Literature DB >> 9583697

Prognostic analysis of survival in small breast cancers.

I A Mustafa1, B Cole, H J Wanebo, K I Bland, H R Chang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Routine axillary dissection in patients with invasive small breast cancer remains controversial. We previously reported a model for predicting nodal involvement in patients with T1a or T1b breast cancer that may guide the practice of selective nodal dissection. The objective of this study was to determine whether the prognosticators that predict nodal metastases also predict survival. STUDY
DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of 2,153 women with small invasive breast cancer (< or = 1 cm) diagnosed between January 1984 and December 1995. Cases were identified from a statewide tumor registry, the Hospital Association of Rhode Island, and the tumor registry at Baystate Medical Center in Massachusetts. The impact on survival of patient age (< or = 40 versus > 40 years), nodal status (positive versus negative), tumor size (T1a versus T1b), and tumor grade (1 versus 2 or 3) were analyzed. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the proportional hazards regression method.
RESULTS: There were 388 patients with tumors 0.5 cm or less (T1a) and 1,765 with tumors 0.6-1.0 cm (T1b). Nodal status was known in 68% of cases (1,461 of 2,153), and tumor grade was recorded in 42% of cases (902 of 2,153). In univariate analysis, age, grade, and nodal status were significant in their association with BCSS. Tumor size did not influence BCSS among patients with small invasive tumors. Women older than 40 years had superior survival compared with younger women (93% versus 78% at 5 years; p = 0.01). Similarly, women with low grade (1) tumors did better than those with higher grade (2 or 3) tumors (98% versus 88% at 5 years; p = 0.03). The 5-year BCSS was 96% versus 78% for node-negative versus node-positive disease, and the 10-year BCSS was 91% versus 62% (p = 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, age and nodal status remained firmly associated with survival, although grade lost its significance.
CONCLUSIONS: Small tumor size does not affect survival. Although risk profiles for nodal involvement can be constructed to help guide the practice of selective axillary lymphadenectomy in patients with small invasive breast cancers, these factors cannot serve as a surrogate to nodal status in establishing patient prognosis. Nodal status remains the most powerful determinant of survival in breast cancer patients, even those with very small tumors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9583697     DOI: 10.1016/s1072-7515(98)00076-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  6 in total

1.  Failure of routine axillary nodal sampling to predict survival outcomes in lymph node-negative (N0) breast cancer.

Authors:  Kirby I Bland
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography in breast cancer.

Authors:  J Scott Sloka; Peter D Hollett; Maria Mathews
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Minimal breast cancer: evaluation of histology and biological marker expression.

Authors:  E A Dublin; R R Millis; P Smith; L G Bobrow
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  200 Sentinel lymph node biopsies without axillary lymph node dissection -- no axillary recurrences after a 3-year follow-up.

Authors:  R Reitsamer; F Peintinger; E Prokop; L Rettenbacher; C Menzel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-04-19       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 5.  Male breast cancer: is the scenario changing.

Authors:  Kaiyumars B Contractor; Kanchan Kaur; Gabriel S Rodrigues; Dhananjay M Kulkarni; Hemant Singhal
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-06-16       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  Tumor characteristics of breast cancer in predicting axillary lymph node metastasis.

Authors:  Hsin-Shun Tseng; Li-Sheng Chen; Shou-Jen Kuo; Shou-Tung Chen; Yu-Fen Wang; Dar-Ren Chen
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2014-07-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.