Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Site Working Group Statement on Contralateral Mastectomy: Indications, Outcomes, and Risks.

Rates of contralateral mastectomy (CM) among patients with unilateral breast cancer have been increasing in the United States. In this Society of Surgical Oncology position statement, we review the literature addressing the indications, risks, and benefits of CM since the society's 2017 statement. We held a virtual meeting to outline key topics and then conducted a literature search using PubMed to identify relevant articles. We reviewed the articles and made recommendations based on group consensus. Patients consider CM for many reasons, including concerns regarding the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), desire for improved cosmesis and symmetry, and preferences to avoid ongoing screening, whereas surgeons primarily consider CBC risk when making a recommendation for CM. For patients with a high risk of CBC, CM reduces the risk of new breast cancer, however it is not known to convey an overall survival benefit. Studies evaluating patient satisfaction with CM and reconstruction have yielded mixed results. Imaging with mammography within 12 months before CM is recommended, but routine preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging is not; there is also no evidence to support routine postmastectomy imaging surveillance. Because the likelihood of identifying an occult malignancy during CM is low, routine sentinel lymph node surgery is not recommended. Data on the rates of postoperative complications are conflicting, and such complications may not be directly related to CM. Adjuvant therapy delays due to complications have not been reported. Surgeons can reduce CM rates by encouraging shared decision making and informed discussions incorporating patient preferences.

Clipping the Positive Lymph Node in Patients with Clinically Node Positive Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Impact on Axillary Surgery in the ISPY-2 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), retrieving previously clipped, biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes during sentinel lymph node biopsy [i.e., targeted axillary dissection (TAD)] may reduce false negative rates. However, the overall utilization and impact of clipping positive nodes remains uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed cN+ ISPY-2 patients (2011-2022) undergoing axillary surgery after NAC. We evaluated trends in node clipping and associations with type of axillary surgery [sentinel lymph node (SLN) only, SLN and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), or ALND only] and event-free survival (EFS) in patients that were cN+ on a NAC trial. RESULTS: Among 801 cN+ patients, 161 (20.1%) had pre-NAC clip placement in the positive node. The proportion of patients that were cN+ undergoing clip placement increased from 2.4 to 36.2% between 2011 and 2021. Multivariable logistic regression showed nodal clipping was independently associated with higher odds of SLN-only surgery [odds ratio (OR) 4.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-6.8, p < 0.001]. This was also true among patients with residual pathologically node-positive (pN+) disease. Completion ALND rate did not differ based on clip retrieval success. No significant differences in EFS were observed in those with or without clip placement, both with or without successful clip retrieval [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.4-1.7, p = 0.7; HR 1.8, 95% CI 0.5-6.0, p = 0.3, respectively]. CONCLUSION: Clip placement in the positive lymph node before NAC is increasingly common. The significant association between clip placement and omission of axillary dissection, even among patients with pN+ disease, suggests a paradigm shift toward TAD as a definitive surgical management strategy in patients with pN+ disease after NAC.

Risk factors and health behaviors associated with loneliness among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Loneliness may exacerbate poor health outcomes particularly among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about the risk factors of loneliness among cancer survivors. We evaluated the risk factors of loneliness in the context of COVID-19 pandemic-related prevention behaviors and lifestyle/psychosocial factors among cancer survivors. Cancer survivors (n = 1471) seen at Huntsman Cancer Institute completed a survey between August-September 2020 evaluating health behaviors, medical care, and psychosocial factors including loneliness during COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were classified into two groups: 'lonely' (sometimes, usually, or always felt lonely in past month) and 'non-lonely' (never or rarely felt lonely in past month). 33% of cancer survivors reported feeling lonely in the past month. Multivariable logistic regression showed female sex, not living with a spouse/partner, poor health status, COVID-19 pandemic-associated lifestyle factors including increased alcohol consumption and marijuana/CBD oil use, and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life, less social interaction, and higher perceived stress and financial stress were associated with feeling lonely as compared to being non-lonely (all p < 0.05). A significant proportion of participants reported loneliness, which is a serious health risk among vulnerable populations, particularly cancer survivors. Modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and psychosocial stress were associated with loneliness. These results highlight the need to screen for unhealthy lifestyle factors and psychosocial stressors to identify cancer survivors at increased risk of loneliness and to develop effective management strategies.

