Current Status of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Investigating Structural Racial Disparity.

BACKGROUND: Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) remains a personal decision, influenced by psychosocial factors, including cosmesis and peace of mind. Although use of CPM is disproportionately low among Black patients, the degree to which these disparities are driven by patient- vs hospital-level factors remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing mastectomy for nonmetastatic ductal or lobular breast cancer were tabulated using the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2020. The primary endpoint was receipt of CPM. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed with interaction terms between Black-serving hospital (BSH) status and patient race to evaluate associations with CPM. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate long-term survival. RESULTS: Of 597,845 women studied, 70,911 (11.9%) were Black. After multivariable adjustment, Black race (adjusted odds ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.67) and treatment at BSH (adjusted odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.85) were independently linked to lower odds of CPM. Although predicted probability of CPM was universally lower at higher BSH, Black patients faced a steeper reduction compared with White patients. Receipt of CPM was linked to improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86), whereas Black race was associated with a greater HR of 10-year mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals serving a greater proportion of Black patients are less likely to use CPM, suggestive of disparities in access to CPM at the institutional level. Further research and education are needed to characterize surgeon-specific and institutional practices in patient counseling and shared decision-making that shape disparities in access to CPM.

The Effect of Intraoperative Margin Assessment During Breast Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer in a Dutch Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative specimen radiography is a routinely used procedure to ensure adequate resection of non-palpable breast tumors. Intraoperative digital specimen mammography (IDSM) is an alternative to conventional specimen radiography (CSR) which provides immediate specimen evaluation and can potentially decrease operation time. IDSM may also result in lower positive margin and re-excision rates. IDSM was implemented in our hospital in 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of using IDSM versus CSR on operation time, margin status and re-excision rates in breast conserving surgery. METHODS: The present study is a single-center retrospective cohort study with 2 patient cohorts: one which underwent CSR (n = 532) and one which underwent IDSM (n = 475). The primary outcome was the operation time. Secondary outcomes were the margin status of the primary surgery, the cavity shaving rate, and the re-excision rate. Differences between cohorts were compared using univariate statistics and multiple regression analyses to adjust for variables that were significantly different between the groups. RESULTS: IDSM use was associated with an 8-minute reduction in surgery time (B = -8.034, 95% CI [-11.6, -4.5]; P < .001). Treatment variables independently associated with the operation time included use of IDSM, type of surgery, and performance of cavity shaving. Cavity shaves were more often performed when IDSM was used (24% for IDSM vs. 14% for CSR, P < .001), while the proportion of negative margin rates (93% for IDSM vs. 96% for CSR, P = .070) was comparable. CONCLUSION: IDSM was associated with a modest reduction in operation time. Surgeons performed more cavity shaves since the introduction of IDSM, but this increase was not reflected by difference in negative margin rates.

Cost-Efficacy Analysis of Use of Frozen Section Histology for Margin Assessment During Breast Conservation Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Margin assessment is an essential component of breast conservation surgery (BCS). Re-excision of infiltrated margin(s) detected on paraffin section histology (PSH) needs reoperation, adding time, inconvenience and cost. Intra-operative assessment of margins using frozen section histology (IFSH) can potentially obviate need for re-operation, thus facilitating one-step oncologically complete BCS. METHODS: IFSH and PSH reports of consecutive patients undergoing BCS (2010-2020) were reviewed. Accuracy and cost-efficacy of IFSH were assessed, considering PSH as gold standard. Cost of achieving oncologically complete BCS in whole cohort with IFSH (Scenario-A) was calculated and compared using appropriate statistical tests, with hospital costs for the cohort in a hypothetical Scenario-B, where IFSH was presumed not to have been used and all patients with infiltrated margin(s) on PSH would have been re-operated. RESULTS: Of the 367 patients screened, 39 were excluded due to incomplete IFSH data. Of 328 patients analyzed, 59 (18%) had one or more margins were reported infiltrated on IFSH, managed by re-excision or mastectomy in the same sitting, thus avoiding a reoperation. Additional 8 (2.4%) had involved margins on PSH (False negative IFSH). Significantly higher number of reoperations (p < 0.001) would have been needed in scenario-B. Average cost of the first operation with use of IFSH was Indian Rupees (INR) 25791 which included INR660 as IFSH cost. The average cost of reoperation was INR23724 which could be avoided in 59 (18%) by use of IFSH. The average cost per patient to achieve oncologically complete surgery in scenario A utilizing IFSH was significantly lower (p = 0.001) by INR3101 (11.7%), c.w. that in scenario B. Significant cost-saving with IFSH was maintained in cost-efficacy analysis undertaken with various higher and lower costs assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Use of IFSH facilitates one-step oncologically complete BCS in majority of patients and results in considerable cost saving, resulting in avoidance of reoperations, besides preventing patient anxiety and delay in adjuvant treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2021/08/035896).

