Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) vs. mastectomy with reconstruction: a comparison of outcomes in an underserved population.

Background: Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) has demonstrated superior cosmetic outcomes to traditional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) while maintaining oncologic safety. While prior studies have compared OBCS to mastectomy, there is a scarcity of literature on the impact of social determinants of health on outcomes. Furthermore, although traditionally tumors larger than 5 cm and multifocal disease were treated with mastectomy, the literature has now shown OBCS to be safe in treating such disease. As a result, patients with large or multifocal tumors could be eligible for both mastectomy and OBCS, which prompts the need for comparison between the two. Thus, the aim of our study was to compare OBCS and mastectomy with reconstruction using BREAST-Q and oncologic outcome measures, as well as stratify these outcomes based on race, ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI). Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed for 57 patients treated with OBCS and 204 patients treated with mastectomy with reconstruction from 2015 to 2021. Variables including age, race, ethnicity, BMI, insurance status, surgery type, pathology, recurrence, and complications were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using BREAST-Q pre- and post-operatively. Results: Despite having a higher BMI (P<0.001), OBCS yielded higher "satisfaction with breast" and "satisfaction with outcome" than mastectomy (P=0.02 and P=0.02, respectively). When stratified by race, there were no statistical differences in the PROs between the two surgeries for Hispanic nor African American patients. OBCS had a significantly lower rate of infection and fewer additional surgeries than mastectomy (P=0.004 and P<0.001, respectively). There were no differences in positive margin rate or recurrence rate between the groups. Conclusions: In our study, OBCS yielded better PROs than mastectomy while maintaining oncologic safety and resulting in fewer surgeries and complications. These excellent outcomes in a majority non-Caucasian cohort support the utilization of OBCS for underserved, minority populations. Larger studies evaluating PROs in diverse and uninsured groups are needed to reinforce these conclusions.

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma-a rare salivary gland-type tumor of the breast: are we dealing with primary or secondary?-a case report and literature review.

Background: Salivary gland-like tumors are extremely unusual in the breast, and their histology is very similar to primary salivary gland neoplasms. Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC), a common salivary gland tumor, displays an infrequent occurrence in the breast, accounting for a mere 0.2-0.3% incidence. Given its rarity, it is critical to accurately distinguish it from metastatic cases before diagnosing it as a primary breast MEC for appropriate treatment. Currently, there is no consensus on the treatment of MEC, and there is a paucity of literature highlighting the ideal treatment modality, especially for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cancers. Therefore, the aim of our case report was to underscore the diagnostic process, surgical and adjunctive treatments for our patient with ER-positive, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative MEC while also conducting a literature review to contribute to the limited existing data. Case Description: A 67-year-old African American woman presented with a lobulated 3.1-cm left breast mass on mammography, for which she underwent ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy that revealed invasive carcinoma with squamous differentiation. The carcinoma was ER-positive, PR-negative and HER2-negative. Subsequently, she underwent a lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy. Her final pathology revealed an intermediate-grade MEC with negative lymph nodes. She had a past medical history of benign salivary gland tumor, as well as a family history of BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1)-associated breast cancer in her daughter. Conclusions: MEC of the breast is a rare tumor with a relatively favorable overall prognosis. The early and precise diagnosis of this condition plays a pivotal role in formulating effective treatment strategies and ensuring positive survival rates. Nonetheless, future studies are recommended to further explore the role of surgical approaches and adjuvant therapy to improve treatment outcomes.

Does Nipple-Ward Positive Margin Contribute to a Higher Rate of Re-Excision Procedures After a Lumpectomy with Pathology-Confirmed Positive Margins? A Retrospective Study.