Global prevalence and content of information about alcohol use as a cancer risk factor on Twitter.

OBJECTIVES: Alcohol use is a major risk factor for several forms of cancer, though many people have limited knowledge of this link. Public health communicators and cancer advocates desire to increase awareness of this link with the long-term goal of reducing cancer burden. The current study is the first to examine the prevalence and content of information about alcohol use as a cancer risk on social media internationally. METHODS: We used a three-phase process (hashtag search, dictionary-based auto-identification of content, and human coding of content) to identify and evaluate information from Twitter posts between January 2019 and December 2021. RESULTS: Our hashtag search retrieved a large set of cancer-related tweets (N = 1,122,397). The automatic search process using an alcohol dictionary identified a small number of messages about cancer that also mentioned alcohol (n = 9061, 0.8%), a number that got small after adjusting for human coded estimates of the dictionary precision (n = 5927, 0.5%). When cancer-related messages also mentioned alcohol, 82% (n = 1003 of 1225 examined through human coding) indicated alcohol use as a risk factor. Coding found rare instances of problematic information (e.g., promotion of alcohol, misinformation) in messages about alcohol use and cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Few social media messages about cancer types that can be linked to alcohol mention alcohol as a cancer risk factor. If public health communicators and cancer advocates want to increase knowledge and understanding of alcohol use as a cancer risk factor, efforts will need to be made on social media and through other communication platforms to increase exposure to this information over time.

Prospective Pilot Study of 18F-Fluoroestradiol PET/CT in Patients With Invasive Lobular Carcinomas.

BACKGROUND. PET/CT with 18F-fluoroestradiol (FES) (FDA-approved in 2020) depicts tissues expressing estrogen receptor (ER). Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is commonly ER positive. OBJECTIVE. The primary aim of this study was to assess the frequency with which sites of histologically proven ILC have abnormal uptake on FES PET/CT. METHODS. This prospective single-center pilot study, conducted from December 2020 to August 2021, enrolled patients with histologically confirmed ILC to undergo FES PET/CT; patients optionally underwent FDG PET/CT. Two nuclear radiologists assessed FES PET/CT and FDG PET/CT studies for abnormal uptake corresponding to known ILC sites at enrollment and for additional sites of abnormal uptake, resolving differences by consensus. The primary endpoint was percentage of known ILC sites showing abnormal FES uptake. The alternative to the null hypothesis was that more than 60% of sites would have abnormal FES uptake, exceeding the percentage of ILC with abnormal FDG uptake described in prior literature. A sample size of 24 biopsied lesions was preselected to provide 81% power for the alternative hypothesis (one-sided α = .10). Findings on FES PET/CT and FDG PET/CT were summarized for additional secondary endpoints. RESULTS. The final analysis included 17 patients (mean age, 59.1 ± 13.2 years) with 25 sites of histologically confirmed ILC at enrollment (22 breast lesions, two axillary lymph nodes, one distant metastasis). FES PET/CT showed abnormal uptake in 22 of 25 (88%) lesions, sufficient to reject the null hypothesis (p = .002). Thirteen patients underwent FDG PET/CT. Four of 23 (17%) sites of histologically confirmed ILC, including additional sites detected and confirmed after enrollment, were identified with FES PET/CT only, and 1 of 23 (4%) was identified only with FDG PET/CT (p = .18). FES PET/CT depicted additional lesions not detected with standard-of-care evaluation in 4 of 17 (24%) patients (two contralateral breast cancers and two metastatic axillary lymph nodes, all with subsequent histologic confirmation). Use of FES PET/CT resulted in changes in clinical stage with respect to standard-of-care evaluation in 3 of 17 (18%) patients. CONCLUSION. The primary endpoint of the trial was met. The frequency of abnormal FES uptake among sites of histologically known ILC was found to be to be significantly greater than 60%. CLINICAL IMPACT. This pilot study shows a potential role of FES PET/CT in evaluation of patients with ILC. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04252859.