Imaging of lumpectomy surface with large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscopy 'Histolog® scanner' for breast margin assessment in comparison with conventional specimen radiography.

PURPOSE: The Histolog® Scanner (SamanTree Medical SA, Lausanne, Switzerland) is a large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscope designed to allow intraoperative margin assessment by the production of histological images ready for assessment in the operating room. We evaluated the feasibility and the performance of the Histolog® Scanner (HS) to correctly identify infiltrated margins in clinical practice of lumpectomy specimens. It was extrapolated if the utilization of the HS has the potential to reduce infiltrated margins and therefore reduce re-operation rates in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery (BCS) due to a primarily diagnosed breast cancer including ductal carcinoma in situ. METHODS: This is a single-center, prospective, non-interventional, diagnostic pilot study including 50 consecutive patients receiving BCS. The complete surface of the specimen was scanned using the HS intraoperatively. The surgery and the intraoperative margin assessment of the specimen was performed according to the clinical routine consisting of conventional specimen radiography as well as the clinical impression of the surgeon. Three surgeons and an experienced pathologist assessed the scans produced by the HS for cancer cells on the surface. The potential of the HS to correctly identify involved margins was compared to the results of the conventional specimen radiography alone as well as the clinical routine. The histopathological report served as the gold standard. RESULTS: 50 specimens corresponding to 300 surfaces were scanned by the HS. The mean sensitivity of the surgeons to identify involved margins with the HS was 37.5% ± 5.6%, the specificity was 75.2% ± 13.0%. The assessment of resection margins by the pathologist resulted in a sensitivity of 37.5% and a specificity of 81.0%, while the local clinical routine resulted in a sensitivity of 37.5% and a specificity of 78.2%. CONCLUSION: Acquisition of high-resolution histological images using the HS was feasible in clinical practice. Sensitivity and specificity were comparable to clinical routine. With more specific training and experience on image interpretation and acquisition, the HS may have the potential to enable more accuracy in the margin assessment of BCS specimens.

Imaging of lumpectomy surface with large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscope for intraoperative margin assessment - POLARHIS study.

