A population-based audit of surgical practice and outcomes of oncoplastic breast conservations in Scotland - An analysis of 589 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence for oncoplastic breast conservation (OBC) is based on single institutional series. Therefore, we carried out a population-based audit of OBC practice and outcomes in Scotland. METHODS: A predefined database of patients treated with OBC was completed retrospectively in all breast units practicing OBC in Scotland. RESULTS: 589 patients were included from 11 units. Patients were diagnosed between September 2005 and March 2017. High volume units performed a mean of 19.3 OBCs per year vs. low volume units who did 11.1 (p = 0.012). 23 different surgical techniques were used. High volume units offered a wider range of techniques (8-14) than low volume units (3-6) (p = 0.004). OBC was carried out as a joint operation involving a breast and a plastic surgeon in 389 patients. Immediate contralateral symmetrisation rate was significantly higher when OBC was performed as a joint operation (70.7% vs. not joint operations: 29.8%; p < 0.001). The incomplete excision rate was 10.4% and was significantly higher after surgery for invasive lobular carcinoma (18.9%; p = 0.0292), but was significantly lower after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (3%; p = 0.031). 9.2% of patients developed major complications requiring hospital admission. Overall the complication rate was significantly lower after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.035). The 5 year local recurrence rate was 2.7%, which was higher after OBC for DCIS (8.3%) than invasive ductal cancer (1.6%; p = 0.026). 5-year disease-free survival was 91.7%, overall survival was 93.8%, and cancer-specific survival was 96.1%. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that measured outcomes of OBC in a population-based multi-centre setting can be comparable to the outcomes of large volume single centre series.

The combined endocrine receptor in breast cancer, a novel approach to traditional hormone receptor interpretation and a better discriminator of outcome than ER and PR alone.

BACKGROUND: The functional role of progesterone receptor (PR) signalling was previously unclear and PR testing in breast cancer is controversial. Recent defining work has highlighted the functional crosstalk that exists between the oestrogen receptor (ER) and PR. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the prognostic value of the combined ER and PR score with either ER or PR alone. METHODS: Tumour Allred ER and PR scores were reclassified as negative, low and high. The combined endocrine receptor (CER) was calculated as the average of the reclassified ER and PR scores, resulting in three groups: CER negative, impaired and high. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate disease-free survival (DFS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). RESULTS: The CER was a more powerful predictor of 5-year DFS and BCSS than either ER or PR alone. In multivariate analysis that included ER, PR and CER, only CER remained an independent prognostic variable for 5-year DFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.393; CI: 0.283-0.548, P=0.00001) and BCSS (HR 0.553; CI: 0.423-0.722; P=2.506 × 10-8). In ER-positive (ER+) patients impaired CER was an independent marker of poor outcome for 5-year DFS (HR 2.469; CI: 1.049-5.810; P=0.038) and BCSS (HR 1.946; CI: 1.054-3.596; P=0.033) in multivariate analysis that included grade, lymph node, tumour size, HER2 status and PR status. The results were validated in a separate cohort of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Combined endocrine receptor is a more powerful discriminator of patient outcome than either ER or PR alone. Economical and simple, it can identify risk in ER+ early breast cancer and potentially be used for adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy decision-making.

Bacterial hand contamination and transfer after use of contaminated bulk-soap-refillable dispensers.

Bulk-soap-refillable dispensers are prone to extrinsic bacterial contamination, and recent studies demonstrated that approximately one in four dispensers in public restrooms are contaminated. The purpose of this study was to quantify bacterial hand contamination and transfer after use of contaminated soap under controlled laboratory and in-use conditions in a community setting. Under laboratory conditions using liquid soap experimentally contaminated with 7.51 log(10) CFU/ml of Serratia marcescens, an average of 5.28 log(10) CFU remained on each hand after washing, and 2.23 log(10) CFU was transferred to an agar surface. In an elementary-school-based field study, Gram-negative bacteria on the hands of students and staff increased by 1.42 log(10) CFU per hand (26-fold) after washing with soap from contaminated bulk-soap-refillable dispensers. In contrast, washing with soap from dispensers with sealed refills significantly reduced bacteria on hands by 0.30 log(10) CFU per hand (2-fold). Additionally, the mean number of Gram-negative bacteria transferred to surfaces after washing with soap from dispensers with sealed-soap refills (0.06 log(10) CFU) was significantly lower than the mean number after washing with contaminated bulk-soap-refillable dispensers (0.74 log(10) CFU; P < 0.01). Finally, significantly higher levels of Gram-negative bacteria were recovered from students (2.82 log(10) CFU per hand) than were recovered from staff (2.22 log(10) CFU per hand) after washing with contaminated bulk soap (P < 0.01). These results demonstrate that washing with contaminated soap from bulk-soap-refillable dispensers can increase the number of opportunistic pathogens on the hands and may play a role in the transmission of bacteria in public settings.