Search

Objective: To compare long-term quality of life (QOL) outcomes in breast cancer survivors who received breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS+RT) with those who received a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery (Mast+Recon) without radiotherapy and identify other important factors., Background: The long-term differences in patient-reported QOL outcomes following BCS+RT and Mast+Recon are not well understood., Methods: We identified patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage 0-II breast cancer diagnosed in 2009-2014 after BCS+RT or Mast+Recon without radiotherapy. Sampling was stratified by age and race and ethnicity. A paper survey was sent to 4800 patients which included validated BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules. Multivariable linear regression models were implemented for each outcome. Minimal clinically important difference for BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules, respectively, was 4 points and 2 points., Results: Of 1215 respondents (25.3% response rate), 631 received BCS+RT and 584 received Mast+Recon. The median interval from diagnosis to survey completion was 9 years. In adjusted analysis, Mast+Recon was associated with worse BREAST-Q psychosocial well-being (effect size: -3.80, P =0.04) and sexual well-being (effect size: -5.41, P =0.02), but better PROMIS physical function (effect size: 0.54, P =0.03) and similar BREAST-Q satisfaction with breasts, physical well-being, and PROMIS upper extremity function ( P >0.05) compared with BCS+RT. Only the difference in sexual well-being reached clinical significance. Older (≥65) patients receiving BCS+RT and younger (<50) patients receiving autologous Mast+Recon typically reported higher QOL scores. Receipt of chemotherapy was associated with detriments to multiple QOL domains., Conclusions: Patients who underwent Mast+Recon reported worse long-term sexual well-being compared with BCS+RT. Older patients derived a greater benefit from BCS+RT, while younger patients derived a greater benefit from Mast+Recon. These data inform preference-sensitive decision-making for women with early-stage breast cancer., Competing Interests: B.D.S. receives salary support from Varian Medical Systems that is unrelated to the current project. He also has a royalty and equity interest in Oncora Medical. R.J.’s time on this work was supported by the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Outside the current work, she has stock options as compensation for her advisory board role in Equity Quotient, a company that evaluates culture in health care companies; she has received personal fees from the Greenwall Foundation, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health and grants or contracts for unrelated work from the National Institutes of Health, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the American Cancer Society, the Greenwall Foundation, and Genentech. She has served as an expert witness for Dressman Benzinger LaVelle and Kleinbard LLC. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Bolus serves as a tissue equivalent material that shifts the 95-100% isodose line towards the skin and subcutaneous tissue. The need for bolus for all breast cancer patients planned for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has been questioned. The work was initiated by the faculty of the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) breast cancer courses and represents a multidisciplinary international breast cancer expert collaboration to optimize PMRT. Due to the lack of randomised trials evaluating the benefits of bolus, we designed a stepwise project to evaluate the existing evidence about the use of bolus in the setting of PMRT to achieve an international consensus for the indications of bolus in PMRT, based on the Delphi method., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Within the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer, variations exist in the reconstructive options offered and care provided. The authors evaluated plastic surgeon perspectives on important issues related to breast cancer management and reconstruction and provide some insight into factors that influence these perspectives., Methods: Women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (stages 0 to II) between July of 2013 and September of 2014 were identified through the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. These women were surveyed and identified their treating plastic surgeons. Surveys were sent to the identified plastic surgeons to collect data on specific reconstruction practices., Results: Responses from 134 plastic surgeons (74.4 percent response rate) were received. Immediate reconstruction (79.7 percent) was the most common approach to timing, and expander/implant reconstruction (72.6 percent) was the most common technique reported. Nearly one-third of respondents (32.1 percent) reported that reimbursement influenced the proportion of autologous reconstructions performed. Most (82.8 percent) reported that discussions about contralateral prophylactic mastectomy were initiated by patients. Most surgeons (81.3 to 84.3 percent) felt that good symmetry is achieved with unilateral autologous reconstruction with contralateral symmetry procedures in patients with small or large breasts; a less pronounced majority (62.7 percent) favored unilateral implant reconstructions in patients with large breasts. In patients requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy, one-fourth of the surgeons (27.6 percent) reported that they seldom recommend delayed reconstruction, and 64.9 percent reported recommending immediate expander/implant reconstruction., Conclusions: Reconstructive practices in a modern cohort of plastic surgeons suggest that immediate and implant reconstructions are performed preferentially. Respondents perceived a number of factors, including surgeon training, time spent in the operating room, and insurance reimbursement, to negatively influence the performance of autologous reconstruction.