INTRODUCTION: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in case of breast cancer and/or in-situ-carcinoma lesions (DCIS) intends to completely remove breast cancer while saving healthy tissue as much as possible to achieve better aesthetic and psychological outcomes for the patient. Such modality should result in postoperative tumor-free margins of the surgical resection in order to carry on with the next therapeutical steps of the patient care. However, 10-40% of patients undergo more than one procedure to achieve acceptable cancer-negative margins. A 2nd operation or further operation (re-operation) has physical, psychological, and economic consequences. It also delays the administration of adjuvant therapy, and has been associated with an elevated risk of local and distant disease relapse. In addition, a high re-operation rate can have significant economic effects - both for the service provider and for the payer. A more efficient intraoperative assessment of the margin may address these issues. Recently, a large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscope designed to allow real-time intraoperative margin assessment has arrived on the market - the Histolog Scanner. In this paper, we present the first evaluation of lumpectomy margins assessment with this new device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 40 consecutive patients undergoing BCS with invasive and/or DCIS were included. The whole surface of the surgical specimens was imaged right after the operation using the Histolog Scanner (HLS). The assessment of all the specimen margins was performed intraoperatively according to the standard-of-care of the center which consists of combined ultrasound (IOUS) and/or conventional specimen radiography (CSR), and gross surgical inspection. Margin assessment on HLS images was blindly performed after the surgery by 5 surgeons and one pathologist. The capabilities to correctly determine margin status in HLS images was compared to the final histopathological assessment. Furthermore, the potential reduction of positive-margin and re-operation rates by utilization of the HLS were extrapolated. RESULTS: The study population included 7/40 patients with DCIS (17.5%), 17/40 patients with DCIS and invasive ductal cancer (IDC NST) (42.5%), 10/40 patients with IDC NST (25%), 4/40 with invasive lobular cancer (ILC) (10%), and 1/40 patients with a mix of IDC NST, DCIS, and ILC. Clinical routine resulted in 13 patients with positive margins identified by final histopathological assessment, resulting in 12 re-operations (30% re-operation rate). Amongst these 12 patients, 10 had DCIS components involved in their margin, confirming the importance of improving the detection accuracy of this specific lesion. Surgeons, who were given a short familiarization on HLS images, and a pathologist were able to detect positive margins in 4/12 and 7/12 patients (33% and 58%), respectively, that were missed by the intraoperative standard of care. In addition, a retrospective analysis of the HLS images revealed that cancer lesions can be identified in 9/12 (75%) patients with positive margins. CONCLUSION: The present study presents that breast cancer can be detected by surgeons and pathologists in HLS images of lumpectomy margins leading to a potential reduction of 30% and 75% of the re-operations. The Histolog Scanner is easily inserted into the clinical workflow and has the potential to improve the intraoperative standard-of-care for the assessment of breast conserving treatments. In addition, it has the potential to increase oncological safety and cosmetics by avoiding subsequent resections and can also have a significant positive economic effect for service providers and cost bearers. The data presented in this study will have to be further confirmed in a prospective phase-III-trial.

Economic Impact of Reducing Reexcision Rates after Breast-Conserving Surgery in a Large, Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Reexcision after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is costly for patients, but few studies have captured the economic burden to a healthcare system. We quantified operating room (OR) charges as well as OR time and then modeled expected savings of a reexcision reduction initiative. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort review of all breast cancer patients with BCS between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. Operating room charges of disposable supplies and implants as well as operative time were calculated. RESULTS: During the 5-year period, the 8804 patients who underwent BCS, 1628 (18.5%) required reexcision. The reexcision cohort was younger (61 vs. 64 years, p < 0.001), more likely to have ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (23.7% vs. 15.2%, p < 0.001), and had larger tumors (T1+T2 73.2% vs. 83.1%, p < 0.001). Reexcision costs represented 39% of total costs, the cost per patient for surgery was fourfold higher for reexcision patients. Reexcision operations comprised 14% of total operating room (OR) time (1848 of 13,030 hours). The reexcision rate for 54 surgeons varied from 7.2-39.0% with 46% (n = 25) having a reexcision rate >20%. A model simulating reducing reexcision rates to 20% or below for all surgeons reduced the reexcision rate to 16.2% overall. Using per procedure data, the model predicted a decrease in reexcision operations by 18% (327 operations), OR costs by 14% ($287,534), and OR time by 11% (204 hours). CONCLUSIONS: Reexcision after BCS represents 39% of direct OR costs and 14% of OR time in our healthcare system. Modest improvements in surgeon reexcision rates may lead to significant economic and OR time savings.

DCIS: Risk Assessment in the Molecular Era.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents 20% of all breast cancers. The treatment paradigm for the majority of patients with DCIS consists of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy (RT), with adjuvant endocrine therapy offered for hormone-receptor positive disease. RT after BCS reduces the risk of in-breast recurrence, decreasing subsequent in-situ and invasive cancers by ≥50%, with 10-year breast-cancer specific survival outcomes approaching 98%. As local control rates are high, treatment efforts have focused on selective de-escalation of care. Traditionally, clinicians have used clinical-pathologic features (ie, grade, age, size, margin width) to guide selection of low-risk DCIS patients in whom postoperative RT may be omitted. More recently, genomic molecular assays including the Oncotype DX Breast DCIS Score and DCISionRT have been developed to provide individualized assessment of predicting RT benefit after BCS. These molecular assays have the potential for personalized risk assessment, particularly when used in combination with existing clinical-pathologic features for risk assessment. This article reviews the current status and existing published literature on DCIS molecular-risk assessment tools and their potential for guiding postoperative RT recommendations in the BCT setting. In addition, current trials studying omission of definitive surgery for low-risk DCIS are discussed.

