Susan K. Boolbol

Do additional shaved margins at the time of lumpectomy eliminate the need for re-excision?

BACKGROUND Most women diagnosed with breast cancer undergo breast-conservation surgery. Re-excision rates for positive margins have been reported to be greater than 50%. The purpose of our study was to determine if removing additional shaved margins from the lumpectomy cavity at the time of lumpectomy reduces re-excisions. METHODS A retrospective study was performed on 125 women who had undergone lumpectomy with additional shaved margins taken from the lumpectomy cavity. Pathology reports were reviewed for tumor size and histology, lumpectomy and additional margin status, and specimen and margin volume. RESULTS If additional margins were not taken, 66% would have required re-excision. Because of taking additional shaved margins, re-excision was eliminated in 48%. CONCLUSION Excising additional shaved margins at the original surgery reduced reoperations by 48%. There is a balance between removing additional margins and desirable cosmesis after breast-conservation surgery. The decision to take extra margins should be based on the surgeons judgment.

The feasibility of a second lumpectomy and breast brachytherapy for localized cancer in a breast previously treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for breast cancer

PURPOSE With accumulating evidence supporting partial-breast irradiation, we conducted a Phase I/II study to evaluate the role of a second conservative surgery and brachytherapy for patients presenting with a local recurrence/new primary in a breast who has previously undergone a lumpectomy and external radiation therapy for breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Fifteen patients with a localized lesion in the breast have undergone a second lumpectomy and received low-dose-rate brachytherapy on protocol. The first 6 patients received a dose of 30Gy. With no unacceptable acute toxicity observed, the brachytherapy dose was increased to 45Gy. Three patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and 8 patients are on antiestrogen therapy. RESULTS The median time interval between the primary breast cancer diagnosis and the second cancer event in the ipsilateral breast is 94 months (range, 28-211). With a median followup of 36 months after brachytherapy, the 3-year Kaplan-Meier overall survival, local disease-free survival and mastectomy-free survival are 100% and 89%, respectively. There was no Grade 3/4 fibrosis or necrosis observed. All patients had baseline asymmetry due to the breast volume deficit from the second lumpectomy. With breast asymmetry as a given, the cosmetic result observed in all patients has been good to excellent. CONCLUSIONS Early results suggest low-complication rates, high rate of local control and freedom from mastectomy. Additional studies are needed to establish whether a second lumpectomy and breast brachytherapy are an acceptable alternative to mastectomy for patients presenting with a localized cancer in a previously irradiated breast.

Intra-operative Touch Preparation Cytology; Does It Have a Role in Re-excision Lumpectomy?

ObjectiveBreast carcinoma is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women of North America. The combination of breast conservation surgery and radiotherapy has become a standard of treatment for the majority of breast cancers. It is critical to obtain clear margins to minimize local recurrence. However, avoiding multiple re-excisions for margin clearance helps optimize cosmetic results in patients undergoing breast conservation surgery. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology (IOTPC) may decrease the need for multiple re-excisions and thereby improve cosmesis. The literature suggests that IOTPC can be useful in evaluation of margins. Klimberg et al. evaluated the touch preparation technique prospectively in 428 patients undergoing breast biopsy for undiagnosed breast masses. Margin evaluation was correct in 100% of the lesions and was used to re-excise the margins when touch prep results were positive. They reported a diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 100% for the touch prep technique.To the best of our knowledge, there has been no published data on the role of IOTPC for evaluation of margins in re-excision cases. This report describes our experience with IOTPC for margin assessment for re-excision partial mastectomy at Beth Israel Medical Center (BIMC). The purpose of this study is to determine whether IOTPC is reliable for evaluating margins in patients undergoing re-excision for involved or close margins.MethodsA prospective study of 30 patients, who have undergone re-excision partial mastectomy for involved or close margins after breast conservation surgery with the use of IOTPC for margin assessment at BIMC was performed. The re-excision lumpectomy specimens were oriented by the surgeon intra-operatively and were submitted fresh to pathology for cytologic assessment. The touch prep method consisted of touching the corresponding margin onto the glass slide. The principle of this technique is that if cancer cells are present they will stick to the slide, while fat cells will not. A slide was prepared for each re-excision specimen. Air-dried samples were stained immediately using the Diff-Quik method and examined under the microscope by a cytopathologist.ResultsThirty patients underwent re-excision lumpectomy for involved or close margins with touch preparation cytology for assessment of 68 margins. Twenty-six patients had invasive ductal carcinoma and/or ductal carcinoma in situ, three patients had invasive lobular carcinoma and the remaining one patient had a combination of invasive lobular and ductal carcinoma. There was a correlation between touch prep cytology and final pathology in 56/68 margins, which accounts for 82.4% of the cases.ConclusionIntra-operative touch preparation cytology for assessment of margins in patients undergoing re-excision lumpectomy for involved or close margins has a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 82.8%, positive predictive value of 21.4%, and negative predictive value of 98.2%. This high negative predictive value and a single false negative margin are quite significant. Therefore, based on our experience, IOTPC can be a useful tool for intra-operative assessment of margins for patients undergoing re-excision partial mastectomy.