Background: Positive margins on lumpectomy specimens are associated with a twofold increased risk of local breast tumor recurrence. Prior literature has demonstrated various techniques and modalities for assessing margin status to reduce re-excision rates. However, there is paucity of literature analyzing which margin contributes to the highest re-excision rates. Therefore, the primary aim of the study was to investigate whether the nipple-ward margins resulted in a higher rate of re-excision in our patient population. Methods:  A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had re-excision surgery. Nipple-ward margin was identified by correlating radiological and pathological reports. A cut-off of more than 25% was used to demonstrate correlation between nipple-ward margin and re-excision rate. Results: A total of 98 patients' data were analyzed, with 41 (41.8%), 14 (14.3%), 5 (5.1%), and 38 (38.8%) diagnosed with DCIS, IDC, ILC, and mixed pathology on their margins, respectively. Overall, 48% (n=47) of the positive margins were nipple-ward, with 44.7% (n=21) reporting DCIS. Upon stratification, 45 (45.9%) cases were single-margin positive, with 26 (57.8%) being nipple-ward. Furthermore, the remaining 53 (54.1%) patients had multiple positive margins, with 21 (39.6.7%) nipple-ward cases. Conclusion: Positive nipple-ward margins significantly contribute to a higher re-excision rate p < 0.001; 48% of re-excision surgeries had positive nipple-ward margins, and 57.8% of positive single-margin cases were nipple-ward. Taking an additional shave during initial lumpectomy decreases re-excision rates. However, planning a lumpectomy procedure with a more elliptical rather than a spherical resection with additional cavity shave (ie, larger volume) in the nipple-ward direction and minimizing the remaining cavity shaves so the total volume resected remains unchanged. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to bolster our findings.

Can the Clinical Utility of iBreastExam, a Novel Device, Aid in Optimizing Breast Cancer Diagnosis? A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: A portable, cost-effective, easy-to-use, hand-held Intelligent Breast Exam (iBE), which is a wireless, radiation-free device, may be a valuable screening tool in resource-limited settings. While multiple studies evaluating the use of iBE have been conducted worldwide, there are no cumulative studies evaluating the iBE's performance. Therefore this review aims to determine the clinical utility and applicability of iBE compared with clinical breast examinations, ultrasound, and mammography and discuss its strengths and weaknesses when performing breast-cancer screening. METHODS: A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Four electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. RESULTS: The review included 11 studies with a total sample size of 16,052 breasts. The mean age ranged from 42 to 58 years. The sensitivity and specificity of the iBE ranged from 34.3% to 86% and 59% to 94%, respectively. For malignant lesions, iBE demonstrated a moderate to higher diagnostic capacity ranging from 57% to 93% and could identify tumor sizes spanning from 0.5 cm to 9 cm. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the potential clinical utility and applicability of iBE as a prescreening and triaging tool, which may aid in reducing the burden of patients undergoing diagnostic imaging in lower- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, iBE has shown to diagnose cancers as small as 0.5 cm, which can be a boon in early detection and reduce mortality rates. However, the encouraging results of this systematic review should be interpreted with caution because of the device's low sensitivity and high false-positive rates.

Case Report: Bilateral targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: a safe and effective alternative for synchronous bilateral breast cancer.

Background: The incidence of bilateral breast cancer (BBC) ranges from 1.4% to 11.8%. BBC irradiation is a challenge in current clinical practice due to the large target volume that must be irradiated while minimizing the dose to critical organs. Supine or prone breast techniques can be used, with the latter providing better organ sparing; both, however, result in lengthy treatment times. The use of Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) in breast cancer patients who choose breast conservation has been highlighted in previous studies, but there is a scarcity of literature analyzing the utility and applicability of IORT in BBC. This case series aims to highlight the applicability of administering bilateral IORT in patients with BBC. Case reports: Five patients with bilateral early-stage breast cancer (or DCIS) were treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by bilateral IORT. Of the 10 breast cancers, 8 were diagnosed as either DCIS or IDC, while the other 2 were diagnosed as invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive carcinoma, respectively. During surgery, all patients received bilateral IORT. Furthermore, 1 patient received external beam radiation therapy after her final pathology revealed grade 3 DCIS. The IORT procedure was well tolerated by all five patients, and all patients received aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy. Additionally, none of these patients showed evidence of disease after a 36-month median follow-up. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate the successful use of IORT for BCS in patients with BBC. Furthermore, none of the patients in our study experienced any complications, suggesting the feasibility of the use of IORT in BBC. Considering the benefits of improved patient compliance and a reduced number of multiple visits, IORT may serve as an excellent patient-centered alternative for BBC. Future studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability of IORT in patients with BBC.