Is Axillary Assessment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast Necessary in All Cases?

BACKGROUND: Staging of the axilla in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a point of controversy. We aimed to assess whether there is a group of patients in whom axillary assessment can be avoided and whether the likelihood of underdiagnosis of infiltrating carcinoma is sufficient to justify this evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study of patients who were operated on between 2008 and 2018 in three Spanish hospitals, with a diagnosis by radiological or excisional biopsy of DCIS and clinically and radiologically negative axilla. RESULTS: A total of 530 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS were studied. An axillary assessment was performed in 77% of the patients. In 397 patients, selective sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed. Axillary involvement was found in 7.2% of all patients, which dropped to 2.15% if we only included DCIS diagnosed after a definitive anatomical pathology analysis. Underdiagnosis was correlated with the type of biopsy performed: the risk was 1.34 times as high if the biopsy was performed with a core needle. The risk of lymph node metastasis was higher when there was lymphovascular invasion and when mastectomy was performed. CONCLUSIONS: We propose an axilla management algorithm in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS. The patients who would benefit from sentinel lymph node biopsy would be those who are not candidates for breast-conserving surgery, those with a BIRADS 5 lesion biopsied by core-needle biopsy, and those whose definitive diagnosis is lymphovascular invasion.

Magnetic resonance imaging system for intraoperative margin assessment for DCIS and invasive breast cancer using the ClearSight™ system in breast-conserving surgery-Results from a postmarketing study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is followed by reoperations in approximately 25%. Reoperations lead to an increased risk of infection and wound healing problems as well as a worse cosmetic outcome. Several technical approaches for an intraoperative margin assessment to decrease the reoperation rate are under evaluation, some of them are still experimental. METHODS: A prospective single-arm post-marketing study with 60 patients undergoing BCS for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive breast cancer was conducted. The specimen was intraoperatively examined by the ClearSight™ system, a mobile magnetic resonance imaging system that is based on a diffusion-weighted imaging protocol. However, the results were blinded to the surgeon. RESULTS: The ClearSight™ system was performed for both ductal and lobular breast cancer and DCIS, with a sensitivity of 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.96) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.72-0.92), with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 80%. CONCLUSION: Had the ClearSight™ been known to the surgeon intraoperatively, the reoperation rate would have been reduced by 83% for invasive carcinoma, from 10% to 2%, and 50% for DCIS, from 30% to 15% reoperations. A trial designed to examine the impact on reoperation rates is currently ongoing.

Effect of the Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Margin Consensus Guideline Implementation on Re-Excision Rates, Satisfaction, and Cost.

INTRODUCTION: The 2016 consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with whole-breast irradiation (WBI) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) recommended 2 mm margins to decrease local recurrence rates. We examined re-excision rates, cost, and patient satisfaction before and after guideline implementation. METHODS: From an Institutional Review Board-approved database, patients with DCIS who underwent BCS with over 1 year of follow-up at one academic institution and one community cancer center were evaluated. Two groups were compared based on when they received treatment, i.e. before (pre-consensus [PRE]) and after November 2016 (post consensus [POST]), with respect to outcome and cost parameters. RESULTS: After consensus guideline implementation, re-excision rate (32.1% vs. 20.0%) and mastectomy conversion (8.3% vs. 2.3%) significantly increased, although total resection volume, operative cost per patient, and satisfaction with breast scores did not differ. Not all patients with <2 mm margins were re-excised, although the re-excision rate among this subset significantly increased (62.4% vs. 31.3%). On multivariable analysis controlling for age, estrogen receptor status, WBI use, and margin status, surgery after consensus guideline publication was independently associated with a higher re-excision rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-3.59, p = 0.03) and a higher rate of conversion to mastectomy (OR 6.84, 95% CI 1.67-28.00, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the 2016 margin consensus guideline for DCIS resulted in an increase in re-excisions and mastectomy conversions at two institutions. Research is needed for operative tools and strategies to decrease DCIS re-excision rates.