Quality Assurance Initiative at One Institution for Minimally Invasive Breast Biopsy as the Initial Diagnostic Technique

BACKGROUND In 2005, the American College of Surgeons Consensus Conference issued a statement about the diagnostic workup of image-detected breast abnormalities. Guidelines include use of image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy as the gold standard for diagnosing image-detected breast abnormalities. In this study, we evaluate a method to audit use of excisional biopsy among different breast surgeons at our institution. STUDY DESIGN From March to September 2007, 465 patients undergoing breast operation for benign or malignant lesions at our institution were interviewed by a surgical resident or physicians assistant. If an excisional biopsy was scheduled for initial diagnosis, the patient and surgeon were asked whose preference it was to perform the operation. Three attending groups were designated: academic breast surgeons, private practice breast surgeons on clinical faculty, and general surgeons who perform breast operations in addition to other procedures. Use of excisional biopsy was compared between these groups. RESULTS Compliance for preoperative interview completion was 79%, differing substantially between surgeon groups with rates of 91%, 74%, and 58% for the academic breast, private practice, and general surgeons, respectively. Excisional biopsy for diagnosis made up 10%, 35%, and 37% of the case load for academic breast, private practice, and general surgeons, respectively. Patient and surgeon agreed 85% of the time for preference of performing diagnostic excisional biopsies. CONCLUSIONS Excisional biopsies continue to be performed as the initial diagnostic procedure for 40% of patients. Tracking biopsy practices by surgeon can improve adherence with current recommendations.

Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treated With 3-Week Accelerated Whole-Breast Radiation Therapy and Concomitant Boost

PURPOSE To report early outcomes of accelerated whole-breast radiation therapy with concomitant boost. METHODS AND MATERIALS This is a prospective, institutional review board-approved study. Eligibility included stage TisN0, T1N0, and T2N0 breast cancer. Patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were ineligible. The whole breast received 40.5 Gy in 2.7-Gy fractions with a concomitant lumpectomy boost of 4.5 Gy in 0.3-Gy fractions. Total dose to the lumpectomy site was 45 Gy in 15 fractions over 19 days. RESULTS Between October 2004 and December 2010, 160 patients were treated; stage distribution was as follows: TisN0, n = 63; T1N0, n = 88; and T2N0, n = 9. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years (range, 1.5-7.8 years) the 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.94) and 97% (95% CI 0.93-0.99), respectively. Five-year local relapse-free survival was 99% (95% CI 0.96-0.99). Acute National Cancer Institute/Common Toxicity Criteria grade 1 and 2 skin toxicity was observed in 70% and 5%, respectively. Among the patients with ≥ 2-year follow-up no toxicity higher than grade 2 on the Late Effects in Normal Tissues-Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic scale was observed. Review of the radiation therapy dose-volume histogram noted that ≥ 95% of the prescribed dose encompassed the lumpectomy target volume in >95% of plans. The median dose received by the heart D05 was 215 cGy, and median lung V20 was 7.6%. CONCLUSIONS The prescribed accelerated schedule of whole-breast radiation therapy with concomitant boost can be administered, achieving acceptable dose distribution. With follow-up to date, the results are encouraging and suggest minimal side effects and excellent local control.

Comparative Acute Toxicity from Whole Breast Irradiation Using 3-Week Accelerated Schedule With Concomitant Boost and the 6.5-Week Conventional Schedule With Sequential Boost for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND We aimed to evaluate the incidence of acute toxicity in a 3-week accelerated radiation therapy (RT) schedule with a concomitant boost compared with the 6.5-week conventional schedule with a sequential boost for early-stage, node-negative breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study included the first 50 patients treated on protocol using the accelerated schedule as well as 74 patients with comparable stages of disease treated over the same period using the conventional schedule. An accelerated schedule of 40.5 Gy × 2.7 Gy/fraction to the whole breast with 4.5 Gy × 0.3 Gy/fraction concomitant boost, for a delivered total dose of 45.0 Gy × 3.0 Gy/fraction in 15 fractions to the lumpectomy site. The conventional schedule used 46.8 Gy × 1.8 Gy to the whole breast with a sequential boost of 14.0 Gy × 2.0 Gy/fraction, delivering a total dose of 60.8 Gy × 33 fractions to the lumpectomy site. The side effects observed during RT and through the initial 8 weeks after treatment were scored for acute toxicity. RESULTS A lower incidence of ≥ grade 2 skin toxicity was observed among patients treated on the accelerated schedule compared with those treated on the conventional schedule (p = .0015). There was a higher incidence of breast pain among patients receiving the conventional schedule (p = .045). No significant difference in the incidence of breast edema, fatigue, or hematologic side effects was observed between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION Our observations suggest that there is acceptable toxicity with the accelerated schedule as used in this study. Further, it is not associated with a higher risk of acute toxicity when compared with the conventional schedule. Patients in the study are being followed, and clinical outcomes will be reported as the data mature.

