Marcia Boraas

Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy.

PURPOSE The association between a positive resection margin and the risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after conservative surgery and radiation is controversial. The width of the resection margin that minimizes the risk of IBTR is unknown. While adjuvant systemic therapy may decrease the risk of an IBTR in all patients, its impact on patients with positive or close margins is largely unknown. This study examines the interaction between margin status, margin width, and adjuvant systemic therapy on the 5- and 10-year risk of IBTR after conservative surgery and radiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS A series of 1,262 patients with clinical Stage I or II breast cancer were treated by breast-conserving surgery, axillary node dissection, and radiation between March 1979 and December 1992. The median follow-up was 6.3 years (range 0.1-15.6). The median age was 55 years (range 24-89). Clinical size was T1 in 66% and T2 in 34%. Seventy-three percent of patients were node-negative. Only 5 % of patients had tumors that were EIC-positive. Forty-one percent had a single excision, and 59% had a reexcision. The final margins were negative in 77%, positive in 12%, and close (< or = 2 mm) in 11%. The median total dose to the tumor bed was 60 Gy with negative margins, 64 Gy with close margins, and 66 Gy with positive margins. Chemotherapy +/- tamoxifen was used in 28%, tamoxifen alone in 20%, and no adjuvant systemic therapy in 52%. RESULTS The 5-year cumulative incidence (CI) of IBTR was not significantly different between patients with negative (4%), positive (5%), or close (7%) margins. However, by 10 years, a significant difference in IBTR became apparent (negative 7%, positive 12%, close 14%, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in IBTR when a close or positive margin was involved by invasive tumor or DCIS. Reexcision diminished the IBTR rate to 7% at 10 years if the final margin was negative; however, the highest risk was observed in patients with persistently positive (13%) or close (21%) (p = 0.02) margins. The median interval to failure was 3.7 years after no adjuvant systemic therapy, 5.0 years after chemotherapy +/- tamoxifen, and 6.7 years after tamoxifen alone. This delay to IBTR was observed in patients with close or positive margins, with little impact on the time to failure in patients with negative margins. The 5-year CI of IBTR in patients with close or positive margins was 1% with adjuvant systemic therapy and 13% with no adjuvant therapy. However, by 10 years, the CI of IBTR was similar (18% vs. 14%) due to more late failures in the patients who received adjuvant systemic therapy. CONCLUSION A negative margin (> 2 mm) identifies patients with a very low risk of IBTR (7% at 10 years) after conservative surgery and radiation. Patients with a close margin (< or = 2 mm) are at an equal or greater risk of IBTR as with a positive margin, especially following a reexcision. A margin involved by DCIS or invasive tumor has the same increased risk of IBTR. A reexcision of an initially close or positive margin that results in a negative final margin reduces the risk of IBTR to that of an initially negative margin. A close or positive margin is associated with an increased risk of IBTR even in patients who are EIC-negative or receiving higher boost doses of radiation. The median time to IBTR is delayed; however, the CI is not significantly decreased by adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with close or positive margins-the 5 year results in these patients underestimate their ultimate risk of recurrence.

Internal mammary node irradiation neither decreases distant metastases nor improves survival in stage I and II breast cancer

