Raphael J Louie1, Charles E Gaber2,3, Paula D Strassle2,3, Kristalyn K Gallagher1, Stephanie M Downs-Canner1, David W Ollila4. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 4. Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. david_ollila@med.unc.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the past two decades, three prospective randomized trials demonstrated that elderly women with early stage hormone positive breast cancer had equivalent disease-specific mortality regardless of axillary surgery. In 2016, the Choosing Wisely campaign encouraged patients and providers to reconsider the role of axillary surgery in this population. We sought to identify factors that contribute to adopting non-operative management of the axilla in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of women ≥ 70 years old with cT1/T2, hormone positive invasive ductal carcinoma who underwent partial or total mastectomy, with/without axillary surgery, and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015. We used multivariable log-binomial regression to model the risk of undergoing axillary surgery across region, care setting, and Charlson-Deyo scores, and analyzed temporal trends using Poisson regression. From 2004 to 2015, 87,342 of 99,940 women who met inclusion criteria (83%) had axillary surgery. Over time, axillary surgery increased from 78% to 88% (p < 0.001). This rise was consistent across region (p = 0.81) and care setting (p = 0.09), but flattened as age increased (p < 0.001). Omitting axillary surgery was more likely in patients treated in New England (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86, 0.89) and patients ≥ 85 (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.65, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Axillary surgery continues to be the preferred option of axillary management in elderly women with early stage, clinically node negative, hormone-positive, invasive breast cancer despite no survival benefit. Identifying factors to improve patient selection and dissemination of current recommendations can improve adoption of current evidence on axillary surgery in the elderly.
INTRODUCTION: In the past two decades, three prospective randomized trials demonstrated that elderly women with early stage hormone positive breast cancer had equivalent disease-specific mortality regardless of axillary surgery. In 2016, the Choosing Wisely campaign encouraged patients and providers to reconsider the role of axillary surgery in this population. We sought to identify factors that contribute to adopting non-operative management of the axilla in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of women ≥ 70 years old with cT1/T2, hormone positive invasive ductal carcinoma who underwent partial or total mastectomy, with/without axillary surgery, and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015. We used multivariable log-binomial regression to model the risk of undergoing axillary surgery across region, care setting, and Charlson-Deyo scores, and analyzed temporal trends using Poisson regression. From 2004 to 2015, 87,342 of 99,940 women who met inclusion criteria (83%) had axillary surgery. Over time, axillary surgery increased from 78% to 88% (p < 0.001). This rise was consistent across region (p = 0.81) and care setting (p = 0.09), but flattened as age increased (p < 0.001). Omitting axillary surgery was more likely in patients treated in New England (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86, 0.89) and patients ≥ 85 (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.65, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Axillary surgery continues to be the preferred option of axillary management in elderly women with early stage, clinically node negative, hormone-positive, invasive breast cancer despite no survival benefit. Identifying factors to improve patient selection and dissemination of current recommendations can improve adoption of current evidence on axillary surgery in the elderly.
Authors: Jennifer K Plichta; Samantha M Thomas; Rebecca Vernon; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju; Laura H Rosenberger; Terry Hyslop; E Shelley Hwang; Rachel A Greenup Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Carl-Magnus Rudenstam; David Zahrieh; John F Forbes; Diana Crivellari; Stig B Holmberg; Piercarlo Rey; David Dent; Ian Campbell; Jürg Bernhard; Karen N Price; Monica Castiglione-Gertsch; Aron Goldhirsch; Richard D Gelber; Alan S Coates Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Judy C Boughey; Bruce G Haffty; Elizabeth B Habermann; Tanya L Hoskin; Matthew P Goetz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-01-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Haejin In; Karl Y Bilimoria; Andrew K Stewart; Kristen E Wroblewski; Mitchell C Posner; Mark S Talamonti; David P Winchester Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-02-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Hanne Verbelen; Nick Gebruers; Fau-Mei Eeckhout; Kim Verlinden; Wiebren Tjalma Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Daniel J Boffa; Joshua E Rosen; Katherine Mallin; Ashley Loomis; Greer Gay; Bryan Palis; Kathleen Thoburn; Donna Gress; Daniel P McKellar; Lawrence N Shulman; Matthew A Facktor; David P Winchester Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Armando E Giuliano; Kelly K Hunt; Karla V Ballman; Peter D Beitsch; Pat W Whitworth; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukamal Saha; Linda M McCall; Monica Morrow Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 56.272
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: Benjamin D Smith; Grace L Smith; Arti Hurria; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Thomas A Buchholz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-04-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jessemae L Welsh; Tanya L Hoskin; Courtney N Day; Elizabeth B Habermann; Matthew P Goetz; Judy C Boughey Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Kathleen Iles; Mya L Roberson; Philip Spanheimer; Kristalyn Gallagher; David W Ollila; Paula D Strassle; Stephanie Downs-Canner Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2022-03-01
Authors: Christina A Minami; Ava F Bryan; Rachel A Freedman; Anna C Revette; Mara A Schonberg; Tari A King; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-08-01