Understanding Patient Experiences to Inform Future Studies to Optimize Personalization of Treatment for Early Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer treatment is multimodal, but not all patients benefit from each treatment, and many experience morbidities significantly impacting quality of life. There is increasing interest in tailoring breast cancer treatments to optimize oncological outcomes and reduce treatment burden, but it is vital that future trials focus on treatments that most impact patients. This study was designed to explore patient experiences of treatment to inform future research. METHODS: An online survey was co-developed with patient advocates to explore respondents' experiences of breast cancer treatment. Questions included simple demographics, treatments received, and views regarding omitting treatments if that is deemed safe. The survey was circulated via social media and patient advocacy groups. Responses were summarized by using simple statistics; free text was analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Of the 235 participants completing the survey, 194 (82.6%) would choose to omit a specific treatment if safe to do so. The most commonly selected treatments were chemotherapy (n = 69, 35.6%) and endocrine therapy (n = 61, 31.4%) mainly due to side effects. Fewer respondents would choose to omit surgery (n = 40, 20.6%) or radiotherapy (n = 20, 10.3%). Several women commented that survival was their "absolute priority" and that high-quality evidence to support the safety of reducing treatment would be essential. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with breast cancer are individuals who may wish to optimize different components of their treatment. A portfolio of studies co-designed with patients is needed to establish an evidence base for greater treatment personalization with studies focused on reducing avoidable chemotherapy and endocrine therapy a priority.

Outcomes of Women Undergoing Mastectomy for Unilateral Breast Cancer Who Elect to Undergo Contralateral Mastectomy for Symmetry: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction (BR) is routinely offered to restore symmetry after mastectomy for breast cancer. Not all women, however, may want reconstructive surgery. A contralateral mastectomy (CM) to achieve "flat symmetry" can be an excellent alternative, but surgeons are often reluctant to offer this procedure. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding the outcomes of CM as the first step to developing guidelines in this area. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to identify primary research studies, published in English between 1 January 2000 and 30 August 2022, evaluating clinical or patient-reported outcomes for women who underwent a CM without reconstruction after a mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer. Simple descriptive statistics summarized quantitative data, and content analysis was used for qualitative data. RESULTS: The study included 15 studies (13 quantitative, 1 qualitative, and 1 mixed-methods) evaluating outcomes for at least 1954 women who underwent a bilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (BM) after unilateral breast cancer. The risk of surgical complications after BM was higher than after unilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (UM) but significantly less than after BR. Satisfaction with the decision for BM was high in all the studies. Key themes relating to flat denial, stigma, and gender-based assumptions were identified. CONCLUSION: Women electing to undergo BM reported high levels of satisfaction with their decision and complication rates similar to those for UM. Further study is needed to comprehensively explore the outcomes for women seeking BM, but these data should give surgeons confidence to offer the procedure as an alternative option for symmetry after unilateral mastectomy for breast cancer. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022353689).

Identifying research priorities in breast cancer surgery: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

PURPOSE: A James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership was developed to identify research priorities in breast cancer surgery from individuals with lived experience, at high genetic risk of breast cancer, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS: 'Uncertainties' were collected using an online survey. Following an evidence check and development of summary questions, an interim survey asked participants to rank their top 10 research priorities from the question list. Top-ranked questions from patient/carer, high-risk and professional groups were carried forward for discussion to a final online prioritisation workshop. RESULTS: 260 participants (101 patients/carers, 156 HCPs) submitted 940 uncertainties via the initial survey. These were analysed thematically into 128 summary questions in six topic areas. Following evidence checking, 59 questions were included in the interim survey which was completed by 572 respondents. Marked differences were seen in questions prioritised by patients/carers, HCPs and women at high-risk. The top eight priorities in patient/carer and professional groups and top two priorities for high-risk women were carried forward to the online workshop at which 22 participants discussed and agreed the final top 10. Key themes included de-escalation of breast and axillary surgery, factors impacting the development/detection of locoregional recurrence and optimal provision of support for informed treatment decision-making. CONCLUSION: The top 10 research priorities in breast cancer surgery have been agreed. However, the observed differences in research priorities identified by patients and professional groups were not anticipated. Top priorities from both groups should inform future UK breast cancer surgical research, to ensure that it addresses questions that are important to breast cancer community as a whole.