Experience with intraoperative radiation therapy in an urban cancer center.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT) is a newer partial breast irradiation technique that has been well studied in 2 large randomized trials, the TARGIT-A and ELIOT trials. We initiated our IORT program in 2018 in the context of a registry trial, and aim to report our early results thus far. METHODS: We instituted an IORT practice using Intrabeam® low energy 50kVp x-rays for selected breast cancer cases in 2018. Patients were enrolled on our institutional registry protocol which allowed for IORT in ER + patients with grade 1-2 DCIS ≤ 2.5 cm or invasive disease ≤ 3.5 cm in patients of at least 45 years of age. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, 181 patients with clinical stage 0-IIA ER + breast cancer were evaluated. One hundred sixty-seven patients ultimately received IORT to 172 sites. The majority of patients received IORT at the time of initial diagnosis and surgery (160/167; 95.8%). Re-excision post IORT occurred in 16/167 patients (9.6%) due to positive margins. Adjuvant RT to the whole breast +/- LN was ultimately given to 23/167 (13.8%) patients mainly due to positive sentinel LN found on final pathology (12/23; 52%); other reasons were close margins for DCIS (3/23; 13%), tumor size (3/23; 4.3%), and multifactorial (5/23; 17.4%). Five patients (3%) had post-operative complications of wound dehiscence. There were 3 local recurrences (1.6%) at a median follow-up of 27.9 months (range: 0.7- 54.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: IORT has been proven to be a safe and patient-centered form of local adjuvant RT for our population, in whom compliance with a longer course of external beam radiation can be an issue. Long term efficacy remains to be evaluated through continued follow up. In the era of COVID-19 and beyond, IORT has been an increasingly attractive option, as it greatly minimizes toxicities and patient visits to the clinic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: All patients were prospectively enrolled on an institutional review board-approved registry trial (IRB number: 2018-9409).

Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach for the Primary Prevention of Lymphedema: A 4-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains the leading cause of lymphedema nationally, and there is still no cure for the disease. The lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA) is a promising option for lymphedema prophylaxis in patients undergoing ALND, but long-term outcomes of the LYMPHA are not well established. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing ALND at their center from November of 2012 to November of 2016 and assembled two cohorts, those who received the LYMPHA and those who did not (non-LYMPHA). Patient data were collected to evaluate lymphedema risk and long-term lymphedema incidence of each group. RESULTS: Forty-five women were included in both our LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA cohorts. Mean body mass index (27.7 kg/m2 versus 29.9 kg/m2; P = 0.15) and radiation therapy rates (60.0% versus 68.9%; P = 0.51) did not differ between groups. Non-LYMPHA patients underwent complete mastectomy more frequently than LYMPHA patients (97.8% versus 77.8%; P = 0.007), but had a similar number of nodes removed during ALND (14.4 versus 15.8; P = 0.32). Median follow-up time was greater than 4 years for both LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA groups (57.0 months versus 63.0 months; P = 0.07). Overall, lymphedema incidence was 31.1% in the LYMPHA group and 33.3% in the non-LYMPHA group (P > 0.99). No significant differences in lymphedema incidences were observed between the LYMPHA and non-LYMPHA groups for patients with obesity, patients who received radiation therapy, or patients with obesity who also received radiation therapy (P > 0.05 for all subgroups). CONCLUSIONS: The LYMPHA may not prevent lymphedema long-term in patients who undergo ALND. More long-term studies are needed to determine the true potential of the procedure. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

The prevention and treatment of breast cancer- related lymphedema: A review.