Rapid Assessment of Resection Margins During Breast Conserving Surgery Using Intraoperative Flow Cytometry.

BACKGROUND: Positive margins are the most important factor for recurrence of the disease after breast-conserving surgery. Several methods have been developed throughout the years to evaluate the margin status during surgery in an attempt to assist the surgeon in excising the whole tumor at once, a goal that has not yet been accomplished. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In our study, we compared intraoperative flow cytometry (iFC) with cytology and pathology in order to evaluate 606 samples of margins and tumors corresponding to 99 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of no special type and invasive lobular carcinoma obtained from breast-conserving surgeries. RESULTS: Using the pathology as the gold standard, flow cytometry had 93.3% sensitivity, 92.4% specificity, and 92.5% accuracy. Cytology had 82.3% sensitivity, 94.6% specificity, and 94.2% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the suggestion that iFC is a novel, reliable technique that allows rapid evaluation of the excision margins of lumpectomies, thus improving the precision of breast-conserving surgery. Among the advantages of iFC are that it does not rely on the expertise of a pathologist or cytologist, it is low cost, and it has no additional psychological effect on patients, because no re-operation is needed.

Breast-Conserving Surgeries With and Without Cavity Shave Margins Have Different Re-excision Rates and Associated Overall Cost: Institutional and Patient-Driven Decisions for Its Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the rate of margin positivity and reoperations remains a paramount goal in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). This study assesses the effectiveness of standard partial mastectomy with cavity shave margins (CSM) compared with partial mastectomy with selective margin resection (SPM), with regard to outcomes of the initial surgeries, re-excisions, and overall costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 122 eligible breast cancer patients who underwent BCS at one institution. The CSM and SPM groups each included 61 patients, matched for presurgical diagnoses and clinical stage. Data including margin status, rates and reason for re-excision, associated operation times, and costs were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients undergoing CSM had less than half the rate of positive margins (PMs) (10% vs. 23%; P = .03) and re-excisions (8% vs. 23%; P = .02) compared with SPM. In the former group, the margin involvement was focal, and re-excisions were performed almost exclusively for PMs. For SPM, the majority (92%) of PMs were on the main lumpectomy specimen rather than the selective margins, and re-excisions included, in addition to PMs, extensive or multifocal negative but close margins. Reduced breast tissue volumes were removed with CSM, particularly for patients undergoing a single surgery (47 vs. 165 cm3; P < .001). The initial surgery with CSM is on average 27% more costly than that for SPM (P < .001), due to the increased pathology costs which are partially offset by the increased re-excision rates in SPM. CONCLUSION: Circumferential cavity shaving, associated with consistent lower PMs, tissue volumes excised, and re-excision rates, is appropriate for routine implementation as a method offering superior surgical outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatment approaches for early breast cancer: a retrospective matched cohort study from China.

BACKGROUND: Both breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction surgery are less popular in China, although they can improve patients' quality of life. The main reason comes from the economy. There is currently no economic evaluation of different surgical treatment options for early breast cancer. Our study aims to assess the economic impact and long-term cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatments for early breast cancer. The surgical approaches are including mastectomy (MAST), breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and mastectomy with reconstruction (MAST+RECON). METHODS: Based on demographic data, disease-related information and other treatments, we applied propensity score matching (PSM) to perform 1: 1 matching among patients who underwent these three types of surgery in the tertiary academic medical center from 2011 to 2017 to obtain a balanced sample of covariates between groups. A Markov model was established. Clinical data and cost data were obtained from the medical records. Health utility values were derived from clinical investigations. Strategies were compared using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: After PSM, there were 205 cases in each group. In the matched data set, the distribution of covariates was fully balanced. The total cost of MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT was $37,392.84, $70,556.03 and $82,330.97, respectively. The quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) were 17.11, 18.40 and 20.20, respectively. Compared with MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT have an ICER of $25,707.90/QALY and $14,543.08/QALY, respectively. The ICER of BCT vs. MAST was less than the threshold of $27,931.04. The reliability and stability of the results were confirmed by Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that in the context of the limited resources in China, after comparing the three surgical approaches, BCT is the more cost-effective and preferred solution.

