In Search of a Gold Standard Scoring System for the Subjective Evaluation of Cosmetic Outcomes Following Breast-Conserving Therapy

Breast Journal

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 345-351

  Racz, Jennifer M ^a   Hong, Nicole Look ^b   Latosinsky, Steven ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c WESTERN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

breast cancer; breast conservation; cosmetic outcome; cosmetic scales; Delphi; subjective evaluation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BODY IMAGE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DELPHI STUDY; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHOTOGRAPHY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; SEGMENTAL MASTECTOMY; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

ADULT; BODY IMAGE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHOTOGRAPHY; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 84934444428     PISSN: 1075122X     EISSN: 15244741     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12423     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Canadian Cancer Society's Steering Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2011. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society, 2011.
2. Members of the Breast Cancer Disease Site Group. Surgical management of early-stage invasive breast cancer. Cancer Care Ontario, 2011. Available at: https://www.cancercare.on.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=34108 (accessed November 14, 2011).
3. Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al,. Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 822-8.
4. Whelan T, Levin M, Gafni A, et al,. Mastectomy or lumpectomy? Helping women make informed choices. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1727-35.
5. Fisher B, Anderson S, Redmond CK, et al,. Reanalysis and results after 12 years of follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1456-61.
6. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, 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. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1233-41.
7. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Veronesi U, et al,. Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 390-8.
8. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Del Vecchio M, et al,. Comparison of Halsted mastectomy with quadrentectomy, axillary dissection, and radiotherapy in early breast cancer: long-term results. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1986; 22: 1085-9.
9. Sarrazin D, Lê MG, Arriagada R, et al,. Ten-year results of a randomized trial comparing a conservative treatment to mastectomy in early breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 1989; 14: 177-84.
10. Blichert-Toft RC, Andersen JA, Overgaard M, et al,. Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1992; 11: 19-25.
11. Lichter AS, Lippman ME, Danforth DN, et al,. Mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in the treatment of stage I and II carcinoma of the breast: a randomized trial at the National Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 976-83.
12. Van Dongen JA, Bartelink H, Fentiman IS, et al,. 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 Monogr 1992; 11: 15-8.
13. Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group. Effects of radiotherapy and surgery in early breast cancer: an overview of the randomized trials. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1444-55.
14. Beadle GF, Silver B, Botnick L, et al,. Cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for early breast cancer. Cancer 1984; 54: 2911-8.
15. Sacchini V, Luini A, Tana S, et al,. Quantitative and qualitative cosmetic evaluation after conservative treatment for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 1395-400.
16. Ramon Y, Ullmann Y, Moscona R, et al,. Aesthetic results and patient satisfaction with immediate breast reconstruction using tissue expansion: a follow-up study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99: 686-91.
17. Roelstraete A, van Lancker LM, De Schryver A, et al,. Adjuvant radiation after conservative surgery for early breast cancer. Local control and cosmetic outcome. Am J Clin Oncol 1993; 16: 284-90.
18. Fortin A, Cheang M, Latosinsky S,. Cosmetic outcomes following breast conservation therapy: in search of a reliable scale. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 100: 65-70.
19. Danoff BF, Goodman RL, Glick JH, et al,. The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on cosmesis and complications in patients with breast cancer treated by definitive irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1983; 9: 1625-30.
20. Liljegren G, Holmberg L, Westman G,. The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with sector resection with or without radiotherapy. Uppsala-Orebro Breast Cancer Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 2083-9.
21. Lowery JC, Wilkins EG, Kuzon WM, et al,. Evaluations of aesthetic results in breast reconstruction: an analysis of reliability. Ann Plast Surg 1996; 36: 601-6.
22. Asplund O, Nilsson B,. Interobserver variation and cosmetic result of submuscular breast reconstruction. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 18: 215-20.
23. Pezner RD, Lipsett JA, Vora NL, et al,. Limited usefulness of observer-based cosmesis scales employed to evaluate patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985; 11: 1117-9.
24. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Yarnold JR, et al,. Cosmetic and functional outcomes of breast conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer. 1. Comparison of patients' ratings, observers' ratings, and objective assessments. Radiother Oncol 1992; 25: 153-9.
25. Pezner RD, Patterson MP, Hill LR, et al,. Breast retraction assessment: an objective evaluation of cosmetic results of patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985; 11: 575-8.
26. Van Limbergen E, van der Schueren E, Van Tongelen K,. Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 1. Proposal of a quantitative scoring system. Radiother Oncol 1989; 16: 159-67.
27. Fitzal F, Krois W, Trischler H, et al,. The use of a breast symmetry index for objective evaluation of breast cosmesis. Breast 2007; 16: 429-35.
28. Cardoso MJ, Magalhaes A, Almeida T, et al,. Is face-only photographic view enough for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008; 112: 565-8.
29. Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS, Vrieling C, et al,. Recommendations for aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 135: 629-37.
30. DiBernardo BE, Adams RL, Krause J, et al,. Photographic standards in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102: 559-68.
31. Harris JR, Levene MB, Svensson G, Hellman S,. Analysis of cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for stages I and II carcinoma of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1979; 5: 257-61.
32. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H,. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000; 32: 1008-15.
33. Meyrick J,. The Delphi method and health research. Health Education 2003; 103: 7-16.
34. Landis J, Koch G,. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
35. Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, et al,. Factors determining esthetic outcome after breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast J 2007; 13: 140-6.
36. Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, et al,. Interobserver agreement and consensus over the esthetic evaluation of conservative treatment for breast cancer. The Breast 2006; 15: 52-7.