Do you mind if I record?: Perceptions and practice regarding patient requests to record clinic visits in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Audio recordings of oncology clinic discussions can help patients retain and understand information about their disease and treatment decisions. Access to this tool relies on acceptance of recordings by oncologists. This is the first study to evaluate experience and attitudes of oncologists toward patients recording clinic visits. METHODS: Medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists from 5 US cancer centers and community affiliates were surveyed to evaluate clinicians' experience, beliefs, and practices regarding patient-initiated recordings. RESULTS: Among 360 oncologists (69% response rate), virtually all (93%) have experienced patients seeking to record visits. Although 75% are comfortable with recording, 25% are uncomfortable and 56% report concerns ranging from less thorough discussions to legal liability. Most (85%) always agree when patients ask to record, but 15% never or selectively allow recording. Although 51% believe recording is positive for the patient-physician relationship, a sizable minority report that it can lead to less detailed conversations (28%) or avoidance of difficult topics, including prognosis (33%). Views did not vary based on subspecialty, practice setting, or geographic region, but older age and years in practice were associated with more positive views of recording. The majority of clinicians (72%) desire institutional policies to govern guidelines about recordings. CONCLUSIONS: Most oncologists are comfortable with patient requests to record visits, but a sizable minority remain uncomfortable, and access to recording varies solely on physician preference. This difference in care delivery may benefit from institutional policies that promote access while addressing legitimate physician concerns over privacy and appropriate use of recordings.

Factors associated with changes in exercise behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: There is limited information on how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed health behaviors among cancer patients. We examined changes in exercise behaviors since the pandemic and identified characteristics associated with these changes among cancer patients. METHODS: Cancer patients (n = 1,210) completed a survey from August to September 2020 to assess COVID-19 pandemic-related changes in health behaviors and psychosocial factors. Patients were categorized into three groups: exercising less, exercising did not change, and exercising more. Patient characteristics were compared by exercise groups. RESULTS: One-third of the patients reported a decreased amount of regular exercise, while 10% reported exercising more during the pandemic. Patients who exercised less were more likely to be unemployed/retired and have poor health status and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life while less likely to be former smokers (all p < 0.05). In contrast, patients who exercised more were younger, had stage IV diagnosis, and also reported disruptions in daily life (all p < 0.05). Patients who were living in rural areas were also more likely not to experience changes in exercise habits (all p < 0.05), although rural-urban status was not identified as a strong predictor. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of cancer patients experienced changes in exercise habits, especially exercising less, during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Age, employment status, tumor stage, health status, smoking status, and psychosocial factors were associated with changes in exercise behaviors. Our results highlight the importance of promoting physical activity guidelines for cancer survivorship during the COVID-19 pandemic and may help improve the identification of cancer patients susceptible to exercising less.

Innovation in Breast Surgery: Practical and Ethical Considerations.

The adoption of innovation is essential to the evolution of patient care. Breast surgical oncology advances through incorporating new techniques, devices, and procedures. Historical changes in practice standards from radical to modified radical mastectomy or axillary node dissection to sentinel node biopsy reduced morbidity without sacrifice in oncologic outcome. Contemporary oncoplastic techniques afford broader consideration for breast conservation and the potential for improved cosmetic outcomes. At present, many breast surgeons face the decision of which wireless device to use for localization of nonpalpable lesions. Consideration for future changes, such as robotic mastectomy, are on the horizon. No guideline exists to assist breast surgeons in the adoption of innovation into practice. The Ethics Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons acknowledges that breast surgeons confront many questions associated with onboarding innovation. This paper aims to provide a framework for asking relevant questions along with the ethical principles to consider when integrating an innovation into practice.

Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Role Perceptions and Choice of Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies have reported that breast cancer patients who perceived more personal responsibility for the surgery decision were more likely to undergo aggressive surgery. We examined this in a prospective study. METHODS: 100 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients identified their decision- making role using the Patient Preference Scale. Chart review captured the initial surgery received. Patient decision role preference, role perception, role concordance, and provider role perception were compared with type of surgery to assess differences between mastectomy and lumpectomy groups and unilateral versus bilateral mastectomy. We compared type of surgery and patient role concordance. Satisfaction with Decision immediately after the visit, Decision Regret and FACT-B quality of life at 2 weeks and 6 months were assessed and compared with type of surgery. RESULTS: Patient decision role preference (p = 0.49) and perception (p = 0.16) were not associated with type of surgery. Provider perception of patient role was associated with type of surgery, with providers perceiving more passive patient roles in the mastectomy group (p = 0.026). Patient role preference varied significantly by stage of disease (= 0.024), with stage 0 (64%, N = 6) and stage III (60%, N = 6) patients preferring active roles and stage I (60%, N = 25) and stage II (52%, N = 16) patients preferring a collaborative role. CONCLUSIONS: Patient role preference and perception were not associated with type of surgery, while provider perception of patient role was. Patient role preference varied by stage of disease. Further study is warranted to better understand how disease factors and provider interactions affect decision role preferences and perceptions and surgical choice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03350854). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03350854 .

Patient Satisfaction With Decision Making Does Not Correlate With Patient Centeredness of Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: High-quality decision making is important in patient-centered care. Although patient involvement in decision making varies widely, most patients desire to share in decision making. The Press-Ganey Patient Satisfaction survey includes questions that measure patients' perceptions of their providers' efforts to involve them in decision making (PGDM). We hypothesized that higher PGDM scores would correlate with higher scores on a validated measure of patient centeredness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgical providers at a university hospital who routinely receive Press-Ganey scores received a survey that included the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS), a validated tool that measures the provider's orientation toward patient centeredness on a continuous six-point scale: score ≥5 = high, 4.57-5 = moderate, and <4.57 = low and includes nine-item "caring" or "sharing" subscales. We compared PPOS scores to PGDM scores, averaged from April 2015 to January 2016. RESULTS: Eighty-six of 112 (75%) of surgical providers responded to the survey. Fifty-two (46%) had PGDM scores available and 26% achieved a perfect score on the PGDM. The overall PPOS scores were low, with a mean of 4.2 (SD = 0.5). The PPOS was not correlated with the PGDM, correlation coefficient (rs) = -0.07 (CI: -0.34-0.21, P = 0.63). Similarly, the two subscales of the PPOS did not correlate with the PGDM with rs = -0.15 (CI: -0.41-0.13, P = 0.29) for "caring" and rs = -0.04 (CI: -0.31-0.23, P = 0.76) for "sharing". CONCLUSIONS: Although surgical providers scored low in patient centeredness using the PPOS, over one-quarter (26%) of them rank in the top 1% on the PGDM. No correlation was found between providers' patient centeredness and their patients' perceptions of efforts to include them in decision making.

Standard preoperative use of nonopioid multi-modal medications for patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction and the effect on postoperative opioid needs.

Standardized nonopioid preoperative protocol effects perioperative opioids. Combined use of acetaminophen, pregabalin, celecoxib, and transdermal scopolamine (APCS), in mastectomy with immediate subpectoral reconstruction procedures. Retrospective (2014-2017) cohort study (n = 305) examined treatment groups; APCS, no treatment (NONE), and partial combination APCS (OTHER), employing multivariable gamma regression models controlling preoperative and perioperative variables, examining postoperative opioid use (oral morphine equivalents, OME) and hospital stay (hours, LOS). APCS group had a 25% statistical reduction in OME total vs OTHER, a 12% statistical reduction in LOS vs OTHER, and 11% statistical reduction in LOS vs NONE. Standardized nonopioid preoperative protocol provides insight into perioperative opioid use.

