Liam A Devane1, Chwanrow K Baban1, A O'Doherty2, Cecily Quinn3, Enda W McDermott1, Ruth S Prichard4. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. 2. Department of Radiology, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. 3. Department of Pathology, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. 4. Department of Breast Surgery, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. ruthprichard@rcsi.ie.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) can improve cosmesis by reducing resection volume. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) aims to achieve clear excision margins while optimizing cosmesis. However, the influence of NAC on margin re-excision after BCS is unclear. This study examines the rate and determinants of margin re-excision in patients undergoing BCS following NAC in our institution. METHODS: From 2011-2015, all patients treated with NAC prior to BCS were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact test tests were used to compare variables in patients who did and did not require re-excision. Patients undergoing primary surgical treatment in 2015 comprised an unmatched comparison group. RESULTS: Of 211 patients treated with NAC, 69 initially underwent BCS. The re-excision rate was 32% (n = 22) compared to 17% in the primary operable group (38 of 221, p = 0.02). Re-excision rates were lowest in triple-negative and HER2+ tumors (0% and 10%, respectively). Lobular carcinoma and ER+ tumors had a significantly higher rate of re-excision (100% and 42%, respectively). Of 22 patients undergoing re-excision, 9 had further BCS and 13 had a mastectomy. CONCLUSION: The re-excision rate following NAC is almost twice that of patients who underwent primary operative management. Her2+ and triple-negative tumors have lower re-excision rates and may represent a selected cohort most suitable for BCS. Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma or ER+ disease have significantly higher rates of margin positivity, and these patients should be considered for a cavity shave during primary surgery to reduce the rates of re-excision.
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) can improve cosmesis by reducing resection volume. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) aims to achieve clear excision margins while optimizing cosmesis. However, the influence of NAC on margin re-excision after BCS is unclear. This study examines the rate and determinants of margin re-excision in patients undergoing BCS following NAC in our institution. METHODS: From 2011-2015, all patients treated with NAC prior to BCS were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact test tests were used to compare variables in patients who did and did not require re-excision. Patients undergoing primary surgical treatment in 2015 comprised an unmatched comparison group. RESULTS: Of 211 patients treated with NAC, 69 initially underwent BCS. The re-excision rate was 32% (n = 22) compared to 17% in the primary operable group (38 of 221, p = 0.02). Re-excision rates were lowest in triple-negative and HER2+ tumors (0% and 10%, respectively). Lobular carcinoma and ER+ tumors had a significantly higher rate of re-excision (100% and 42%, respectively). Of 22 patients undergoing re-excision, 9 had further BCS and 13 had a mastectomy. CONCLUSION: The re-excision rate following NAC is almost twice that of patients who underwent primary operative management. Her2+ and triple-negative tumors have lower re-excision rates and may represent a selected cohort most suitable for BCS. Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma or ER+ disease have significantly higher rates of margin positivity, and these patients should be considered for a cavity shave during primary surgery to reduce the rates of re-excision.
Authors: Sarah Shuk-Kay Tang; Sarantos Kaptanis; James B Haddow; Giuseppina Mondani; Beatrix Elsberger; Marios Konstantinos Tasoulis; Christine Obondo; Neil Johns; Wisam Ismail; Asim Syed; Panayioti Kissias; Mary Venn; Souganthy Sundaramoorthy; Gareth Irwin; Amtul S Sami; Dalia Elfadl; Alice Baggaley; Dionysios Dennis Remoundos; Fiona Langlands; Petros Charalampoudis; Zoe Barber; Werbena L S Hamilton-Burke; Ayesha Khan; Chiara Sirianni; Louise Anne-Marie Grant Merker; Sunita Saha; Risha Arun Lane; Sharat Chopra; Sophie Dupré; Aidan T Manning; Edward R St John; Aya Musbahi; Nokwanda Dlamini; Caitlin L McArdle; Chloe Wright; James O Murphy; Ravi Aggarwal; Matei Dordea; Karen Bosch; Donna Egbeare; Hisham Osman; Salim Tayeh; Faraz Razi; Javeria Iqbal; Serena F C Ledwidge; Vanessa Albert; Yazan Masannat Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Geneviève Soucy; Julie Bélanger; Guy Leblanc; Lucas Sideris; Pierre Drolet; Andrew Mitchell; Yves E Leclerc; Michel P Dufresne; Julie Beaudet; Pierre Dubé Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2008-03-03 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Monica Morrow; Eric A Strom; Lawrence W Bassett; D David Dershaw; Barbara Fowble; Armando Giuliano; Jay R Harris; Frances O'Malley; Stuart J Schnitt; S Eva Singletary; David P Winchester Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2002 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: J H Volders; M H Haloua; N M A Krekel; V L Negenborn; E Barbé; C Sietses; K Jóźwiak; S Meijer; M P van den Tol Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Priya Rastogi; Stewart J Anderson; Harry D Bear; Charles E Geyer; Morton S Kahlenberg; André Robidoux; Richard G Margolese; James L Hoehn; Victor G Vogel; Shaker R Dakhil; Deimante Tamkus; Karen M King; Eduardo R Pajon; Mary Johanna Wright; Jean Robert; Soonmyung Paik; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-02-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: W Truin; G Vugts; R M H Roumen; A J G Maaskant-Braat; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; M van der Heiden-van der Loo; V C G Tjan-Heijnen; A C Voogd Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jeffrey Landercasper; Barbara Bennie; Benjamin M Parsons; Leah L Dietrich; Caprice C Greenberg; Lee G Wilke; Jared H Linebarger Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 5.344