Background: Breast cancer- related lymphedema (BCRL) affects about 3 to 5 million patients worldwide, with about 20,000 per year in the United States. As breast cancer mortality is declining due to improved diagnostics and treatments, the long-term effects of treatment for BCRL need to be addressed. Methods: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Lymphatic Surgery Working Group conducted a large review of the literature in order to develop guidelines on BCRL prevention and treatment. This was a comprehensive but not systematic review of the literature. This was inclusive of recent randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and reviews evaluating the prevention and treatment of BCRL. There were 25 randomized clinical trials, 13 systemic reviews and meta-analyses, and 87 observational studies included. Results: The findings of our review are detailed in the paper, with each guideline being analyzed with the most recent data that the group found evidence of to suggest these recommendations. Conclusions: Prevention and treatment of BCRL involve a multidisciplinary team. Early detection, before clinically apparent, is crucial to prevent irreversible lymphedema. Awareness of risk factors and appropriate practice adjustments to reduce the risk aids are crucial to decrease the progression of lymphedema. The treatment can be costly, time- consuming, and not always effective, and therefore, the overall goal should be prevention.

Insulin resistance and racial disparities in breast cancer prognosis: a multi-center cohort study.

The survival for breast cancer (BC) is improving but remains lower in Black women than White women. A number of factors potentially drive the racial differences in BC outcomes. The aim of our study was to determine if insulin resistance (defined as homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR)), mediated part of the relationship between race and BC prognosis (defined by the improved Nottingham prognostic index (iNPI)). We performed a cross-sectional study, recruiting self-identified Black and White women with newly diagnosed primary invasive BC from 10 US hospitals between March 2013 and February 2020. Survey, anthropometric, laboratory, and tumor pathology data were gathered, and we compared the results between Black and White women. We calculated HOMA-IR as well as iNPI scores and examined the associations between HOMA-IR and iNPI. After exclusions, the final cohort was 1206: 911 (76%) White and 295 (24%) Black women. Metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance were more common in Black than White women. Black women had less lobular BC, three times more triple-negative BC, and BCs with higher stage and iNPI scores than White women (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Fewer Black women had BC genetic testing performed. HOMA-IR mediated part of the association between race and iNPI, particularly in BCs that carried a good prognosis and were hormone receptor (HR)-positive. Higher HOMA-IR scores were associated with progesterone receptor-negative BC in White women but not Black women. Overall, our results suggest that HOMA-IR contributes to the racial disparities in BC outcomes, particularly for women with HR-positive BCs.

Case Report: Can Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer and Pacemakers be the New Standard of Care?

Background: Partial breast irradiation with Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) has become a popular management option as opposed to whole breast radiation using external beam radiotherapy for breast cancer patients. While previous studies have highlighted the use of IORT in breast cancer patients, there is a scarcity of literature on the use of IORT in those who also have ipsilateral pacemakers. Thus, the aim of our case report is to highlight the applicability of IORT in breast cancer patients who also have a pacemaker. Case Reports: Two female patients with an implanted dual-chamber pacemaker presented with a diagnosis of left-sided invasive ductal carcinoma on mammogram. Mammography of the left breast revealed a 10 mm and 7 mm spiculated mass, respectively, further confirmed with an ultrasound-guided core biopsy that was conclusive of clinical Stage I T1 N0 grade 2, ER +, PR + Her2 - invasive ductal carcinoma. They met our eligibility criteria for IORT, which is being performed as a registry trial. These patients underwent a wide excision lumpectomy along with IORT. Conclusion: Our findings underscore the successful use of targeted IORT for breast-conserving surgery in a patient with invasive ductal carcinoma and pacemaker, hence eliminating the necessity for relocating pacemaker surgeries in these patients. Furthermore, no device failure or malfunction for the pacemaker was recorded before, during, or after the surgery, demonstrating the safety of using IORT in patients with preinstalled pacemaker despite a lack of evidence on safe radiation dosage or manufacturer guidelines. Nonetheless, the effects of IORT on pacemaker < 10 cm were not studied in our patients and further clinical studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability and safe distance of IORT in breast cancer patients with pacemaker.

Risk-Stratified Intraoperative Radiation Therapy as a Definitive Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Modality for Women With Early Breast Cancer.