Population-based relative risks for specific family history constellations of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Using a large resource linking genealogy with decades of cancer data, a non-traditional approach was used to estimate individualized risk for breast cancer (BC) based on specific family history extending to first cousins, providing a clearer picture of the contribution of various aspects of both close and distant combinations of affected relatives. METHODS: RRs for BC were estimated in 640,366 females for a representative set of breast cancer family history constellations that included number of first- (FDR), second-(SDR), and third-degree relatives (TDR), maternal and paternal relatives, and age at earliest diagnosis in a relative. RESULTS: RRs for first-degree relatives of BC cases ranged from 1.61 (= 1 FDR affected, CI 1.56, 1.67) to 5.00 (≥ 4 FDRs affected, CI 3.35, 7.18). RRs for second-degree relatives of probands with 0 affected FDRs ranged from 1.04 (= 1 SDR affected, CI 1.00, 1.08) to 1.71 (≥ 4 SDRs affected, CI 1.26, 2.27) and for second-degree relatives of probands with exactly 1 FDR from 1.54 (0 SDRs affected, CI 1.47, 1.61) to 4.78 (≥ 5 SDRs; CI 2.47, 8.35). RRs for third-degree relatives with no closer relatives affected were significantly elevated over population risk for probands with ≥ 5 affected TDRs RR = 1.32, CI 1.11, 1.57). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of females in the Utah resource had a positive family history of BC in FDRs to TDRs. Presence of any number of affected FDRs or SDRs significantly increased risk for BC over population risk; and more than four TDRs, even with no affected FDRs or SDRs, significantly increased risk over population risk. Risk prediction derived from the specific and extended family history constellation of affected relatives allows identification of females at increased risk even when they do not have a conventionally defined high-risk family; these risks could be a powerful, efficient tool to individualize cancer screening and prevention.

Exploring Surgeon Variability in Recommendations for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: What Matters Most?

BACKGROUND: American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) guidelines state that it is the responsibility of the surgeon to discuss the risks/benefits of and give a recommendation regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). We conducted a survey of ASBrS members to evaluate the factors that affect this recommendation, confidence in this recommendation, and awareness/adoption of the guidelines. METHODS: A survey was sent to the ASBrS membership. Vignettes with the following variables about breast cancer patient were randomly included: age, disease stage, receptor status, family history (FH) of breast cancer, and patient preference for CPM. Respondents were asked to estimate the patient's chance of developing contralateral cancer, whether they would recommend CPM, and their confidence in this recommendation, and about their familiarity with and use of the guidelines. RESULTS: 536 members (21.9%) responded. The odds of recommending CPM and confidence in recommendation were higher in a younger patient, higher-stage disease, triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2+ relative to estrogen receptor (ER)+, and in women with FH. Of surgeons, 51% were familiar or very familiar with the guidelines and 38% used the guidelines most or all of the time. Surgeons who used the guidelines were not less likely to recommend CPM. CONCLUSIONS: While surgeons generally agree on the factors that are important in making a recommendation on CPM, there is variability in how strongly the different factors influence the recommendation and their confidence in that recommendation. In addition, while most surgeons were at least a little familiar with the ASBrS guidelines, the vast majority do not routinely use them.

Secretory breast carcinoma in an 8-year-old girl: A case report and literature review.

Secretory breast carcinoma (SBC) is a rare form of breast cancer found in both children and adults, and is the most common breast cancer in the pediatric population. Although SBC usually carries a favorable prognosis, there have been reported cases of axillary and distant metastases. Surgery is the primary mode of treatment, however, there exists variability within the literature surrounding the management of SBC. We report a case of an 8-year-old girl who presented with a firm, mobile, palpable breast mass. Ultrasonography was performed, followed by local excision, with surgical pathology concerning for SBC. The patient was definitively treated with mastectomy and sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy. She received no adjuvant therapies and 2 years later, remains disease free. Herein, we review the literature, curate data from 89 reported cases of pediatric and adult SBC, and address some of the controversy surrounding its treatment. From this review we conclude that patients with SBC should be reviewed at multidisciplinary treatment planning conference, undergo surgery with mastectomy or lumpectomy with SLN biopsy, and have long-term postoperative follow-up.

Is radiation indicated for young women with early stage, node-negative breast cancer after mastectomy? A multi-institution, retrospective review.

