Margin status after breast-conserving treatment of breast cancer: How much free margin is enough?

Journal of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 98, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 585-587

  Von Smitten, Karl ^a  

^a HELSINKI UNIVERSITY CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Finland)

Author keywords

Breast; Margin status; Resection

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; CALCIFICATION; CANCER SURGERY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MASTECTOMY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RECURRENCE RISK; RECURRENT CANCER; REVIEW; TUMOR; TUMOR VOLUME;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 58149232426     PISSN: 00224790     EISSN: 10969098     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jso.21038     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al.: Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002:347:1227-1232.
2. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al.: Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus radiation for the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347:1233-1241.
3. Aspegren K, Holmberg L, Adami H-O: Standardization of the surgical technique in breast-conserving treatment of breast cancer. Br J Surg 1988:76:807-810.
4. Holland R, Veling S, Mravunac M, et al,: Histologic multifocality of Tis, T l-2breast carcinomas: Implications for clinical trials of breast conserving surgery. Cancer 1985;56:979-990.
5. Veronesi U, Volterani F, Luini A, et al.: Quadrantectomy versus lumpectomy for small size breast caocer. Eur J Cancer 1990;26: 671-673.
6. Nixon A, Neuberg D, Hayes D, et al.: Relatiooship of patients age to pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis for patients with stage I or II breast cancer, j Clin Oncol 1994;12:888-894.
7. Borger J, Kemperman A, Hart A, et al.: Risk factors in breast conservation therapy. J Clin Oncoi 1994:12:647-649.
8. Schnitt S, Abner A, Gelman R, et al.: The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recurrence in breast cancer patients treated with conservative surgerv and radiation therapy. Cancer 1994;74:1746-1751.
9. van Dongen J, Bartelink H, Fentiman I, et al.: Factors influencing local relapse and survival and results of salvage treatment after breast conserving therapy in operable breast cancer EORTC trial 25. 10801, breast conservation compared with mastectomy in TNM stage I and II breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1992;28A:801-805.
10. Jolly S, Kestin L, Goldstein N, et al.: The impact of tabular carsinoma in situ in association with invasive breast cancer on the rate of local recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. In J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:365-371.
11. Liljegren G, Lindgren J, Bergh J, et al.: Risk factor for local 27. recurrence after conservative treatment in stage I breast cancer. Definition of a sub group not requiring radiotherapy. Ann Oncol 1997;8:235-241.
12. Peterse J, van Dongen J, Bartelink H: Recurrence of breast carcinoma after breast conserving treatment. Eur J Surg One 1988;14:123-126.
13. Ben-David M, Kleer C, Paramagul C, et al.: Is lobular carcinoma in situ as a component of breast carcinoma a risk factor for local failure after breast conserving therapy? Result of matched analysis. Cancer 2006:106:28-34.
14. Chagpar A, Yen T, Sahin A, et al: Intraoperative margin assessment reduces reexcision rates in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery. Am J Surg 2003;186:371-377.
15. Obedian E, Haffty B: Negative margin status improves local control in conservatively managed breast cancer patients. Cancer J Sci Am 2000:6:28-33.
16. Freedman G, Fowble B, Hanlon A, et al.: Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close of positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy. Int J Radiat One Biol Phys 1999;44:1005-1015.
17. Mazouni C, Rouzier R, Balleyguier C, et al.: Specimen radiography as predictor of resection margin status in non-palpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol 2006:61:789-796.
18. Ciccarelli G, Di Virgilio M, Garretti L, et al.: Radiography of the surgical specimen in early stage breast lesions: Diagnostic reliability in the analysis of the resection margins, Radiol Med 2007:112:366-376.
19. Tan K, Tan S, Chiang S: Breast specimen ultrasound and mammography in the prediction of tumour-free margins. ANZ J Surg 2006:76:1064-1067.
20. Bakhshandeh M, Tutuncuoglu S, Fishcer G, et al.: Imprint cytology for assessment of surgical margins in lumpectomy specimens of breast cancer patients. Cytopathology 2007;35: 656-659.
21. Valdes E, Boolbol S, Cohen J, et al.: Intra-operative touch preparation cytology: Does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 2007:14:1045-1050.
22. Janes S, Stankhe M, Sing S, et al.: Systematic cavity shaves reduces close margins and reexcision rates in breast conserving surgery. Breast 2006; 15:326-330.
23. Malik H, George W, Mallon E, et al.: Margin assessment by cavity shaving after breast conserving surgery: Analysis and follow-up of 543 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999:25:464-469.
24. Wazer D, Jabro G, Ruthazer R, et al.: Extent of margins positivity as a predictor for local recurrence after breast conserving irradiation. Radiat Oncol Invest 1999:7:11-117.
25. Park C, Mitsumori M, Nixon A, et al.: Outcome at 8 years after breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: Influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:1668-1675.
26. Anscher M, Jones P, Prosnitz L, et al.: Local failure and margin status in early-stage breast carcinoma treated with conservation surgery and radiation therapy. Ann Surg 1993: 218:22-28.
27. Leong C, Boyages J, Javasinghe U, et al.: Effect of margins on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conservation therapy for lymph node negative breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004;100:1823-1832.
28. Gage I, Schnitt S, Nixon A, et al.: Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast conserving therapy. Cancer 1996:78:1921-1928.
29. Dillon M, Hill C, McDermott E, et al.: A pathologic assessment of adequate margin status in breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006:13:333-339.
30. Jobsen J, van der Palen J, Ong F. et al.: The value of a positive margin for invasive carcinoma in breast-conservative treatment in relation to local recurrence is limited to young women only. In J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;57;724-731.
31. Jobsen J, van der Palen J, Ong F, et al.: Differences in outcome for positive margins in a large cohort of breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving therapy, Ada Oncol 2007;46:172-180.
32. Voogd AC, Peterse J, Crommelin M, et al.: Histologic determinants for different types of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy of invasive breast cancer. Dutch Study Group on local recurrence after breast conservation (BORST). Eur J Cancer 1999:35:1828-1837.
33. Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al.; Effects of radiotherapy and the differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: An overview of the randomized trials, Lancet 2005;366:2087-2106.
34. Clough K, Lewis J, Couturaud B, et al.: Oncoplastic techniques allow extensive resections for breast-conserving therapy of breast carcinomas. Ann Surg 2003:237:26-34.
35. Holland R, Hendriks J, Vebeek A, et al.: Extent, distribution, and mammographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 1990;335;519-522.
36. Silverstein M, Lagios M, Groshen S, et al,: The influence of margin width on local control of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. NEJM 1999:340:1455-1461.