RESUMO
Objectives: Pathological complete response (pCR) occurs in about 20-30% of patients undergoing systemic neoadjuvant therapy. This leads to the idea of sparing the patient the morbidity associated with axillary surgery. "Wait and watch" policy for cancers which achieve complete pathological response on neoadjuvant systemic therapy is a well-established practice in various cancers like the esophagus, rectum and larynx. This has led to organ preservation protocols being practiced worldwide for these cancers without affecting the overall survival of the patient. We believe patients undergoing a complete pathological response in the breast may be spared axillary surgery. Axillary surgery leads to morbidity and extra financial burden with no added advantage in survival. Material and Methods: A total of 326 patients with breast cancer who had received neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy from 2015 to 2020 were included in our retrospective study. Final histopathology of the breast and axillary surgery was noted to report the frequency of complete pathological response. The frequency of positive nodal disease with respect to stage, grade and type of cancer was measured. Results: Among 326 patients, our study showed that 53% of patients with complete pathological response in breast also had complete response in the axilla compared to 43% with incomplete pathological response. No significant difference was found for age, menopausal status, initial tumor size when patients with complete pathological response were compared to non or partial responders. The rate of complete pathological response was higher in patients with clinically node negative patients after NACT, hormone negative, HER2 positive and triple negative population. Conclusion: Our results indicated that 53% of the patients who developed complete pathological response in the breast underwent needless axillary procedure. Axillary surgery can be staged after the breast surgery if residual tumor is present on the histopathological specimen. In case of pCR, omission of axillary surgery can be considered. However, a larger population, multi-centric studies are needed for treatment guidelines.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Breast Conserving Surgery (BCS) with whole breast radiation is now standard of care as a safer alternative to Mastectomy in terms of loco-regional recurrence and long-term survival. Despite this, a frequent pitfall of conventional BCS is positive surgical margins and need for second surgery with a reported frequency of 12-59 % in literature. Oncoplastic Surgery can be a safer, more cost effective alternate to conventional BCS owing to its higher rate of negative surgical margins (4-6% vs 12-59 %) and better cosmetic results. We aim to prove utility of Oncoplastic surgery for Low-Middle income countries. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine Oncoplastic Surgery as a more appropriate alternative to Conventional Breast Conserving Surgery for Low-Middle Income countries in terms of its lower positive margins and re-excision rates. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective comparative single center study by reviewing patient's medical records from August 2016 to June 2020 was conducted. Rate of positive margins and re-excisions along with mean volume of resection specimen, mean tumor size and quadrant dealt by both surgical procedures were compared. RESULTS: Out of 421 patients 249 patients underwent oncoplastic surgery and were compared with 173 patients who had conventional breast conserving surgery. Positive margins were seen in 5 patients (2 %) in OPS group whereas in 31 (17.9 %) patients in BCS group (p value < 0.001). Therefore, 2 from OPS group and 17 from BCS group underwent re-excision (p value < 0.002).None in OPS group while 7 out of 17 patients in BCS group underwent mastectomy as second procedure. Mean tumor size in OPS group was 2.26 cm ± SD 1.66 and in BCS group was 1.94 cm ± SD 1.28. Majority of Lobular carcinoma and Ductal carcinoma in-situ, multifocal, upper inner and central quadrant tumors and those unresponsive to neo-adjuvant therapy were treated by Oncoplastic techniques. CONCLUSION: Oncoplastic surgery has shown promising results as a safer tool to deal with large, complex tumors, lesions in difficult anatomical locations, multifocal or progressing on neo-adjuvant therapy. With its low Re-excision rates, it is a better alternative to traditional Breast Conserving approach for overburdened and resource limited health care system of Low-Middle Income countries. Multi-center, prospective trials are needed to determine its feasibility.