Intraoperative touch preparation cytology for margin assessment in breast-conservation surgery: does it work for lobular carcinoma?

BackgroundBreast carcinoma is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women of the North America. The combination of breast-conservation surgery and radiotherapy has become a standard of treatment for most breast cancers. It is critical to obtain clear margins to minimize local recurrence. The literature suggests that intraoperative touch preparation cytology (IOTPC) can be useful in evaluation of margins. Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) accounts for 10% to 15% of all breast cancers. Obtaining clear margins in ILC can be more challenging. Literature shows the positive margin rate for ILC to be as high as 60%. This report describes our experience with IOTPC for margin assessment in ILC by a single surgeon at Beth Israel Medical Center. The purpose of this study is to determine whether IOTPC is reliable for ILC.MethodsA prospective review of 73 patients who underwent breast-conservation surgery with the use of IOTPC for margin assessment at Beth Israel Medical Center was performed. Pathology revealed ILC in 12 of these patients (16.4%), who are the subjects of this study. The lumpectomy specimens were oriented by the surgeon intraoperatively and were submitted fresh to pathology for cytologic assessment. IOTPC consisted of touching the corresponding margin onto the glass slide. The principle of this technique is that if cancer cells are present, they will stick to the slide, whereas fat cells will not. Six slides were prepared for each lumpectomy specimen. Air-dried samples were stained immediately by the Diff-Quik method and examined under the microscope by a cytopathologist.ResultsTwelve patients with ILC underwent breast-conservation surgery with IOTPC for assessment of 72 margins. Ten patients had lobular carcinoma only, and the remaining two patients had a combination of lobular and ductal carcinoma. There was a correlation between IOTPC and final pathology in 60 of 72 margins, which accounted for 83.3% of the cases. IOTPC for assessment of margins in patients undergoing breast-conservation surgery for ILC has a sensitivity of 8.3%, specificity of 98.3%, positive predictive value of 50%, and negative predictive value of 84.3%.ConclusionsOn the basis of our experience, IOTPC is of limited value for intraoperative assessment of margins for ILC.

Papillary Lesions: A Review of the Literature

Papillary lesions of the mammary glands are relatively uncommon. These lesions account for less than 10% of benign breast neoplasms, 0.5–2% of all breast malignancies, and up to 5% of all the lesions undergoing biopsy. They comprise a broad spectrum of entities such as papilloma, papillomatosis, sclerosing papilloma, atypical papilloma, papilloma with atypical ductal hyperplasia, intraductal papillary carcinoma and invasive papillary carcinoma. Distinguishing benign from malignant lesions can be quite challenging without surgical excision because of the lack of distinctive clinical and radiological signs. Overall, clear management guidelines regarding papillary lesions have not yet been established.

George Peters Award: How does breast-specific gamma imaging affect the management of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer?

BACKGROUND We sought to determine the number of patients with known breast cancer who were found to have an additional, mammographically occult lesion detected on breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI). METHODS An institutional review board-approved review of all patients who underwent BSGI at Beth Israel Medical Center from 2006 to 2008 was performed. RESULTS A total of 82 patients underwent BSGI for newly diagnosed breast cancer. Of these, 18 had an additional abnormality, and 17 were biopsied. There were 4 cases of invasive ductal carcinoma, 1 invasive lobular carcinoma, 1 ductal carcinoma in situ, 1 lobular carcinoma in situ, 2 papillomas, and 8 benign biopsies. One patient proceeded directly to mastectomy and an area of ductal carcinoma in situ was found, corresponding to the BSGI. CONCLUSIONS In our study group, 22% of patients had a surgical change in management based on BSGI findings. BSGI detected additional carcinoma in 9%. BSGI plays an important role in the clinical management of patients with known breast cancer.

The Role of Mammary Ductoscopy in Breast Cancer: a Review of the Literature

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy among American women. It is the second most common cause of cancer death. Genetic analysis using comparative genetic hybridization (CGH) has shown evidence that the majority of breast cancers, approximately 85%, begin in the ductal epithelium with normal cells progressing to atypia and finally to carcinoma. Mammary ductoscopy, also referred to as the intraductal approach, is a new tool that allows direct visualization of the breast ductal system. It enables one to sample the ductal epithelium and may allow identification of early changes cytologically as well as potentially play an important role in aiding surgical excision. This may aid in detection of breast masses long before they are palpable or visible via mammography. Mammary ductoscopy may have a role in the evaluation of women with nipple discharge, high-risk women, or limiting the amount of tissue removed in breast conservation surgery for cancer.