Margin Assessment and Re-excision Rates for Patients Who Have Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Breast-Conserving Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has enabled more patients to be eligible for breast-conservation surgery (BCS). Achieving negative lumpectomy margins, however, is challenging due to changes in tissue composition and potentially scattered residual carcinoma in the tumor bed. Data regarding BCS after NAC have shown variable re-excision rates. MarginProbe (Dilon Technologies, Newport News, VA, USA) has been shown to identify positive resection margins intraoperatively and to reduce the number of re-excisions in primary BCS, but has not been studied in NAC+BCS cases. This study aimed to investigate the clinicopathologic characteristics, margin status, and re-excision rates for NAC+BCS patients with and without the use of MarginProbe. METHODS: The Institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for patients who received NAC and had BCS from 2010 to 2019. The variables of interest were demographics, tumor characteristics, pathologic complete response (pCR), MarginProbe use, and re-excision rates. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 214 patients who had NAC, 61 (28.5 %) of whom had NAC+BCS. The median age of the patients was 53.5 years. A pCR was achieved for 19 of the patients (31.1 %). Of the remaining 42 patients, 9 (21 %) had close or positive margins that required re-excision. Re-excision was associated with a larger residual tumor size (p = 0.025) and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease before NAC (p = 0.041). MarginProbe use was associated with a lower re-excision rate for the patients who had NAC+BCS (6 % vs. 31 %, respectively). CONCLUSION: The patients with a larger residual tumor burden and ER-positive disease had a greater risk for inadequate margins at surgery. MarginProbe use was associated with a lower re-excision rate. Techniques to reduce the need for re-excision will support the use of BCS after NAC.

Clinical and Financial Implications of Positive Margins After Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Resection: A Longitudinal Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Management of positive margins after nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) excision is debated in the literature. The purpose of this study is to determine the rate of residual tumor in reexcised NMSC specimens after previous excision with positive margins, to determine the rate of recurrence in patients who had positive margins but did not undergo reexcision, and to define the financial burden of negative reexcisions. METHODS: An Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective review was conducted on all patients with NMSC excision over a 15-year period. Patients who met inclusion criteria and underwent initial NMSC excision with negative frozen section margins, but had positive permanent section margins were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent reexcision for clearance of tumor (n = 161) or those who did not undergo further reexcision (n = 105). Variables collected include demographics, previous skin cancer, tumor location, cancer subtype, excision measurements, and time between first and second excisions. For those patients who did not undergo reexcision, charts were examined for recurrence. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-six patients met inclusion criteria with mean follow-up of 60 months. Eighty-three (52%) of 161 patients with positive margins on initial excision had no evidence of residual cancer upon reexcision. Residual tumor on permanent section was confirmed in 48% of patients. Patients with a previous history of basal cell carcinoma were more likely to have a true-positive margin after reexcision (P = 0.02). Larger reexcisions were more likely to harbor residual cancer (5.9 cm2, P = 0.04). Patients with positive margins that did not undergo reexcision, only 7 of 105 patients (6.6%) had recurrence. No mortalities were reported from NMSC recurrence. US $247,672 was spent in reexcision for negative margins in 98 patients for an average cost of US $2984 per case. CONCLUSIONS: Forty-eight percent of NMSC patients with positive margins had residual tumor upon reexcision. There were 6.6% of the patients who did not undergo resection after positive margins developed recurrence of disease at 5 years. Patients requiring larger reexcisions or those with a prior history of BCC were more likely to have residual cancer upon reexcision. This study suggests that observation is an appropriate option of care for certain patients with residual NMSC on permanent pathology.

Can micro-computed tomography imaging improve interpretation of macroscopic margin assessment of specimen radiography in excised breast specimens?