Radiation therapy is an integral component of adjuvant therapy in women who undergo breast conservative surgery, decreasing the likelihood of tumor recurrence and extending survival. The likelihood of tumor recurrence is highest within a proximity of the lumpectomy cavity, which prompted the idea of partial breast irradiation in place of the usual standard-of-care treatment with external beam whole breast radiation therapy. Targeted intraoperative radiation therapy (TARGIT-A) is a multicenter trial initially developed in 1999 and designed as a randomized clinical trial comparing whole breast radiation therapy to risk-adapted intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). TARGIT-A recruited its first patient in March 2000, with the study concluding in 2012. At a median follow-up of 8.6 years, the prepathology TARGIT-A trial noted results to be noninferior to external beam radiation therapy, with no statistically significant difference in ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, mastectomy-free survival, distant disease-free survival, or breast cancer-specific mortality. These results are consistent with the majority of retrospective and prospective trials. Risk-adapted IORT, as performed in the prospective randomized TARGIT-A trial, gives level 1 evidence that this approach is a standard option in the treatment of breast cancer.

Cryoablation Without Excision for Low-Risk Early-Stage Breast Cancer: 3-Year Interim Analysis of Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence in the ICE3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: The ICE3 trial is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of breast cryoablation, enabling women older than 60 years with low-risk early-stage breast cancers to benefit from a nonsurgical treatment and to avoid the associated surgical risks. METHODS: The ICE3 trial is a prospective, multi-center, single-arm, non-randomized trial including women age 60 years or older with unifocal, ultrasound-visible invasive ductal carcinoma size 1.5 cm or smaller and classified as low to intermediate grade, hormone receptor (HR)-positive, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) at 5 years was the primary outcome. A 3-year interim analysis of IBTR was performed, and the IBTR probability was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Full eligibility for the study was met by 194 patients, who received successful cryoablation per protocol. The mean age was 75 years (range, 55-94 years). The mean tumor length was 8.1 mm (range, 8-14.9 mm), and the mean tumor width was 7.4 mm (range, 2.8-14 mm). During a mean follow-up period of 34.83 months, the IBTR rate was 2.06% (4/194 patients). Device-related adverse events were reported as mild in 18.4% and moderate in 2.4% of the patients. No severe device-related adverse events were reported. More than 95% of the patients and 98% of the physicians reported satisfaction with the cosmetic results at the clinical follow-up evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cryoablation presents a promising alternative to surgery while offering the benefits of a minimally invasive procedure with minimal risks. Further study within a clinical trial or registry is needed to confirm cryoablation as a viable alternative to surgical excision for appropriately selected low-risk patients.

American Society of Breast Surgeons' Practice Patterns for Patients at Risk and Affected by Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) published expert panel recommendations for patients at risk for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and those affected by BCRL. This study sought to determine BCRL practice patterns. METHODS: A survey was sent to 2975 ASBrS members. Questions evaluated members' clinical practice type, practice duration, and familiarity with BCRL recommendations. Descriptive statistics, the chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test were used. RESULTS: Of the ASBrS members surveyed, 390 (13.1%) responded. Most of the breast surgeons (58.5%, 228/390) indicated unfamiliarity with recommendations. Nearly all respondents (98.7%, 385/390) educate at-risk patients. Most (60.2%, 234/389) instruct patients to avoid venipuncture, injection or blood pressure measurements in the at-risk arm, and 35.6% (138/388) recommend prophylactic compression sleeve use during air travel. Nearly all (97.7%, 380/389) encourage those at-risk to exercise, including resistance exercise (86.2%, 331/384). Most do not perform axillary reverse mapping (ARM) (67.9%, 264/389) or a lymphatic preventive healing approach (LYMPHA) (84.9%, 331/390). Most (76.1%, 296/389) screen at-risk patients for BCRL. The most frequently used screening tools include self-reported symptoms (81%, 255/315), circumferential tape measure (54%, 170/315) and bioimpedance spectroscopy (27.3%, 86/315). After a BCRL diagnosis, most (90%, 351/390) refer management to a lymphedema-certified physical therapist. For affected patients, nearly all encourage exercise (98.7%, 384/389). Many (49%, 191/390) refer affected patients for consideration of lymphovenous bypass or lymph node transfer. CONCLUSION: Most respondents were unfamiliar with the ASBrS expert panel recommendations for patients at risk for BCRL and those affected by BCRL. Opportunities exist to increase awareness of best practices and to acquire ARM and LYMPHA technical expertise.

