Thomas J O'Keefe1, Olivier Harismendy2, Anne M Wallace3. 1. Division of Breast Surgery and The Comprehensive Breast Health Center, University of California San Diego, 0819, 3855 Health Sciences Dr, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA. tokeefe@health.ucsd.edu. 2. Division of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine, Moores Cancer Center, University of California San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA. 3. Division of Breast Surgery and The Comprehensive Breast Health Center, University of California San Diego, 0819, 3855 Health Sciences Dr, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Trials for DCIS have not explored whether outcomes for patients with large disease burden requiring mastectomy are comparable to those of patients with lumpectomy-amenable disease. We aim to identify whether patients with DCIS larger than 5 cm and diffuse-type DCIS differ in breast cancer mortality (BCM) from patients with disease less than 5 cm. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with DCIS in the SEER program were assessed to identify factors prognostic of breast-cancer-specific survival using competing risks regression. RESULTS: 44,849 patients met criteria for the cumulative incidence estimate. On competing risks cumulative incidence approximation, the 10-year estimate for BCM for each group was 1.3%, 1.3%, 2.3%, and 5.1%, respectively, and the difference among groups was significant (p = 0.017). On competing risks regression of patients with known covariates, both diffuse-type disease and disease larger than 5 cm (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.2 and 1.7, p = 0.013 and p = 0.042, respectively) were associated with increased risk of BCM. After matching, DCIS > 5 cm and diffuse disease were associated with increased BCM relative to disease < 5 cm (HR = 1.69, p = 0.04). Among patients undergoing mastectomy for disease larger than 5 cm or diffuse disease, the 10-year cumulative incidence for BCM was 0.5% among patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy and 2.4% for patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Patients with large and diffuse DCIS represent uncommon but poorly studied DCIS subgroups with worse prognoses than patients with disease smaller than 5 cm. Further studies are needed to elucidate the appropriate treatment for these patients.
PURPOSE: Trials for DCIS have not explored whether outcomes for patients with large disease burden requiring mastectomy are comparable to those of patients with lumpectomy-amenable disease. We aim to identify whether patients with DCIS larger than 5 cm and diffuse-type DCIS differ in breast cancer mortality (BCM) from patients with disease less than 5 cm. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with DCIS in the SEER program were assessed to identify factors prognostic of breast-cancer-specific survival using competing risks regression. RESULTS: 44,849 patients met criteria for the cumulative incidence estimate. On competing risks cumulative incidence approximation, the 10-year estimate for BCM for each group was 1.3%, 1.3%, 2.3%, and 5.1%, respectively, and the difference among groups was significant (p = 0.017). On competing risks regression of patients with known covariates, both diffuse-type disease and disease larger than 5 cm (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.2 and 1.7, p = 0.013 and p = 0.042, respectively) were associated with increased risk of BCM. After matching, DCIS > 5 cm and diffuse disease were associated with increased BCM relative to disease < 5 cm (HR = 1.69, p = 0.04). Among patients undergoing mastectomy for disease larger than 5 cm or diffuse disease, the 10-year cumulative incidence for BCM was 0.5% among patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy and 2.4% for patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Patients with large and diffuse DCIS represent uncommon but poorly studied DCIS subgroups with worse prognoses than patients with disease smaller than 5 cm. Further studies are needed to elucidate the appropriate treatment for these patients.
Authors: Isaac Schmale; Stephen Liu; Jessica Rayhanabad; Christy A Russell; Stephen F Sener Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Elizabeth M Ward; Carol E DeSantis; Chun Chieh Lin; Joan L Kramer; Ahmedin Jemal; Betsy Kohler; Otis W Brawley; Ted Gansler Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-10-02 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: B Fisher; J Costantino; C Redmond; E Fisher; R Margolese; N Dimitrov; N Wolmark; D L Wickerham; M Deutsch; L Ore Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kandace P McGuire; Alfredo A Santillan; Paramjeet Kaur; Tammi Meade; Jateen Parbhoo; Morgan Mathias; Corinne Shamehdi; Michelle Davis; Daniel Ramos; Charles E Cox Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-08-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jack Cuzick; Ivana Sestak; Sarah E Pinder; Ian O Ellis; Sharon Forsyth; Nigel J Bundred; John F Forbes; Hugh Bishop; Ian S Fentiman; William D George Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2010-12-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Alexa C Glencer; Jasmine M Wong; Nola M Hylton; Gregor Krings; Emma McCune; Harriet T Rothschild; Tristan A Loveday; Michael D Alvarado; Laura J Esserman; Michael J Campbell Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2021-05-25