INTRODUCTION: Peri-operative macroscopic margin assessment with standard intraoperative specimen radiography (IOSR) results in improved re-excision rates in excised breast tissue specimens but is limited. This study sought to improve the intraoperative margin assessment on standard IOSR techniques by utilizing noninvasive X-ray micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) imaging of breast tissue specimens to compare margins in three-dimensional with two-dimensional IOSR. METHODS: Patients with impalpable breast carcinoma, or suspected breast carcinoma, who were eligible for breast-conserving surgery were recruited. Margins were assessed within each specimen using standard IOSR, micro-CT, and histology techniques. RESULTS: Six malignant and three benign lesions were included for the analysis in this study. Micro-CT identified the same positive margin as IOSR in 3 out of 6 malignancies. However, margin status identified by micro-CT was concordant with pathological assessment in only one specimen. In comparison, margin assessment by IOSR correctly correlated with pathological margin status in three malignant specimens. CONCLUSION: The use of micro-CT imaging in this study did not improve margin assessment in impalpable breast specimens when compared to standard specimen radiography (SR) assessment. However, future improvements in sample preparation and CT image acquisition processes may enhance the potential of micro-CT as a valuable imaging tool for improving margin assessment.

Adherence to post-surgery follow-up assessment and its association with sociodemographic and disease characteristics in patients with breast cancer in Central China.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up after curative surgery is increasingly recognized as an important component of breast cancer care. Although current guideline regulates the follow-ups, there are no relevant studies on the adherence to it in China. This study investigated the post-surgery follow-up and explored its association with patients, tumor and treatment characteristics. METHODS: A total of 711 patients underwent surgical treatment in Shanxi Bethune Hospital from March 2012 to May 2018 were included in this study. Baseline sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were obtained from the hospital electronic medical records. The post-surgery follow-up was reviewed and assessed from the patient's follow-up examination record. Factors associated with the first three-year follow up was evaluated using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The annual follow-up rate after surgery decreased gradually from 67.1% at the 1st year, 60.2% at the 3rd year to 51.9% at the 4th year, and 43.5% at the 5th year. Loss of follow-up during the first 3 years after surgery was significantly associated with older age (> 65 years), lower medical insurance coverage, axillary lymph node dissection, and less intensity of systemic treatment. CONCLUSION: A significant downtrend of annual follow-up rate for breast cancer survivors was confirmed in this study. Loss of follow-up within the first 3 years after surgery was associated with both patient's characteristics and treatment. These results will provide evidence to help clinicians to develop tailored patient management after curative surgery.

The added value of immediate breast reconstruction to health-related quality of life of breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) may improve the quality of life (QoL) of breast cancer patients. Guidelines recommend to discuss the option IBR with all patients undergoing mastectomy. However, substantial hospital variation in IBR-rates was previously observed in the Netherlands, influenced by patient, tumour and hospital factors and clinicians' believes. Information provision about IBR may have a positive effect on receiving IBR and therefore QoL. This study investigated patient-reported QoL of patients treated with mastectomy with and without IBR. METHODS: An online survey, encompassing the validated BREAST-Q questionnaire, was distributed to a representative sample of 1218 breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy. BREAST-Q scores were compared between patients who had undergone mastectomy either with or without IBR. RESULTS: A total of 445 patients were included for analyses: 281 patients with and 164 without IBR. Patients who had received IBR showed significantly higher BREAST-Q scores on "psychosocial well-being" (75 versus 67, p < 0.001), "sexual well-being" (62 versus 52, p < 0.001) and "physical well-being" (77 versus 74, p = 0.021) compared to patients without IBR. No statistically significant difference was found for "satisfaction with breasts" (64 versus 62, p = 0.21). Similar results were found after multivariate regression analyses, revealing IBR to be an independent factor for a better patient-reported QoL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients diagnosed with breast cancer with IBR following mastectomy report a better QoL on important psychosocial, sexual and physical well-being domains. This further supports the recommendation to discuss the option of IBR with all patients with an indication for mastectomy and to enable shared decision-making.