Overall survival after mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy and mastectomy are currently offered as equivalent surgical options for early-stage breast cancer based on RCTs from the 1970s and 1980s. However, the treatment of breast cancer has evolved and recent observational studies suggest a survival advantage for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to summarize the contemporary evidence regarding survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for women with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase that identified studies published between 1 January 2000 and 18 December 2023 comparing overall survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for patients with unilateral stage 1-3 breast cancer was undertaken. The main exclusion criteria were studies evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy, rare breast cancer subtypes, and specific breast cancer populations. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias, with the overall certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Studies without critical risk of bias were included in a quantitative meta-analysis. RESULTS: From 11 750 abstracts, 108 eligible articles were identified, with one article including two studies; 29 studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to an overall critical risk of bias, 42 studies were excluded due to overlapping study populations, and three studies were excluded due to reporting incompatible results. A total of 35 observational studies reported survival outcomes for 909 077 patients (362 390 patients undergoing mastectomy and 546 687 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy). The pooled HR was 0.72 (95% c.i. 0.68 to 0.75, P < 0.001), demonstrating improved overall survival for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. The overall certainty of the evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides evidence suggesting a survival advantage for women undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer compared with mastectomy. Although these results should be interpreted with caution, they should be shared with patients to support informed surgical decision-making.

The LapSim virtual reality simulator: promising but not yet proven.

BACKGROUND: The acquisition of technical skills using surgical simulators is an area of active research and rapidly evolving technology. The LapSim is a virtual reality simulator that currently allows practice of basic laparoscopic skills and some procedures. To date, no reviews have been published with reference to a single virtual reality simulator. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed using the keyword "LapSim," with further papers identified from the citations of original search articles. RESULTS: Use of the LapSim to develop surgical skills has yielded overall results, although inconsistencies exist. Data regarding the transferability of learned skills to the operative environment are encouraging as is the validation work, particularly the use of a combination of measured parameters to produce an overall comparative performance score. CONCLUSION: Although the LapSim currently does not have any proven significant advantages over video trainers in terms of basic skills instruction and although the results of validation studies are variable, the potential for such technology to have a huge impact on surgical training is apparent. Work to determine standardized learning curves and proficiency criteria for different levels of trainees is incomplete. Moreover, defining which performance parameters measured by the LapSim accurately determine laparoscopic skill is complex. Further technological advances will undoubtedly improve the efficacy of the LapSim, and the results of large multicenter trials are anticipated.

Development of an ex vivo simulated training model for laparoscopic liver resection.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients who have undergone laparoscopic liver surgery has increased in the last 15 years. It is technically challenging surgery, requiring both advanced laparoscopic and liver resection skills. Surgeons often require familiarisation with much of the equipment and techniques used in this type of surgery. No ex vivo model currently exists for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of this study was to develop a model for acquiring the technical skills involved in LLR that was also able to assess and measure surgical performance. METHODS: The ProMIS augmented reality surgical simulator was selected because performance data other than time could be obtained, and the simulator was adapted to create the laparoscopic trainer. Twenty candidates with differing laparoscopic surgical experience tested the model. Three groups were identified, novice, intermediate, and expert, according to previous exposure to the laparoscopic tasks. Candidates were required to identify a tumour ultrasonographically, mark and transect ex vivo liver, and perform two laparoscopic stitches with intracorporeal knots. The ProMIS recorded the performance data, including instrument path lengths and time. RESULTS: Measurements taken from the ProMIS simulator were analysed for statistical differences between the groups. Expert surgeons showed a statistically significant difference in the time taken to identify the liver lesion and transect the organ. The results also demonstrate that the more difficult tasks such as laparoscopic suturing are completed by the expert surgeons with statistically significant shorter times and path lengths compared to the less experienced surgeons. CONCLUSION: The adapted ProMIS augmented reality simulator provided junior surgeons with a realistic learning environment in which to familiarise themselves with the equipment and techniques required for LLR. The model also allows assessment of the performance of individuals over time and within a peer group. Construct validity is proven for the suturing component of the model.