PURPOSE To compare outcome for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), or regional node recurrence, initial and subsequent distant metastases, and overall and cause-specific survival in women treated with conservative surgery and radiation based on whether or not radiation was targeted to the internal mammary nodes (IMN). METHODS AND MATERIALS From 1979-1994, 1383 women with Stage I-II breast cancer underwent wide excision, axillary node dissection with >/=10 nodes removed, and radiation. Median follow-up was 6 years; median age was 55 years. A total of 114 women had radiation targeted to the IMN with deep tangents and 1269 did not. Women who received IMN treatment were more often axillary node-positive (40% vs. 25%, p = 0. 002), had central or inner quadrant tumors (61% vs. 40%, p = 0.001), and had T2 tumors (47% vs. 31%, p = 0.001). All axillary node-positive women received adjuvant chemotherapy and/or tamoxifen. For axillary node-negative women, 13% of the IMN treatment group received adjuvant systemic therapy compared to 37% of the no treatment group (p = 0.001). Radiation was directed to the breast only in 97% of the axillary node-negative women who had IMN treatment and 99% of the no IMN treatment group. For axillary node-positive women, 98% of the IMN-treated group had radiation to the breast and supraclavicular nodes +/- a posterior axillary field compared to 77% of the no IMN treatment group (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups for median age, menopausal status, histology, final surgical margin, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, or the number of positive nodes. RESULTS There were no significant differences in the 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence of an IBTR, regional node recurrence, initial or total distant metastases for the two groups. Similarly 5- and 10-year actuarial overall and cause-specific survival were not significantly different. However, subset analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in initial (29% vs. 15% at 10 yr, p = 0.002) and total (30% vs. 17% at 10 yr, p = 0.01) distant metastases and a significant decrease in cause-specific survival (76% vs. 89% at 10 yr, p = 0.02) for postmenopausal women who received IMN treatment. These findings could not be attributed to differences in the use of systemic therapy or the number of positive nodes. Axillary node-positive patients did not experience a significant decrease in initial (36% vs. 22% at 10 yr, p = 0.21) or total distant metastases (37% vs. 28% at 10 yr, p = 0.62) or a significant improvement in cause-specific survival (72% vs. 76% at 10 yr, p = 0.76) with IMN treatment regardless of whether the tumor was lateral or medial/central in location. IMN treatment was not associated with an increase in non-breast cancer deaths during this period of observation. CONCLUSIONS This retrospective series was unable to identify a significant benefit for IMN irradiation in terms of distant metastases or cause-specific survival for the entire patient population, and in particular, for patients with positive axillary nodes and medially located lesions. The results of the proposed or ongoing prospective randomized trials will further address this controversial issue.

Local Recurrence of Breast Cancer in the Stereotactic Core Needle Biopsy Site: Case Reports and Review of the Literature

Abstract: Early mammographic detection of nonpalpable breast lesions has led to the increasing use of stereotactic core biopsies for tissue diagnosis. Tumor seeding the needle tract is a theorectical concern; the incidence and clinical significance of this potential complication are unknown. We report three cases of subcutaneous breast cancer recurrence at the stereotactic biopsy site after definitive treatment of the primary breast tumor. Two cases were clinically evident and relevant; the third was detected in the preclinical, microscopic state. All three patients underwent multiple passes during stereotactic large‐core biopsies (14 gauge needle) followed by modified radical mastectomy. Two patients developed a subcutaneous recurrence at the site of the previous biopsy 12 and 17 months later; one had excision of the skin and dermis at the time of mastectomy revealing tumor cells locally. In summary, clinically relevant recurrence from tumor cells seeding the needle tract is reported in two patients after definitive surgical therapy (without adjuvant radiation therapy). Often, the biopsy site is outside the boundaries of surgical resection. Since the core needle biopsy exit site represents a potential area of malignant seeding and subsequent tumor recurrence, we recommend excising the stereotactic core biopsy tract at the time of definitive surgical resection of the primary tumor.

Time to Surgery and Breast Cancer Survival in the United States.

IMPORTANCE Time to surgery (TTS) is of concern to patients and clinicians, but controversy surrounds its effect on breast cancer survival. There remains little national data evaluating the association. OBJECTIVE To investigate the relationship between the time from diagnosis to breast cancer surgery and survival, using separate analyses of 2 of the largest cancer databases in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Two independent population-based studies were conducted of prospectively collected national data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The SEER-Medicare cohort included Medicare patients older than 65 years, and the NCDB cohort included patients cared for at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities throughout the United States. Each analysis assessed overall survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery by evaluating 5 intervals (≤30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, and 121-180 days) and disease-specific survival at 60-day intervals. All patients were diagnosed with noninflammatory, nonmetastatic, invasive breast cancer and underwent surgery as initial treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Overall and disease-specific survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery, after adjusting for patient, demographic, and tumor-related factors. RESULTS The SEER-Medicare cohort had 94 544 patients 66 years or older diagnosed between 1992 and 2009. With each interval of delay increase, overall survival was lower overall (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13; P < .001), and in patients with stage I (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P < .001) and stage II disease (HR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .01). Breast cancer-specific mortality increased with each 60-day interval (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = .03). The NCDB study evaluated 115 790 patients 18 years or older diagnosed between 2003 and 2005. The overall mortality HR was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; P < .001) for each increasing interval, significant in stages I (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21; P < .001) and II (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < .001) only, after adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment factors. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Greater TTS is associated with lower overall and disease-specific survival, and a shortened delay is associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies. Although time is required for preoperative evaluation and consideration of options such as reconstruction, efforts to reduce TTS should be pursued when possible to enhance survival.

