Margin assessment by cavity shaving after breast-conserving surgery: Analysis and follow-up of 543 patients

European Journal of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 464-469

  Malik, H Z ^a   George, W D ^a   Mallon, E A ^a   Harnett, A N ^b   Macmillan, R D ^c   Purushotham, A D ^d  

^a WESTERN INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^b BEATSON WEST OF SCOTLAND CANCER CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^c NOTTINGHAM CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d ADDENBROOKE S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast conserving surgery; Follow up; Tumour bed positivity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MASTECTOMY; MICROSCOPY; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS;

EID: 0032844191     PISSN: 07487983     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/ejso.1999.0680     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Salvadori B. Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: long-term results of a randomized trial. Eur J Cancer. 26:1990;668-670.
2. Fisher B, Redmond C. Lumpectomy for breast cancer: an update of the NSABP experience. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project. J Natl Cancer Inst. 11:1992;7-13.
3. Sarrazin D, Le MG, Arriagada R,. Ten-year results of a randomized trial comparing a conservative treatment to mastectomy in early breast cancer. Radiother Oncol. 14:1989;177-184.
4. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH. Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 332:1995;907-911.
5. van Dongen JA, Bartelink H, Fentiman IS. Randomized clinical trial to assess the value of breast-conserving therapy in stage I and II breast cancer, EORTC 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 11:1992;15-18.
6. Blichert-Toft M, Rose C, Andersen JA. Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 11:1992;19-25.
7. Veronesi U, Marubini E, Del Vecchio M. Local recurrence and distant metastases after conservation breast cancer treatments: partly independent events. J Natl Cancer Inst. 87:1995;19-25.
8. Fisher B, Anderson S, Fisher ER. Significance of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence after lumpectomy. Lancet. 338:1991;327-331.
9. Frazier TG, Wong RWY, Rose D. Implications of accurate pathologic margins in the treatment of primary breast cancer. Arch Surg. 124:1989;37-38.
10. Bloom HJ, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer. A study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer. 11:1957;359-377.
11. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. J Roy Stat Soc B. 34:1972;187-220.
12. Holland R, Veling SHJ, Mravunac M, Hendriks JHCL. Histological multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer. 56:1985;979-990.
13. Macmillan RD, Purushotham AD, George WD. Local recurrence following breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Br J Surg. 83:1996;149-155.
14. Veronesi U, Luini A, Del Vecchio M. Radiotherapy after breast-preserving surgery in women with localized cancer of the breast. N Engl J Med. 328:1993;1587-1591.
15. Macmillan RD, Purushotham AD, Mallon E, Ramsey G, George WD. Breast conserving surgery and tumour bed positivity in patients with breast cancer. Br J Surg. 81:1994;56-58.
16. Macmillan RD, Purushotham AD, Mallon E, Love JG, George WD. Tumour bed positivity predicts outcome after breast-conserving surgery. Br J Surg. 84:1997;1559-1562.