Association of clinical and pathologic variables with lumpectomy surgical margin status after preoperative diagnosis or excisional biopsy of invasive breast cancer

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 1040-1044

  Smitt, Melanie C ^a   Horst, Kate ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast biopsy; Breast cancer; Lumpectomy surgical margin

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOPSY; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LUNG CARCINOMA; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROBABILITY; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEGMENTAL MASTECTOMY;

ADULT; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROBABILITY; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 34250173863     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-006-9308-1     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Crowe JP, Rim A, Patrick R, et al. A prospective review of the decline of excisional biopsy. Am J Surg 2002; 184:353-5. (Pubitemid 35287359)
2. Jackman RJ, Marzoni FA. Stereotactic histologic biopsy with patients prone: technical feasibility in 98% of mammographically detected lesions. AJR 2003; 180:785-94. (Pubitemid 36237229)
3. Caines JS, Schaller GH, Iles SE, et al. Ten years of breast screening in the Nova Scotia breast screening program, 1991-2001. JACR 2005; 56:82-93.
4. Fahrbach K, Sledge I, Cella C, Linz H, Ross SD. A comparison of the accuracy of two minimally invasive breast biopsy methods: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2006; 274:63-73.
5. Verkooijen HM. Core biopsy after radiologic localization (COBRA) study group Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: results of a multicenter prospective study with 95% surgical confirmation Int J Cancer 2002; 99:853-99.
6. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez-Soto J, Marzoni FA, Finkelstein SI, Shepard MJ. Stereotactic, automated large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: false-negative and histologic underestimation rates after long-term follow up. Radiology 1999; 210:799-805. (Pubitemid 29124044)
7. Yim JH, Barton P, Weber B, et al. Mammographically detected breast cancer. Benefits of stereotactic core versus wire localization biopsy. Ann Surg 1996; 223:688-700. (Pubitemid 26185213)
8. White RR, Halperin TJ, Olson JA, Soo MS, Bentley RC, Seigler HF. Impact of core-needle breast biopsy on the surgical management of mammographic abnormalities. Ann Surg 2001; 233:769-77. (Pubitemid 32494557)
9. Smitt MC, Nowels K, Zdeblick M, et al. The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long term results of breast conservation. Cancer 1995; 77:259-67.
10. Verkooijen HM, Rinkes IH, Peeters PH, et al. Impact of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy on diagnosis and surgical treatment of non-palpable breast cancer. EJSO 2001; 27:244-49. (Pubitemid 32621747)
11. Morrow M, Venta L, Stinson T, Bennett C. Prospective comparison of stereotactic core biopsy and surgical excision as diagnostic procedures for breast cancer patients. Ann Surg 2001; 233:537-41. (Pubitemid 32234952)
12. Fahy BN, Bold RJ, Schneider PD, Khatri V, Goodnight JE. Cost-benefit analysis of biopsy methods for suspicious mammographic lesions. Arch Surg 2001; 136:990-5. (Pubitemid 32982986)
13. Hemmer PH, Klaase JM, Mastboom WJ, Gerritsen JJ, Mulder HJ, Volker ED. The continued utility of needle localized biopsy for non-palpable breast lesions. EJSO 2004; 30:10-4. (Pubitemid 38180985)
14. Groenewoud JH, Pijnappel RM, van den Akker-van Marle ME, et al. Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic large core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast lesions compared to open breast biopsy. Br J Cancer 2004; 90:383-92. (Pubitemid 38250633)
15. Chen AM, Haffty BG, Lee CH. Local recurrence of breast cancer after breast conservation therapy in patients examined by means of stereotactic core-needle biopsy. Radiology 2002; 225:707-12. (Pubitemid 35387105)
16. Cangiarella J, Gross J, Symmans WF, et al. The incidence of positive margins with breast conserving therapy following mammotome biopsy for microcalcification. J Surg Oncol 2000; 74:263-6. (Pubitemid 30660815)
17. Dillon MF, Hill AD, Quinn CM, McDermott EW, O'Higgins N. A pathologic assessment of adequate margin status in breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13:333-9. (Pubitemid 43255916)
18. Fleming FJ, Hill AD, McDermott EW, O'Doherty A, O'Higgins N, Quinn CM. Intraoperative margin assessment and re-excision rate in breast-conserving surgery. EJSO 2004; 30:233-7. (Pubitemid 38425637)
19. Dillon MF, Hill AD, Fleming FJ, et al. Identifying patients at risk of compromised margins following breast conservation for lobular carcinoma. Am J Surg 2006; 191:201-5. (Pubitemid 43151267)
20. Moore MM, Borossa G, Imbrie JZ, et al. Association of infiltrating lobular carcinoma with positive surgical margins after breast-conservation therapy. Ann Surg 2000; 231:877-82. (Pubitemid 30350246)
21. Takehara M, Tamura M, Kameda H, Ogita M. Examination of breast conserving therapy in lobular carcinoma. Breast Cancer 2004; 11:69-72.
22. Jimenez RE, Bongers S, Bouwman D, Segel M, Visscher DW. Clinicopathologic significance of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast core needle biopsies with invasive cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24:123-8. (Pubitemid 30033405)
23. Dzierzanowski M, Melville K, Barnes PJ, Macintosh RF, Caines JS, Porter GA. Ductal carcinoma in situ in core biopsies containing invasive breast cancer: correlation with extensive intraductal component and lumpectomy margins. J Surg Oncol 2005; 90:71-6. (Pubitemid 40594104)