Learned food aversions among cancer chemotherapy patients. Incidence, nature, and clinical implications

The current study documents the incidence of chemotherapy‐related food aversions in defined patient populations and characterizes selected aspects of the problem. The association between the incidence of food aversions and patient outcome was also evaluated. Seventy‐six primarily breast and lung cancer patients were interviewed before and at stipulated time points for 6 months after their initial course of chemotherapy. Learned food aversions (LFA) were documented via open‐ended questionnaires and ratings for foods ingested during the 48‐hour period surrounding the first day of treatment. Treatment‐related aversions were observed in over 50% of the patients and involved all food groups. The aversions generally occurred shortly after the first course of chemotherapy, were food‐specific and of short duration. No strong association was observed between the incidence of food aversions and treatment outcome measures, but quality of life issues warrant further consideration.

Preoperative Delays in the US Medicare Population With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Although no specific delay threshold after diagnosis of breast cancer has been demonstrated to affect outcome, delays can cause anxiety, and surgical waiting time has been suggested as a quality measure. This study was performed to determine the interval from presentation to surgery in Medicare patients with nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy and factors associated with a longer time to surgery. METHODS Medicare claims linked to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data were reviewed for factors associated with delay between the first physician claim for a breast problem and first therapeutic surgery. RESULTS Between 1992 and 2005, 72,586 Medicare patients with breast cancer had a median interval (delay) between first physician visit and surgery of 29 days, increasing from 21 days in 1992 to 32 days in 2005. Women (29 days v 24 days for men; P < .001), younger patients (29 days; P < .001), blacks and Hispanics (each 37 days; P < .001), patients in the northeast (33 days; P < .001), and patients in large metropolitan areas (32 days; P < .001) had longer delays. Patients having breast conservation and mastectomies had adjusted median delays of 28 and 30 days, respectively, with simultaneous reconstruction adding 12 days. Preoperative components, including imaging modalities, biopsy type, and clinician visits, were also each associated with a specific additional delay. CONCLUSION Waiting times for breast cancer surgery have increased in Medicare patients, and measurable delays are associated with demographics and preoperative evaluation components. If such increases continue, periodic assessment may be required to rule out detrimental effects on outcomes.

Postmenopausal Hormone Replacement Therapy: Effect on Diagnosis and Outcome in Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer Treated With Conservative Surgery and Radiation

PURPOSE To compare the pretreatment characteristics and outcome of postmenopausal women with stage I-II breast cancer treated with conservative surgery and radiation who had a history of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) with those who had never received HRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS From 1979 to 1993, 485 postmenopausal women underwent excisional biopsy, axillary dissection, and radiation for stage I-II breast cancer. The median follow-up was 5.9 years. One hundred forty-one patients reported a history of HRT. The median length of use was 5 years. Three hundred forty-four patients reported no history of HRT. RESULTS Statistically significant differences between the two groups were observed for median age (HRT 60 years v no HRT 64 years; P =.0009), median weight (HRT 142 lbs v no HRT 152 lbs; P =.004), clinical tumor size < or = 2 cm (HRT 77% v no HRT 66%; P =.02), and the use of re-excision (HRT 62% v no HRT 49%; P =.01). The method of detection by mammogram only (HRT 52% v no HRT 42%; P =.06) was of borderline statistical significance. The HRT patients had a statistically significant increased cumulative incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (8% v 2%; P =.02), a statistically significant decreased cumulative incidence of distant metastases (HRT 6% v no HRT 17%; P =.01), and a borderline statistically significant improvement in cause-specific survival at 10 years (HRT 92% v no HRT 86%; P =.07). Postmenopausal women with a history of HRT did not have an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer or second non-breast cancer malignancy. CONCLUSION This study failed to identify an adverse effect of HRT on breast cancer mortality in patients with stage I-II disease treated with conservative surgery and radiation.