Background: Patient-reported toxicities help to appraise the breast cancer treatment experience. Yet extant data come from clinical trials and health care claims, which may be biased. Using patient surveys, the authors sought to quantify the frequency, severity, and burden of treatment-associated toxicities., Methods: Between 2013 and 2014, the iCanCare study surveyed a population-based sample of women residing in Los Angeles County and Georgia with early-stage, invasive breast cancer. The authors assessed the frequency and severity of toxicities; correlated toxicity severity with unscheduled health care use (clinic visits, emergency department visits/hospitalizations) and physical health; and examined patient, tumor, and treatment factors associated with reporting increased toxicity severity., Results: The overall survey response rate was 71%. From the analyzed cohort of 1945 women, 866 (45%) reported at least 1 toxicity that was severe/very severe, 9% reported unscheduled clinic visits for toxicity management, and 5% visited an emergency department or hospital. Factors associated with reporting higher toxicity severity included receipt of chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.0-2.5), receipt of both chemotherapy and radiotherapy (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.7), and Latina ethnicity (OR vs whites: 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5). A nonsignificant increase in at least 1 severe/very severe toxicity report was observed for bilateral mastectomy recipients (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4)., Conclusions: Women with early-stage invasive breast cancer report substantial treatment-associated toxicities and related burden. Clinicians should collect toxicity data routinely and offer early intervention. Toxicity differences observed by treatment modality may inform decision making. Cancer 2017;123:1925-1934. © 2017 American Cancer Society., (© 2017 American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 was a prospective trial evaluating the false negative rate of sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer patients with initial node-positive disease. Radiation therapy (RT) decisions were made at the discretion of treating physicians, providing an opportunity to evaluate variability in practice patterns following NAC., Methods and Materials: Of 756 patients enrolled from July 2009 to June 2011, 685 met all eligibility requirements. Surgical approach, RT, and radiation field design were analyzed based on presenting clinical and pathologic factors., Results: Of 401 node-positive patients, mastectomy was performed in 148 (36.9%), mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in 107 (26.7%), and breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in 146 patients (36.4%). Of the 284 pathologically node-negative patients, mastectomy was performed in 84 (29.6%), mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in 69 (24.3%), and BCS in 131 patients (46.1%). Bilateral mastectomy rates were higher in women undergoing reconstruction than in those without (66.5% vs 32.2%, respectively, P<.0001). Use of internal mammary RT was low (7.8%-11.2%) and did not differ between surgical approaches. Supraclavicular RT rate ranged from 46.6% to 52.2% and did not differ between surgical approaches but was omitted in 193 or 408 node-positive patients (47.3%). Rate of axillary RT was more frequent in patients who remained node-positive (P=.002). However, 22% of patients who converted to node-negative still received axillary RT. Post-mastectomy RT was more frequently omitted after reconstruction than mastectomy (23.9% vs 12.1%, respectively, P=.002) and was omitted in 19 of 107 patients (17.8%) with residual node-positive disease in the reconstruction group., Conclusions: Most clinically node-positive patients treated with NAC undergoing mastectomy receive RT. RT is less common in patients undergoing reconstruction. There is wide variability in RT fields. These practice patterns conflict with expert recommendations and ongoing trial guidelines. There is a significant need for greater uniformity and guidelines regarding RT following NAC., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate complications after postmastectomy breast reconstruction, particularly in the setting of adjuvant radiotherapy., Background: Most studies of complications after breast reconstruction have been conducted at centers of excellence; relatively little is known about complication rates in irradiated patients treated in the broader community. This information is relevant for decision making in patients with breast cancer., Methods: Using the claims-based MarketScan database, we described complications in 14,894 women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer from 1998 to 2007 and who underwent immediate autologous reconstruction (n = 2637), immediate implant-based reconstruction (n = 3007), or no reconstruction within the first 2 postoperative years (n = 9250). We used a generalized estimating equation to evaluate associations between complications and radiotherapy over time., Results: Wound complications were diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 2.3% of patients without reconstruction, 4.4% patients with implants, and 9.5% patients with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). Infection was diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 12.7% of patients without reconstruction, 20.5% with implants, and 20.7% with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). A total of 5219 (35%) women received radiation. Radiation was not associated with infection in any surgical group within the first 6 months but was associated with an increased risk of infection in months 7 to 24 in all 3 groups (each P < 0.001). In months 7 to 24, radiation was associated with higher odds of implant removal in patients with implant reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.48; P < 0.001) and fat necrosis in those with autologous reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.55; P = 0.01)., Conclusions: Complication risks after immediate breast reconstruction differ by approach. Radiation therapy seems to modestly increase certain risks, including infection and implant removal.

