Size does matter: High volume breast surgeons accept smaller excision margins for wide local excision - A national survey of the surgical management of wide local excision margins in UK breast cancer patients

Breast

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 718-722

  Hassani, Adam ^a   Griffith, Clive ^a   Harvey, James ^b  

^a ROYAL VICTORIA INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^b WYTHENSHAWE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; DCIS; Ductal carcinoma in situ; Margin; Questionnaire; Wide local excision

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST SURGEON; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; ESTHETICS; EXCISION; EXCISION MARGIN; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; POSTAL MAIL; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARDIZATION; SURGEON; UNITED KINGDOM; WIDE EXCISION; WORKLOAD;

BREAST CANCER; DCIS; DUCTAL CARCINOMA IN SITU; MARGIN; QUESTIONNAIRE; WIDE LOCAL EXCISION;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUESTIONNAIRES; WORKLOAD;

EID: 84884160600     PISSN: 09609776     EISSN: 15323080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.12.009     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Fisher B., Anderson S., Bryant J., Margolese R.G., Deutsch M., Fisher E.R., et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. NEngl J Med 2002, 347:1233-1241.
2. Veronesi U., Cascinelli N., Mariani L., Greco M., Saccozzi R., Luini A., et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. NEngl J Med 2002, 347:1227-1232.
3. Van Dongen J., Voogd A.C., Fentiman I.S., Legrand C., Sylvester R.J., Tong D., et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. JNatl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:1143-1150.
4. Poggi M.M., Danforth D.N., Sciuto L.C., Smith S.L., Steinberg S.M., Liewehr D.J., et al. Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial. Cancer 2003, 98:697-702.
5. Jatoi I., Proschan M.A. Randomized trials of breast-conserving therapy versus mastectomy for primary breast cancer: a pooled analysis of updated results. Am J Clin Oncol 2005, 28:289-294.
6. Early and locally advanced breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment 2009, vol. 80. NICE Clinical Guideline.
7. Surgical guidelines for the management of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009, 35:S1-S22. Association of Breast Surgeons at BASO.
8. Park C.C., Mitsumori M., Nixon A., Recht A., Connolly K., Gelman R., 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. JClin Oncol 2000, 18:1668-1675.
9. Leong C., Boyages J., Jayasinghe U.W., Bilous M., Ung O., Chua B., 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.
10. Spivack B., Khanna M.M., Tafra L., Juillard G., Giuliano A.E. Margin status and local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery. Arch Surg 1994, 129:952-956.
11. Fredriksson I., Liljegren G., Palm-Sjovall M., Arnesson L.G., Emdin S.O., Fornander T., et al. Risk factor for local recurrence after breast conserving surgery. Br J Surg 2003, 90:1093-1102.
12. Schnitt S., Abner A., Gelman R., Connolly J.L., Recht A., Duda R.B., et al. The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recurrence in patients with breast cancer treated breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 1994, 74:1746-1751.
13. Gage I., Schnitt S., Nixon A., Silver B., Recht A., Troyan S.L., et al. Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 1996, 78:1921-1928.
14. Smitt M.C., Nowels K.W., Zdeblick M.J., Jeffrey S., Carlson R.W., Stockdale F.E., et al. The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long-term results of breast conservation. Cancer 1995, 76:259-267.
15. Smitt M.C., Nowels K., Carlson R.W., Jeffrey S.S. Predictors of reexcision findings and recurrence after breast conservation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 57:979-985.
16. Cutuli B., Cohen-Solal-le Nir C., de Lanfontan B., Mignotte H., Fichet V., Fay R., et al. Breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: the French Cancer Centers' experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:868-879.
17. Solin L.J., Fourquet A., Vicini F.A., Taylor M., Olivotto I.A., Haffty B., et al. Long-term outcome after breast-conservation treatment with radiation for mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 2005, 103:1137-1146.
18. Fisher E.R., Constantino J., Fisher B., Palekar A.S., Redmond C., Mamounas E. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) protocol B-17: intraductal carcinoma (ductal carcinoma in-situ) - the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Collaborating Investigators. Cancer 1995, 75:1310-1319.
19. Jeevan R., Cromwell D.A., Trivella M., Lawrence G., Kearins O., Pereira J., et al. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ 2012, 345:e4505.
20. Freedman G., Fowble B., Hanlon A., Nicolaou N., Fein D., Hoffman J., et al. Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or 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 Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 44:1005-1015.
21. Groot G., Rees H., Pahwa P., Kanagaratnam S., Kinloch M. Predicting local recurrence following breast-conserving therapy for early stage breast cancer: the significance of a narrow (≤ 2mm) surgical resection margin. JSurg Oncol 2011, 103:212-216.
22. Houssami N., Macaskill P., Marinovich M.L., Dixon J.M., Irwig L., Brennan M.E., et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer 2010, 46(18):3219-3232.
23. Kestin L.L., Goldstein N.S., Lacerna M.D., Balasubramaniam M., Martinez A.A., Rebner M., et al. Factors associated with local recurrence of mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ in patients given breast-conservation therapy. Cancer 2000, 88:596-607.
24. Vicini F.A., Kestin L.L., Goldstein N.S., Baglan K.L., Pettinga J.E., Martinez A.A. Relationship between excision volume, margin status and tumor size with the development of local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast conserving therapy. JSurg Oncol 2001, 76:245-254.
25. Sahoo S., Recant W.M., Jaskowiak N., Tong L., Heimann R. Defining negative breast margins in DCIS patients treated with breast conservation therapy: the University of Chicago experience. Breast J 2005, 11:242-247.
26. Wang S.Y., Chu H., Shamliyan T., Jalal H., Kuntz K.M., Kane R.L., et al. Network meta-analysis of margin threshold for women with ductal carcinoma in situ. JNatl Cancer Inst 2012, 104(7):507-516.
27. Dunne C., Burke J.P., Morrow M., Kell M.R. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. JClin Oncol 2009, 27(10):1615-1620.
28. Taghian A., Mohiuddin M., Jagsi R., Goldberg S., Ceilley E., Powell S. Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey. Ann Surg 2005, 241(4):629-639.
29. Blair S.L., Thompson K., Rococco J., Malcarne V., Beitsch P.D., Ollila D.W. Attaining negative margins in breast-conservation operations: is there a consensus among breast surgeons?. JAm Coll Surg 2009, 209(5):608-613.
30. Young O.E., Valassiadou K., Dixon M. Areview of current practices in breast conservation surgery in the UK. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2007, 89:118-123.
31. Wapnir I.L., Dignam J.J., Fisher B., Mamounas E.P., Anderson S.J., Julian T.B., et al. Long term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumour recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. JNatl Cancer Inst 2011, 103(6):478-488.
32. Morrow M., Katz S.J. Margins in ductal carcinoma in situ: is bigger really better?. JNatl Cancer Inst 2012, 104(7):494-495.
33. [accessed November 2012]. http://www.ncnn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp.
34. Aebi S., Davidson T., Gruber G., Cardoso F. Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2011, 22(Suppl. 6):vi12-vi24. ESMO Guidelines Working Group.
35. [accessed November 2012]. http://www.health.govt.nz/publication/management-early-breast-cancer-evidence-based-best-practice-guideline.
36. [accessed November 2012]. http://www.dggg.de/fileadmin/public_docs/leitlinien/S3-Leitlinie%2520engl_final.pdf.