Breast cancer survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic within an urban New York Hospital System.

PURPOSE: To examine clinicodemographic determinants associated with breast cancer survivorship follow-up during COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, population-based cohort study including early stage (Stage I-II) breast cancer patients who underwent resection between 2006 and 2018 in a New York City hospital system. The primary outcome was oncologic follow-up prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary analyses compared differences in follow-up by COVID-19 case rates stratified by ZIP code. RESULTS: A total of 2942 patients with early-stage breast cancer were available for analysis. 1588 (54%) of patients had attended follow-up in the year prior to the COVID-19 period but failed to continue to follow-up during the pandemic, either in-person or via telemedicine. 1242 (42%) patients attended a follow-up appointment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with patients who did not present for follow-up during COVID-19, patients who continued their oncologic follow-up during the pandemic were younger (p = 0.049) more likely to have received adjuvant radiation therapy (p = 0.025), and have lower household income (p = 0.031) on multivariate modeling. When patients who live in Bronx, New York, were stratified by ZIP code, there was a modest negative association (r = -0.56) between COVID-19 cases and proportion of patients who continued to follow-up during the COVID-19 period. CONCLUSION: We observed a dramatic disruption in routine breast cancer follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providers and health systems should emphasize reintegrating patients who missed appointments during COVID-19 back into regular surveillance programs to avoid significant morbidity and mortality from missed breast cancer recurrences.

Association of Insulin Resistance and Higher Oncotype DX™ Recurrence Score.

BACKGROUND: Black women with breast cancer have a worse overall survival compared with White women; however, no difference in Oncotype DX™ (ODX) recurrence scores has been observed to explain this health disparity. Black women are also disproportionately affected by insulin resistance. We evaluated whether insulin resistance is associated with a higher ODX recurrence score and whether there is a difference between White and Black women to explain disparate clinical outcomes. METHODS: A subgroup analysis of patients in a multi-institutional cross-sectional study evaluating differences in insulin resistance between White and Black women was performed. Women diagnosed with a new hormone receptor-positive, HER2/neu-negative breast cancer with an ODX recurrence score were identified. Fasting blood glucose and insulin measurements were used to calculate the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) score, a method for assessing insulin resistance, and compared against ODX scores. RESULTS: Overall, 412 women (358 White women, 54 Black women) were identified. Compared with White women, Black women had a higher body mass index (30 vs. 26 kg/m2, p < 0.0001), higher HOMA-IR score (2.4 vs. 1.4, p = 0.004), and more high-grade tumors (30% vs. 16%, p = 0.01). There was a direct positive association with an increasing ODX score and HOMA-IR (p = 0.014). On subset analysis, this relationship was seen in White women (p = 0.005), but not in Black women (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: In women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, increasing insulin resistance is associated with a higher recurrence score; however, this association was not present in Black women. This lack of association may be due to the small number of Black women in the cohort, or possibly a reflection of a different biological disease process of the patient's tumor.

Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

Tremendous progress has been made over the past several decades in the treatment of breast cancer. Mortality and recurrence rates continue to decline. Our ability to tailor patient- and tumor-specific treatments has rapidly advanced. The vast majority of our patients can safely have breast conservation. Unfortunately, for many patients, survivorship is burdened by ongoing quality-of-life issues. Most breast cancer patients are asymptomatic at presentation, and the onus is on us to preserve this. Surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy can result in long-term toxicities that can be amplified with multimodality approaches. We must strive to apply minimally effective therapies rather than a maximally tolerated approach. Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a particularly dreaded chronic complication. This review strives to give the reader a better understanding of BCRL and shed light on wisely choosing an integration of treatment modalities that minimizes BCRL risk. Key literature on emerging concepts is highlighted.

The Incidence of Adjacent Synchronous Invasive Carcinoma and/or Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Patients with Intraductal Papilloma without Atypia on Core Biopsy: Results from a Prospective Multi-Institutional Registry (TBCRC 034).