Best-BRA (Is subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement best in immediate breast reconstruction?): a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of subpectoral versus prepectoral immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in women following mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure following mastectomy. IBBR techniques are evolving rapidly, with mesh-assisted subpectoral reconstruction becoming the standard of care and more recently, prepectoral techniques being introduced. These muscle-sparing techniques may reduce postoperative pain, avoid implant animation and improve cosmetic outcomes and have been widely adopted into practice. Although small observational studies have failed to demonstrate any differences in the clinical or patient-reported outcomes of prepectoral or subpectoral reconstruction, high-quality comparative evidence of clinical or cost-effectiveness is lacking. A well-designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) is needed to compare the techniques, but breast reconstruction RCTs are challenging. We, therefore, aim to undertake an external pilot RCT (Best-BRA) with an embedded QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to determine the feasibility of undertaking a trial comparing prepectoral and subpectoral techniques. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Best-BRA is a pragmatic, two-arm, external pilot RCT with an embedded QRI and economic scoping for resource use. Women who require a mastectomy for either breast cancer or risk reduction, elect to have an IBBR and are considered suitable for both prepectoral and subpectoral reconstruction will be recruited and randomised 1:1 between the techniques.The QRI will be implemented in two phases: phase 1, in which sources of recruitment difficulties are rapidly investigated to inform the delivery in phase 2 of tailored interventions to optimise recruitment of patients.Primary outcomes will be (1) recruitment of patients, (2) adherence to trial allocation and (3) outcome completion rates. Outcomes will be reviewed at 12 months to determine the feasibility of a definitive trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Wales REC 6 (20/WA/0338). Findings will be presented at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10081873.

Detailed systematic analysis of recruitment strategies in randomised controlled trials in patients with an unscheduled admission to hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the design and findings of recruitment studies in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with an unscheduled hospital admission (UHA), to consider how to optimise recruitment in future RCTs of this nature. DESIGN: Studies within the ORRCA database (Online Resource for Recruitment Research in Clinical TriAls; www.orrca.org.uk) that reported on recruitment to RCTs involving UHAs in patients >18 years were included. Extracted data included trial clinical details, and the rationale and main findings of the recruitment study. RESULTS: Of 3114 articles populating ORRCA, 39 recruitment studies were eligible, focusing on 68 real and 13 hypothetical host RCTs. Four studies were prospectively planned investigations of recruitment interventions, one of which was a nested RCT. Most recruitment papers were reports of recruitment experiences from one or more 'real' RCTs (n=24) or studies using hypothetical RCTs (n=11). Rationales for conducting recruitment studies included limited time for informed consent (IC) and patients being too unwell to provide IC. Methods to optimise recruitment included providing patients with trial information in the prehospital setting, technology to allow recruiters to cover multiple sites, screening logs to uncover recruitment barriers, and verbal rather than written information and consent. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of high-quality research into recruitment in RCTs involving UHAs with only one nested randomised study evaluating a recruitment intervention. Among the remaining studies, methods to optimise recruitment focused on how to improve information provision in the prehospital setting and use of screening logs. Future research in this setting should focus on the prospective evaluation of the well-developed interventions to optimise recruitment.

The learning and mentoring experiences of Paralympic coaches.

BACKGROUND: Participation in the Paralympic Games has grown substantially, yet the same growth and development has not occurred with empirical literature for coaching in disability sport. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the current study was to explore Paralympic coaches' perceptions of their learning and educational experiences, including their formal and informal mentoring opportunities. METHODS: Six highly successful and experienced Paralympic coaches were individually interviewed in this qualitative study. The interview data were analyzed following Braun and Clarke's guidelines for thematic analysis. RESULTS: Results demonstrated that Paralympic coaches faced several challenges to acquire disability specific coaching knowledge and skills. These challenges led the participants to utilize an array of informal learning situations, such as actively seeking mentoring relationships when they first entered the field. After becoming expert coaches, they gave back to their sport by making mentoring opportunities available for aspiring coaches. CONCLUSION: The results of the current study address the value and importance of mentoring as a structured source of education and career development for aspiring Paralympic coaches.

