Comparison of Radioactive Seed Localized Excision and Wire Localized Excision of Breast Lesions: A Community Hospital's Experience.

BACKGROUND: Most data comparing wire localized excision (WLE) and radioactive seed localized excision (RSLE) derive from academic institutions with limited data from community hospitals. This study aimed to compare positive margin rates between WLE and RSLE and to determine if there were any differences in specimen volume and operation time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent WLE or RSLE at a Canadian community hospital. Group characteristics were compared as appropriate. Multivariable logistic regression was used determine if the localization techniques were independently associated with having a positive margin. Statistical significance was set as P < .05. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 747 (WLE) and 577 (RSLE) patients. Both groups had similar mean age, mean tumor (invasive and ductal carcinoma-in-situ) size, histologic grade distribution, presence of lymphovascular invasion, and extensive intraductal component, nodal status, and hormone receptor and HER2 status. Compared to WLE, patients who underwent RSLE had significantly lower invasive positive margin rates (8.1% vs. 12.3%, P = .03), shorter operation time (39.5 minutes vs. 68.7 minutes, P = .0001), and smaller surgical specimens (21.4 cm³ vs. 30.2 cm³, P = .008). Ductal carcinoma-in-situ positive margin rates were not different between the groups. However, the localization technique was not independently associated with having a positive margin (odds ratio = 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.44). CONCLUSION: RSLE led to a shorter operation time and smaller surgical specimens compared to WLE, but there was no difference in positive margin rates. RSLE is an effective technique to excise nonpalpable breast lesions in the community setting.

Prospective study of 2-[¹8F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the assessment of regional nodal spread of disease in patients with breast cancer: an Ontario clinical oncology group study.

PURPOSE: 2-[(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is potentially useful in assessing lymph nodes and detecting distant metastases in women with primary breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women diagnosed with operable breast cancer within 3 months underwent FDG-PET at one of five Ontario study centers followed by axillary lymph node assessment (ALNA) consisting of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone if sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) were negative, SLNB with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) if SLNB or PET was positive, or ALND alone if SLNs were not identified. RESULTS: Between January 2005 and March 2007, 325 analyzable women entered this study. Sentinel nodes were found for 312 (96%) of 325 women and were positive for tumor in 90 (29%) of 312. ALND was positive in seven additional women. Using ALNA as the gold standard, sensitivity for PET was 23.7% (95% CI, 15.9% to 33.6%), specificity was 99.6% (95% CI, 97.2% to 99.9%), positive predictive value was 95.8% (95% CI, 76.9% to 99.8%), negative predictive value was 75.4% (95% CI, 70.1% to 80.1%), and prevalence was 29.8% (95% CI, 25.0% to 35.2%). Using logistic regression, tumor size was predictive for prevalence of tumor in the axilla and for PET sensitivity. PET scan was suspicious for distant metastases in 13 patients; three (0.9%) were confirmed as metastatic disease and 10 (3.0%) were false positive. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is not sufficiently sensitive to detect positive axillary lymph nodes, nor is it sufficiently specific to appropriately identify distant metastases. However, the very high positive predictive value (96%) suggests that PET when positive is indicative of disease in axillary nodes, which may influence surgical care.

Surgical management of early stage invasive breast cancer: a practice guideline.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the available evidence on sentinel lymph-node biopsy, and to examine the long-term follow-up data from large randomized phase III trials comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy in order to make recommendations on the surgical management of early invasive breast cancer (stages I and II), including the optimum management of the axillary nodes: for the breast--modified radical mastectomy or breast-conserving therapy; for the axilla--complete axillary node dissection, axillary dissection of levels I and II lymph nodes, sentinel lymph-node biopsy or no axillary node surgery. OUTCOMES: Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, distant recurrence and quality of life. EVIDENCE: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library databases and relevant conference proceedings were searched to identify randomized trials and meta-analyses. Two members of the Practice Guidelines Initiative, Breast Cancer Disease Site Group (BCDSG) selected and reviewed studies that met the inclusion criteria. The systematic literature review was combined with a consensus process for interpretation of the evidence to develop evidence-based recommendations. This practice guideline has been reviewed and approved by the BCDSG, comprising surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pathologists, a medical sociologist, a nurse representative and a community representative. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: Breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy with levels I and II axillary node dissection, plus radiotherapy) provides comparable overall and disease-free survival to modified radical mastectomy. Levels I and II axillary dissection accurately stages the axilla and minimizes the morbidity of axillary recurrence but is associated with lymphedema in approximately 20% of patients and arm pain in approximately 33%. Currently, there is insufficient data regarding locoregional recurrence and long-term morbidity associated with sentinel-node biopsy to advocate it as the standard of care. Breast-conserving therapy may offer an advantage over mastectomy in terms of body image, psychological and social adjustment but appears equivalent with regard to marital adjustment, global adjustment and fear of recurrence. RECOMMENDATIONS: Women who are eligible for breast-conserving surgery should be offered the choice of either breast-conserving therapy with axillary dissection or modified radical mastectomy. Removal and pathological examination of levels I and II axillary lymph nodes should be the standard practice in most cases of stages I and II breast carcinoma. There is promising but limited evidence to support recommendations regarding sentinel lymph-node biopsy alone. Patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials investigating this procedure. VALIDATION: A draft version of this practice guideline and a 21-item feedback questionnaire was circulated to 201 practitioners in Ontario. Of the 131 practitioners who returned the questionnaire, 98 (75%) completed the survey and indicated that the report was relevant to their clinical practice. Eighty (82%) of these practitioners agreed that the draft document should be approved as a practice guideline.