BACKGROUND: Available retrospective data suggest the upgrade rate for intraductal papilloma (IP) without atypia on core biopsy (CB) ranges from 0 to 12%, leading to variation in recommendations. We conducted a prospective multi-institutional trial (TBCRC 034) to determine the upgrade rate to invasive cancer (IC) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at excision for asymptomatic IP without atypia on CB. METHODS: Prospectively identified patients with a CB diagnosis of IP who had consented to excision were included. Discordant cases, including BI-RADS > 4, and those with additional lesions requiring excision were excluded. The primary endpoint was upgrade to IC or DCIS by local pathology review with a predefined rule that an upgrade rate of ≤ 3% would not warrant routine excision. Sample size and confidence intervals were based on exact binomial calculations. Secondary endpoints included diagnostic concordance for IP between local and central pathology review and upgrade rates by central pathology review. RESULTS: The trial included116 patients (median age 56 years, range 24-82) and the most common imaging abnormality was a mass (n = 91, 78%). Per local review, 2 (1.7%) cases were upgraded to DCIS. In both of these cases central pathology review did not confirm DCIS on excision. Additionally, central pathology review confirmed IP without atypia in core biopsies of 85/116 cases (73%), and both locally upgraded cases were among them. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study of 116 IPs without atypia on CB, the upgrade rate was 1.7% by local review, suggesting that routine excision is not indicated for IP without atypia on CB with concordant imaging findings.

What matters most: Randomized controlled trial of breast cancer surgery conversation aids across socioeconomic strata.

BACKGROUND: Women of lower socioeconomic status (SES) with early-stage breast cancer are more likely to report poorer physician-patient communication, lower satisfaction with surgery, lower involvement in decision making, and higher decision regret compared to women of higher SES. The objective of this study was to understand how to support women across socioeconomic strata in making breast cancer surgery choices. METHODS: We conducted a 3-arm (Option Grid, Picture Option Grid, and usual care), multisite, randomized controlled superiority trial with surgeon-level randomization. The Option Grid (text only) and Picture Option Grid (pictures plus text) conversation aids were evidence-based summaries of available breast cancer surgery options on paper. Decision quality (primary outcome), treatment choice, treatment intention, shared decision making (SDM), anxiety, quality of life, decision regret, and coordination of care were measured from T0 (pre-consultation) to T5 (1-year after surgery. RESULTS: Sixteen surgeons saw 571 of 622 consented patients. Patients in the Picture Option Grid arm (n = 248) had higher knowledge (immediately after the visit [T2] and 1 week after surgery or within 2 weeks of the first postoperative visit [T3]), an improved decision process (T2 and T3), lower decision regret (T3), and more SDM (observed and self-reported) compared to usual care (n = 257). Patients in the Option Grid arm (n = 66) had higher decision process scores (T2 and T3), better coordination of care (12 weeks after surgery or within 2 weeks of the second postoperative visit [T4]), and more observed SDM (during the surgical visit [T1]) compared to usual care arm. Subgroup analyses suggested that the Picture Option Grid had more impact among women of lower SES and health literacy. Neither intervention affected concordance, treatment choice, or anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Paper-based conversation aids improved key outcomes over usual care. The Picture Option Grid had more impact among disadvantaged patients. LAY SUMMARY: The objective of this study was to understand how to help women with lower incomes or less formal education to make breast cancer surgery choices. Compared with usual care, a conversation aid with pictures and text led to higher knowledge. It improved the decision process and shared decision making (SDM) and lowered decision regret. A text-only conversation aid led to an improved decision process, more coordinated care, and higher SDM compared to usual care. The conversation aid with pictures was more helpful for women with lower income or less formal education. Conversation aids with pictures and text helped women make better breast cancer surgery choices.

Clinical Factors Affecting the Therapeutic Efficacy of Evening Primrose Oil on Mastalgia.

