Axillary Recurrence in Sentinel Lymph Node Negative Mastectomy Patients at 16 Years Median Follow Up: Natural History in the Absence of Radiation.

BACKGROUND: Axillary recurrence following lumpectomy with a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is rare, possibly due to routine use of whole breast radiation. In this study, we characterized the rate of any axillary recurrence among mastectomy patients with a negative SLNB and no adjuvant radiation therapy. METHODS: We identified women who underwent mastectomy with SLNB for early-stage breast cancer (1999-2005) and included patients with pathologically negative nodes and no axillary dissection or adjuvant radiation. The primary outcome was ipsilateral axillary recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 234 women, median age 50 years, underwent 242 mastectomies. Histology showed 112 (46%) invasive cancers, 16 (7%) ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) with microinvasion, and 114 (47%) pure DCIS. Cancers were predominantly estrogen receptor positive (59%) and moderate (41%) or high grade (32%). A mean of 2 final sentinel nodes were excised (range 1-6) and 21 patients (9%) had isolated tumor cells on SLNB pathology. At 16 years median follow up (range 1-22 years), 3 patients (1.2%) developed an isolated axillary failure, and 1 had concurrent axillary and chest wall recurrences (total axillary recurrence rate 1.7%). Three of four axillary recurrences occurred in patients with moderate or high-grade estrogen receptor-positive DCIS without invasion on mastectomy histology. Median time to axillary recurrence was 70.5 months (range 29-132 months). CONCLUSIONS: Axillary recurrence is rare after a negative SLNB, even in the absence of adjuvant radiation. This supports the safety of forgoing additional surgery or radiation to the axilla in the early-stage breast cancer and a negative SLNB.

Intraoperative radiation therapy as part of planned monotherapy for early-stage breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy has developed into the standard of care for patients following a lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer. However, there is recent interest in intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) to minimize toxicity while still improving local control beyond surgical resection and anti-estrogen therapy alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients were evaluated pre-operatively in a multidisciplinary clinic setting at a community hospital for suitability for breast conservation therapy. A total of 109 patients were reviewed receiving 110 IORT treatments. Patients were followed with clinical breast examinations and mammography as clinically indicated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 29.9 months, 2/110 (1.8%) patients experienced a local failure. One patient (0.9%) experienced a regional failure. Local control, disease-free survival and overall survival at 3 years were 98.9% (95%CI 92.2-99.8), 97.2% (95%CI 88.9-99.3), and 96.0% (95%CI 84.9-99.0), respectively. Five-year local control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 96.3% (95%CI 84.7-99.2), 94.6% (95%CI 83.2-98.3), and 92.5% (95%CI 80.4-97.3), respectively. Patient self-reported cosmetic outcome was available for 51 patients, with all patients reporting being either very pleased, pleased, or satisfied with their cosmetic outcome, and no patients reported being dissatisfied or worse. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our series suggest the feasibility of utilizing IORT in a community-based cancer center with a high degree of local control, and patient satisfaction with regard to cosmesis. While the results of this series suggest that IORT may be a promising modality, longer follow-up is warranted to better understand exactly which clinicopathological features can predict long-term locoregional disease control.

Influential Forces in Breast Cancer Surgical Decision Making and the Impact on Body Image and Sexual Function.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making with one's partner and body image satisfaction may affect surgical choices of breast cancer patients. This study analyzed whether partner opinion was associated with choice of operation and whether comfort level with one's partner was altered postoperatively. METHODS: A prospective anonymous survey was administered to breast cancer patients who underwent breast surgery between 2000 and 2014. Categorical variables were compared by χ (2) or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Women who elected to undergo mastectomy with reconstruction (MR) placed greater emphasis on their own decision making than on input from their partner, surgeon, or others (56.5 vs. 8.3 vs. 23.2 vs. 12, respectively), whereas those who chose lumpectomy (L) placed similar weight on surgeon input and self-input (44.2 vs. 42.7 %). Only 7.5 % of all patients identified their partner as the greatest influence on their surgical choice. Preoperatively, the L group was the most comfortable with their partner seeing their chest (91.9 % L vs. 83.9 % MR vs. 75.9 % mastectomy alone (M); p = 0.01), and postoperatively, the comfort levels for all were remarkably decreased. Furthermore, if a patient was a candidate for L but chose MR, the role her chest played in intimacy dropped more compared with those who chose L (83.8 % L vs. 91.7 % MR; p = 0.3 preoperatively to 65.1 % L vs. 42.9 % MR; p = 0.01 postoperatively). CONCLUSIONS: When making surgical decisions, most patients indicate that they value their own opinion over that of others. Mastectomy, regardless of reconstruction, leads to a significant reduction in comfort with one's partner postoperatively compared with lumpectomy. This information may be helpful in counseling couples at the time of consultation for breast cancer treatment.