Accuracy of the extent of axillary nodal positivity related to primary tumor size, number of involved nodes, and number of nodes examined.

PURPOSE While a number of studies have evaluated the minimum number of axillary nodes that need to be examined to accurately determine nodal positivity or negativity, there is little information on the number of nodes which must be examined to determine the extent of nodal positivity. This study attempts to determine for patients with 1-3 positive nodes the probability that the number of positive nodes reported is the true number of positive nodes as well as the probability that 4 or more nodes could be positive based on primary tumor size and number of nodes examined. MATERIALS AND METHODS From 1979 to 1998, 1652 women with Stages I-II invasive breast cancer underwent an axillary dissection as part of their breast conservation therapy and had more than 10 lymph nodes examined. The mean and median number of nodes identified in the dissection was 19 and 17 (range, 11-75). The median age was 55 years. A total of 1155 women had T1 tumors and 497 had T2 tumors. Of the 459 node-positive women, 72% had 1-3 positive nodes, 18% had 4-9 positive nodes, and 10% had 10 or more positive nodes. A mathematical model based on tumor size and number of nodes examined was created using the hypergeometric distribution and Bayes Theorem. The resulting model was used to estimate the accuracy of the reported number of positive nodes and the probability of 4 or more positive nodes based on various observed sampling combinations. RESULTS For patients with T1 tumors and 1, 2, or 3 positive nodes, the minimum number of nodes examined needed for a 90% probability of accuracy is 19, 20, and 20. For T2 tumors and 1, 2, or 3 positive nodes, a minimum of 20 nodes is required. The probability of 4 or more positive nodes increases as tumor size and the number of reported positive nodes increase and as the number of examined nodes decreases. For a 10% or less probability of 4 or more positive nodes, a patient with a T1 tumor and 1, 2, or 3 observed positive nodes would require a minimum of 8, 15, and 20 nodes removed. For a T2 tumor and 1, 2, or 3 observed positive nodes, the corresponding numbers are 10, 16, and 20. CONCLUSION The accuracy of the extent of axillary nodal positivity is influenced by the number of observed positive nodes, tumor size, and the number of nodes examined. Underestimation of the number of positive nodes will result in errors in the assessment of an individuals risk for locoregional recurrence, distant disease, and breast cancer death and will adversely impact on treatment recommendations. This model provides the clinician with a means for assessing the accuracy of the number of positive nodes reported in patients with 1-3 positive nodes.

Breast conservation versus mastectomy for patients with T3 primary tumors (>5 cm): A review of 5685 medicare patients

Although breast conservation therapy (BCT) is standard for breast cancer treatment, patients with tumors measuring >5 cm have been excluded from clinical trials. Nevertheless, only a few small retrospective series to date have compared BCT with mastectomy for tumors measuring >5 cm. The current study was performed to determine whether survival is equivalent for BCT versus mastectomy using a large national data set.

Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer is associated with increased local recurrence regardless of surgery type.

Multifocal and multicentric breast cancers have been correlated with poor prognostic factors and worse outcomes versus unifocal disease. We evaluated the impact of multifocal and multicentric disease versus case controls with unifocal disease, matching for age, grade, T‐, and N‐stage. A total of 110 patients with multifocal (n = 93) or multicentric (n = 17) disease and 263 matched case controls were identified with a median follow‐up of 53 months and 64 months, respectively. The actuarial local control rates for the multifocal/multicentric and unifocal group were 88% and 97%, respectively at both 5 and 10 years (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, multifocal/multicentric disease remained associated with higher local recurrence after controlling for other covariates including surgery type. The disease‐free survival rates in the multifocal/multicentric group at 5 and 10 years were 75% and 71%, respectively, versus 87% and 78% at 10 years (p = 0.01). On multivariate analysis, multifocal/multicentric disease was no longer associated with worse disease‐free survival. There was no difference in the cohorts in terms of regional control, overall survival, or cancer specific survival. Our findings suggest that multifocal/multicentric disease may be associated with worse outcomes versus unifocal disease regardless of type of surgery. This suggests a more biologically aggressive cancer and may be an important consideration when managing these patients. Further studies are needed to better understand the impact of multifocal/multicentric breast cancers on outcomes.