Efficacy and safety of intercostal nerve anastomosis in immediate subpectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-areola-sparing mastectomy: a randomized, controlled, open-label clinical study.

Purpose: This aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of intercostal nerve anastomosis among breast cancer patients who undergo immediate subpectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-areola-sparing mastectomy. Methods: From 2022 to 2023, female patients between the ages of 20 and 60 diagnosed with stage I-IIIA breast cancer, who required and were willing to undergo immediate subpectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-areola-sparing mastectomy, were screened and assigned to take the operation with (treatment group) or without (control group) intercostal nerve anastomosis (the nerves with appropriate length and thickness were selected from the 2nd-4th intercostal nerves, which were then dissociated and anastomosed to the posterior areola tissue). A radial incision at the surface projection of the tumor location was used. The patients' breast local sensation was assessed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments before the operation as well as at 10 days, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Furthermore, the patients' quality of life was evaluated 6 months postoperatively using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Adverse events, operation duration, drainage volume, and the duration of drainage tube carrying time were also monitored and recorded. Results: Compared to the pre-operative period, a significant decrease in local sensation was observed 10 days after surgery in both groups. However, the control group showed a significant reduction in sensation at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, while the treatment group showed noticeable recovery. A statistically significant difference (P < 0.001) in local sensation between the pre-operative and post-operative periods was observed at the final follow-up in the two groups. By the time of 3 and 6 months postoperatively, a significant difference was seen in the local sensation between the two groups. Intercostal nerve anastomosis was found to significantly improve the patients' quality of life, including emotional (P = 0.01), physical (P = 0.04), and social functioning (P = 0.02) and pain (P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in general characteristics (such as age, BMI, and subtypes). Although intercostal nerve anastomosis increased the duration of operation by around 20 min (P < 0.001), it did not affect the volume or duration of postoperative drainage tube usage between the two groups. Conclusion: This study indicated that intercostal nerve anastomosis improved the local sensation and quality of life of patients who underwent immediate subpectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-areola-sparing mastectomy. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=42487, identifier ChiCTR1900026340.

Comparison of apatinib and capecitabine (Xeloda) with capecitabine (Xeloda) in advanced triple-negative breast cancer as third-line therapy: A retrospective study.

The treatment of advanced triple-negative breast cancer, which failed in first-line or second-line therapy, is a significant challenge. We conducted this retrospective study to explore the efficacy and safety of apatinib and capecitabine as the third-line treatment for advanced triple-negative breast cancer.This retrospective study involved 44 advanced triple-negative breast cancer patients who failed in first-line or second-line therapy in Tangshan People's Hospital from January 2016 to February 2017. Twenty-two patients received apatinib and capecitabine, while 22 patients were treated with capecitabine monotherapy as third-line therapy. The progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events were compared between 2 groups.The apatinib and capecitabine group exhibited a higher PFS than capecitabine group (P = .001). Meanwhile, ORR and DCR in apatinib and capecitabine group were better than in capecitabine group (P = .042; .016). The 2 groups showed no significant difference in adverse events except degree I-II bleeding (P = .021). Both the apatinib and capecitabine and the capecitabine regimens revealed good tolerability.The apatinib and capecitabine regimen can achieve a better efficacy and similar serious adverse events compared with capecitabine regimen as the third-line treatment for advanced triple-negative breast cancer.