 | 1/18(5%) | Immediately | 6/18(33%) |
| McCulloch P et al. [ | 1995 | 16 | 1/16(6%) | Immediately | 6/16(38%) |
Fig. 1Comparison of CTC positive rate before and after breast cancer surgery: meta-analysis. The heterogeneity of the recruited studies was estimated by the Cochran’s Q test (P = 0.147) and the I2 (27.5%). P value < 0.10 or I2 over 50% was defined as substantial heterogeneity. Hence, no substantial heterogeneity was observed among the studies and fixed model was used to analyze the overall difference of CTC positive rate before and after breast cancer surgery therapy (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.06–1.39; P = 0.006). OR over 1 indicates increased CTC positive rate after surgery compared to preoperation