BACKGROUND: Saturated fatty acid esters may cause mastalgia via hypersensitivity of breast epithelium to circulating hormones. Evening primrose oil (EPO) may restore the saturated/unsaturated fatty acid balance and decrease sensitivity to steroidal hormones or prolactin. Conflicting results exist regarding EPO treatment for mastalgia. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of EPO and factors affecting its efficacy in treatment of mastalgia. METHODS: The study included 1015 patients, ages 14-82 (mean age 42.21 ± 10.8), admitted to Acibadem Breast Clinic between January 2015 and March 2018. The patients were divided into group I (n = 581) treated with EPO (1300 mg, twice a day) and group II (n = 434) treated with paracetamol (500 mg, twice a day). The visual analog scale was used to assess EPO's therapeutic efficacy, compared with paracetamol, measured at admittance, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks. Clinical factors affecting the efficacy of EPO were analyzed. RESULTS: The therapeutic efficacy of EPO on mastalgia was significantly higher than with paracetamol (p < 0.001). Factors significantly affecting the efficacy of EPO treatment were hormone replacement therapy (HRT), IUD-with-levonorgestrel, iron deficiency, overt hypothyroidism, and Hashimoto thyroiditis (p < 0.01). Replacement of iron or thyroid hormone efficiently treated mastalgia in patients that did not respond to EPO treatment. Side effects (allergy, anxiety, blurred vision, constipation, and nausea) were rare and not statistically significant (p = 0.88). CONCLUSION: EPO can be used in the treatment of mastalgia without significant side effects. HRT, IUD-with-levonorgestrel, iron deficiency, overt hypothyroidism, and Hashimoto thyroiditis significantly affect the efficacy of EPO on mastalgia.

A Single institution's randomized double-armed prospective study of lumpectomy margins with adjunctive use of the MarginProbe in nonpalpable breast cancers.

Breast conservation surgery (BCS) aims to excise all cancerous tissue while minimizing the amount of healthy breast tissue removed. Up to 30% of patients undergoing BCS require a second operation for re-excision to obtain negative margins. Previous studies reported a lower re-excision rate with intraoperative use of the MarginProbe device (Dune Medical Devices). This device utilizes radiofrequency spectroscopy to detect differences between cancerous and normal tissue. From July 2009 to January 2010, our institution enrolled 46 patients electing for BCS in a prospective double-arm randomized controlled trial and had a significantly lower re-excision rate than that reported in the multicenter trial. Intraoperatively, after performing conventional lumpectomy with excision of any additional shavings deemed necessary based on palpation and visual inspection alone, patients were then randomized. In the device arm, the surgeon used the MarginProbe to interrogate the lumpectomy specimen, taking additional shavings from the cavity surfaces corresponding to the parts of the specimen read as positive by the device. In the control arm, only standard intraoperative assessments were performed. All specimens were evaluated by pathologists who were blinded to the study arm. In this population, 72% had invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), 20% had ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and 8% had invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). Average age was 64 years old. The average size of the specimen was 5.6 cm, the average volume was 37.8 cm3 , and the average weight was 32.7 g. The mean size of DCIS was 1.4 cm. For invasive specimens, 32 were T1 and 7 were T2. Prior to randomization, 43 patients were thought to have positive or close margins and therefore underwent additional shavings. Twenty-three patients were randomized to the device arm and 23 to the control arm. In the device arm, 14 (60%) patients had IDC, 7 (30%) had DCIS, and 2 (8%) had ILC, vs the control arm where 19 (82%) patients had IDC, 2 (8%) had DCIS, and 2 (8%) had ILC. Eight (35%) patients in the control group vs 1 (4%) in the device group underwent re-excision for margin involvement (P < .05). The use of the MarginProbe device at our institution significantly improved the ability of our surgeons to obtain clear margins during initial BCS. Our results show a lower re-excision rate (4%) than those published in the multicenter trial (19.8%). We postulate that in the face of more patients having DCIS in our device group (30%), our surgeons responded by taking thicker shavings when the MarginProbe device reported margin involvement during the initial lumpectomy, resulting in greater success achieving clear final margins on the shaved tissue and a significantly lower re-excision rate than previously reported with the MarginProbe device.