A German Study Comparing Standard Wire Localization With Magnetic Seed Localization of Non-palpable Breast Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Exact localization of non-palpable breast lesions is necessary to ensure that the correct lesion is removed. Conventional methods come with several disadvantages. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared 28 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery for a non-palpable lesion. By surgeon choice, 14 patients were assigned to undergo magnetic seed localization and 14 underwent standard wire localization. The primary outcome was the operative time, and secondary outcome was the patient pain level. RESULTS: The mean age was 52±10 (SD) years in the seed arm, and 55±13 years in the wire arm. The median time from skin incision to tumor extraction was not significantly different between the two groups. Patients in the wire localized group significantly more often reported pain during coughing/breathing, movement, and sleep. CONCLUSION: Using seed localization at Charité Breast Center did not lead to a significant decrease in operative time but might allow time savings once established, while increasing patient comfort and reducing organizational burden.

Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography-Which modality provides more accurate prediction of margin status in specimen radiography?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability of tumor margin assessment in specimen radiography (SR) using digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in comparison to postoperative histopathology margin status as the gold standard. METHODS: After ethics committee approval, 102 consecutive patients who underwent breast conservative surgery for nonpalpable proven breast cancer were prospectively included. All patients underwent ultrasound/mammography-guided wire localization of their lesions. After excision, each specimen was marked for orientation and imaged using FFDM and DBT. Two blinded radiologists (R1, R2) independently analyzed images acquired with both modalities. Readers identified in which direction the lesion was closest to the specimen margin and to measure the margin width. Their findings were compared with the final histopathological analysis. True positive margin status was defined as a margin measuring <1mm for invasive cancer and 5mm for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at imaging and pathology. RESULTS: For FFDM, correct margin direction was identified in 45 cases (44%) by R1 and in 37 cases (36%) by R2. For DBT, 69 cases (68%) were correctly identified by R1 and 70 cases (69%) by R2. Overall accuracy was 40% for FFDM and 69% for DBT; the difference was statistically significant (p<0.0001). Sensitivity in terms of correct assessment of margin status was significantly better for DBT than FFDM (77% versus 62%). CONCLUSION: SR using DBT is significantly superior to FFDM regarding identification of the closest margin and sensitivity in assessment of margin status.

Prognostic impact of hemoglobin levels before and during carboplatin/taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with primary invasive epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Carboplatin/taxane-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced primary ovarian cancer. Anemia is a frequent side effect of platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens. Furthermore, ovarian cancer is often associated with tumor anemia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic relevance of the mean hemoglobin level before and during carboplatin/taxane-based chemotherapy. MATERIAL/METHODS: We studied retrospectively 92 patients with primary invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) receiving carboplatin/taxane-based chemotherapy. Hemoglobin levels were determined before each cycle of therapy. Study objectives were progression-free survival time (PFS) and overall survival time (OS). Univariate analyses and Cox-regression studies were undertaken to evaluate the prognostic impact of hemoglobin levels before and throughout chemotherapy. In addition, sensitivity/specificity analyses and Kaplan-Meier-studies were performed to determine the cut-off level of prognostically relevant hemoglobin levels. RESULTS: In univariate analysis hemoglobin levels throughout chemotherapy showed prognostic relevance in terms of PFS (p<0.05). Sensitivity/specificity and Kaplan-Meier analyses found a hemoglobin level of 11.2 g/dL to be a prognostically relevant cut-off level in terms of PFS (p<0.05). There was a borderline significance for pretherapeutic hemoglobin levels to influence PFS (p=0.07), with a prognostically relevant cut-off level of 11.6 g/dL (p=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Hemoglobin levels before and particularly throughout therapy seem to have prognostic relevance for patients with primary EOC undergoing carboplatin/taxane-based chemotherapy. Further trials are required to confirm these data in a prospective attempt and to evaluate the role of correcting anemia as standard supportive therapy in the treatment of patients with primary EOC.