The role of post-mastectomy radiation for women with node negative, early stage disease is not well-defined. The purpose of this study is to more clearly define a subset of women who are ≤40 years of age with T1-T2, node negative breast cancer who may benefit from post-mastectomy radiation. Using tumor registries at two institutions, we identified 219 women ≤40 years of age with T1-T2, node negative breast cancer treated with mastectomy. Of these 219 patients, 38 received post-mastectomy radiation and 181 did not. Kaplan-Meier methods and cox proportional-hazards regression models were employed for statistical analysis. There were no locoregional failures in the women receiving post mastectomy radiation, which lead to a nonsignificant increase in freedom from locoregional recurrence (P=.08). For women not receiving post-mastectomy radiation, freedom from locoregional recurrence was 94.7% and 89.7% at 5- and 10-years. Lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) was the only factor predictive of locoregional recurrence. For women without LVSI, freedom from locoregional recurrence was 96.0% and 93.3% at 5- and 10-years respectively. For women with LVSI who did not receive post mastectomy radiation, freedom from locoregional recurrence was 89.1% at 5-years. There were no failures in the women with LVSI who received post mastectomy radiation. For women ≤40 years of age with T1-2, node negative breast cancer treated with mastectomy and no post-mastectomy radiation, locoregional control is excellent in the absence of LVSI, regardless of other risk factors. In the presence of LVSI (regardless of other risk factors), the risk of locoregional recurrence is high and appears to be decreased with post-mastectomy radiation.

Breast cancer screening of pregnant and breastfeeding women with BRCA mutations.

Screening recommendations for women with BRCA mutations include annual breast MRI starting at age 25, with annual mammogram added at age 30. The median age of childbearing in the US is age 28, therefore many BRCA mutation carriers will be pregnant or breastfeeding during the time when intensive screening is most important to manage their increased breast cancer risk. Despite this critical overlap, there is little evidence to guide clinicians on the appropriate screening for women with BRCA mutations during pregnancy or breastfeeding. Hormonal shifts that occur during pregnancy, the postpartum period, and breastfeeding result in changes to the breasts that may further complicate the sensitivity and specificity of screening modalities. We explore the safety and efficacy of available breast cancer screening modalities, including clinical breast exam, mammogram, breast MRI, and ultrasound among women with BRCA mutations who are pregnant or breastfeeding, providing recommendations from the most current published literature and expert opinion.

Reoperative Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy is Feasible for Locally Recurrent Breast Cancer, But is it Worthwhile?

INTRODUCTION: Reoperative sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is feasible in patients with local recurrence (LR) of invasive breast cancer but it remains unclear if this procedure affects either treatment or outcome. In this study, we ask whether axillary restaging (vs. none) at the time of LR affects the rate of subsequent events: axillary failure (AF), non-axillary recurrence (NAR), distant metastasis, or death. METHODS: We queried our institutional database to identify patients treated surgically for invasive breast cancer with a negative SLNB (1997-2000) who developed ipsilateral breast or chest wall recurrence as a first event. We excluded those with gross nodal disease at the time of LR. The cumulative incidence of subsequent events was estimated using competing risks methodology. RESULTS: Of 1527 patients with negative SLN at initial surgery, 83 had an ipsilateral breast (79) or chest wall recurrence (4) with clinically negative regional nodes; 47 (57%) were treated with and 36 (43%) without axillary surgery. Primary tumor characteristics were similar between groups, although time to LR was shorter in the no axillary surgery group (median 3.4 vs. 6.5 years; p < 0.05). All patients in the axillary surgery group and 94% of patients in the no axillary surgery group had surgical excision of their LR, and the use of subsequent radiation and systemic therapy was similar between groups. At a median follow-up of 4.2 years from the time of LR, the rates of AF, NAR, distant metastasis and death were low and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among breast cancer patients with LR and clinically negative nodes, our results question the value of axillary restaging but invite confirmation in larger patient cohorts. Since randomized trials support the value of systemic therapy for all patients with invasive LR, reoperative SLNB, although feasible, may not be necessary.