The safety and effectiveness of liver resection for breast cancer liver metastases: A systematic review.

Breast cancer liver metastases have traditionally been considered incurable and any treatment given therefore palliative. Liver resections for breast cancer metastases are being performed, despite there being no robust evidence for which patients benefit. This review aims to determine the safety and effectiveness of liver resection for breast cancer metastases. A systematic literature review was performed and resulted in 33 papers being assembled for analysis. All papers were case series and data extracted was heterogeneous so a meta-analysis was not possible. Safety outcomes were mortality and morbidity (in hospital and 30-day). Effectiveness outcomes were local recurrence, re-hepatectomy, survival (months), 1-, 2-, 3-, 5- year overall survival rate (%), disease free survival (months) and 1-, 2-, 3-, 5- year disease free survival rate (%). Overall median figures were calculated using unweighted median data given in each paper. Results demonstrated that mortality was low across all studies with a median of 0% and a maximum of 5.9%. The median morbidity rate was 15%. Overall survival was a median of 35.1 months and a median 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-year survival of 84.55%, 71.4%, 52.85% and 33% respectively. Median disease free survival was 21.5 months with a 3- and 5-year median disease free survival of 36% and 18%. Whilst the results demonstrate seemingly satisfactory levels of overall survival and disease free survival, the data are of poor quality with multiple confounding variables and small study populations. Recommendations are for extensive pilot and feasibility work with the ultimate aim of conducting a large pragmatic randomised control trial to accurately determine which patients benefit from liver resection for breast cancer liver metastases.

An fMRI study exploring the overlap and differences between neural representations of physical and recalled pain.

Implementing a recall paradigm without hypnosis, we use functional MRI (fMRI) to explore and compare nociceptive and centrally-driven pain experiences. We posit that a trace of a recent nociceptive event can be used to create sensory-re-experiencing of pain that can be qualified in terms of intensity and vividness. Fifteen healthy volunteers received three levels of thermal stimuli (warm, low pain and high pain) and subsequently were asked to recall and then rate this experience. Neuroimaging results reveal that recalling a previous sensory experience activates an extensive network of classical pain processing structures except the contralateral posterior insular cortex. Nociceptive-specific activation of this structure and the rated intensity difference between physical and recalled pain events allow us to investigate the link between the quality of the original nociceptive stimulus and the mental trace, as well as the differences between the accompanying neural responses. Additionally, by incorporating the behavioural ratings, we explored which brain regions were separately responsible for generating either an accurate or vivid recall of the physical experience. Together, these observations further our understanding of centrally-mediated pain experiences and pain memory as well as the potential relevance of these factors in the maintenance of chronic pain.

Simulation speak.

The concept of using simulation to gain and improve practical skills in a safe and low-risk environment has been employed extensively in the airline industry to train pilots for many years now. The use of simulation techniques to train surgeons, however, is a new but rapidly expanding and developing area of surgical education. The introduction of simulation to surgical training curricula has inevitably led to a plethora of simulation technology entering the commercial market, as well as the introduction of new terminology used to describe both the equipment itself, and the methods used to test and validate it for use in the training of surgeons. The terminology has its basis mostly in statistical methodology, and the terms are used throughout the surgical literature, often interchangeably and with multiple meanings. In our experience, this terminology is where most confusion arises. Interpreting the literature is difficult for those not directly involved in the field. This article aims to define the statistical terms used to describe the many forms of validity testing and types of surgical simulator, and consequently to act as a reference guide for those unfamiliar with this rapidly evolving field of technology and surgical training.

Painless obstructive jaundice secondary to a common bile duct abscess: a delayed sequela of cholecystectomy.

Complications related to cholecystectomy are well described. Most occur in the early postoperative period and are recognised either at the time of, or shortly after surgery. Clinical sequelae occurring years following cholecystectomy are rare and infrequently reported. In addition, most delayed complications are related to the continuing presence or new formation of gallstones. In this paper we present a unique case of an abscess of the common bile duct wall, presenting with painless obstructive jaundice more than 30 years following an open cholecystectomy, without the presence of gallstones. The clinical presentation, investigations, and treatment are discussed with a review of other relevant reported cases in the literature.