Late Axillary Recurrence After Negative Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy is Uncommon.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the incidence of late axillary recurrence (AR) in patients with negative sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and provide a comparison with SLNB positive patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all breast cancer patients with negative SLNB from January 1997 to December 2000 was performed on a large, institutional database. Primary outcome was cumulative incidence of AR as a first event with/without concurrent local recurrence. SLNB positive patients who went on to ALND during the same timeframe were comparatively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1529 eligible patients were identified (median age 58 years, median tumor size 1.0 cm): 1297 (85 %) underwent lumpectomy; 1099 (75 %) received adjuvant radiation; and 874 (80 %) were estrogen receptor-positive. At 10.8 (range 0-16) years median follow-up, overall incidence of AR as a first event was low (n = 13). Cumulative incidence was 0.6 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.2-0.9] 5 years after SLNB, and 0.9 % (95 % CI 0.4-1.4, 95 % CI 0.5-1.6) at 10 and 15 years. Late AR (>5 years after surgery) occurred in five patients. Median overall survival after AR was 4.6 years; median distant disease-free survival after AR was 3.8 years. Late AR was also low in a contemporaneous group of SLNB positive patients undergoing ALND. In this group, cumulative incidence of AR was 0.7 % (95 % CI 0.1-1.3) 5 years after surgery, and 0.8 % (95 % CI 0.2-1.5) at 10 and 15 years. DISCUSSION: Late AR after negative SLNB is rare; the majority of ARs are in the first 5 years after surgery. Prognosis after these events is poor. SLNB remains a safe and effective procedure for axillary evaluation in breast cancer.

Skin Flap Necrosis After Mastectomy With Reconstruction: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Rates of mastectomy with immediate reconstruction are rising. Skin flap necrosis after this procedure is a recognized complication that can have an impact on cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction, and in worst cases can potentially delay adjuvant therapies. Many retrospective studies of this complication have identified variable event rates and inconsistent associated factors. METHODS: A prospective study was designed to capture the rate of skin flap necrosis as well as pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables, with follow-up assessment to 8 weeks postoperatively. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed for factors associated with skin flap necrosis. RESULTS: Of 606 consecutive procedures, 85 (14 %) had some level of skin flap necrosis: 46 mild (8 %), 6 moderate (1 %), 31 severe (5 %), and 2 uncategorized (0.3 %). Univariate analysis for any necrosis showed smoking, history of breast augmentation, nipple-sparing mastectomy, and time from incision to specimen removal to be significant. In multivariate models, nipple-sparing, time from incision to specimen removal, sharp dissection, and previous breast reduction were significant for any necrosis. Univariate analysis of only moderate or severe necrosis showed body mass index, diabetes, nipple-sparing mastectomy, specimen size, and expander size to be significant. Multivariate analysis showed nipple-sparing mastectomy and specimen size to be significant. Nipple-sparing mastectomy was associated with higher rates of necrosis at every level of severity. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of skin flap necrosis are likely higher than reported in retrospective series. Modifiable technical variables have limited the impact on rates of necrosis. Patients with multiple risk factors should be counseled about the risks, especially if they are contemplating nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Extent of microinvasion in ductal carcinoma in situ is not associated with sentinel lymph node metastases.

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion (DCISM) is a rare diagnosis with a good prognosis. Although nodal metastases are uncommon, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) remains standard care. Volume of disease in invasive breast cancer is associated with SLNB positivity, and, thus we hypothesized that in a large cohort of patients with DCISM, multiple foci of microinvasion might be associated with a higher risk of positive SLNB. METHODS: Records from a prospective institutional database were reviewed to identify patients with DCISM who underwent SLNB between June 1997 and December 2010. Pathology reports were reviewed for number of microinvasive foci and categorized as 1 focus or ≥2 foci. Demographic, pathologic, treatment, and outcome data were obtained and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 414 patients, 235 (57 %) had 1 focus of microinvasion and 179 (43 %) had ≥2 foci. SLNB macrometastases were found in 1.4 %, and micrometastases were found in 6.3 %; neither were significantly different between patients with 1 focus versus ≥2 foci (p = 1.0). Patients with positive SLNB or ≥2 foci of microinvasion were more likely to receive chemotherapy. At median 4.9 years (range 0-16.2 years) follow-up, 18 patients, all in the SLNB negative group, had recurred for an overall 5-year recurrence-free proportion of 95.9 %. CONCLUSIONS: Even with large numbers, there was no higher risk of nodal involvement with ≥2 foci of microinvasion compared with 1 focus. Number of microinvasive foci and results of SLNB appear to be used in decision making for systemic therapy. Prognosis is excellent.