Background: Although many plastic surgeons perform autologous fat grafting (lipofilling) for breast reconstruction after oncologic surgery, it has not been established whether postoncologic lipofilling increases the risk of breast cancer recurrence. The authors assessed the risk of locoregional and systemic recurrence in patients who underwent lipofilling for breast reconstruction., Methods: The authors identified all patients who underwent segmental or total mastectomy for breast cancer (719 breasts) (i.e., cases) or breast cancer risk reduction or benign disease (305 cancer-free breasts) followed by breast reconstruction with lipofilling as an adjunct or primary procedure between June of 1981 and February of 2014. They also then identified matched patients with breast cancer treated with segmental or total mastectomy followed by reconstruction without lipofilling (670 breasts) (i.e., controls). The probability of locoregional recurrence was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Mean follow-up times after mastectomy were 60 months for cases, 44 months for controls, and 73 months for cancer-free breasts. Locoregional recurrence was observed in 1.3 percent of cases (nine of 719 breasts) and 2.4 percent of controls (16 of 670 breasts). Breast cancer did not develop in any cancer-free breast. The cumulative 5-year locoregional recurrence rates were 1.6 percent and 4.1 percent for cases and controls, respectively. Systemic recurrence occurred in 2.4 percent of cases and 3.6 percent of controls (p = 0.514). There was no primary breast cancer in healthy breasts reconstructed with lipofilling., Conclusions: The study results showed no increase in locoregional recurrence, systemic recurrence, or second breast cancer. These findings support the oncologic safety of lipofilling in breast reconstruction., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Risk, II.

Multiple randomized trials and their meta-analysis have demonstrated an overall survival benefit from postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in women with node-positive breast cancer. However, none of the patients treated in these trials received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which is now an increasingly common approach. It is unclear how best to apply data from trials conducted in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy to this population. To illuminate these issues, this article first reviews the history of PMRT and the current indications for its use based on contemporary data. It focuses on the ways in which staging and outcomes differ for patients who undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy before mastectomy (as compared with those who receive postoperative adjuvant therapy) and how pathologic features such as response to therapy are correlated with recurrence and survival outcomes. It highlights key information obtained from analysis of the pooled data from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) prospective neoadjuvant chemotherapy trials B-18 and B-27 and separate retrospective single-institution studies; this includes the low risk of locoregional recurrence in early-stage patients in whom a pathologic complete response (pCR) was achieved after neoadjuvant chemotherapy without PMRT and the high risk of recurrence in patients with stage III disease, even in the setting of a pCR. It also discusses the ongoing NSABP B-51/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1304 and Alliance A011202 trials, which will provide information on whether PMRT can be omitted in patients who have a pathologic complete response (pCR) in the lymph nodes, and whether axillary lymph node dissection will improve recurrence rates compared with sentinel lymph node biopsy and radiotherapy in patients who do not achieve a pCR in the lymph nodes. Finally, it identifies directions for future research.

Objective: Although breast conservation is therapeutically equivalent to mastectomy for most patients with early-stage breast cancer, an increasing number of patients are pursuing mastectomy, which may be followed by breast reconstruction. We sought to evaluate long-term quality of life and cosmetic outcomes after different locoregional management approaches, as perceived by patients themselves., Methods: We surveyed women with a diagnosis of nonmetastatic breast cancer from 2005 to 2007, as reported to the Los Angeles and Detroit population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We received responses from 2290 women approximately 9 months after diagnosis (73% response rate) and from 1536 of these 4 years later. We evaluated quality of life and patterns and correlates of satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes overall and, more specifically, within the subgroup undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, using multivariable linear regression., Results: Of the 1450 patients who responded to both surveys and experienced no recurrence, 963 underwent breast-conserving surgery, 263 mastectomy without reconstruction, and 222 mastectomy with reconstruction. Cosmetic satisfaction was similar between those receiving breast conservation therapy and those receiving mastectomy with reconstruction. Among patients receiving mastectomy with reconstruction, reconstruction type and radiation receipt were associated with satisfaction (P < 0.001), with an adjusted scaled satisfaction score of 4.7 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction without radiation, 4.4 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction and radiation therapy, 4.1 for patients receiving implant reconstruction without radiation therapy, and 2.8 for patients receiving implant reconstruction and radiation therapy., Conclusions: Patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction was similar after breast conservation and after mastectomy with reconstruction. In patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation, the use of autologous reconstruction may mitigate the deleterious impact of radiation on cosmetic outcomes.

Importance: Most women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer do not undergo breast reconstruction., Objective: To examine correlates of breast reconstruction after mastectomy and to determine if a significant unmet need for reconstruction exists., Design, Setting, and Participants: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries from Los Angeles, California, and Detroit, Michigan, for rapid case ascertainment to identify a sample of women aged 20 to 79 years diagnosed as having ductal carcinoma in situ or stages I to III invasive breast cancer. Black and Latina women were oversampled to ensure adequate representation of racial/ethnic minorities. Eligible participants were able to complete a survey in English or Spanish. Of 3252 women sent the initial survey a median of 9 months after diagnosis, 2290 completed it. Those who remained disease free were surveyed 4 years later to determine the frequency of immediate and delayed reconstruction and patient attitudes toward the procedure; 1536 completed the follow-up survey. The 485 who remained disease free at follow-up underwent analysis., Exposures: Disease-free survival of breast cancer., Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast reconstruction at any time after mastectomy and patient satisfaction with different aspects of the reconstruction decision-making process., Results: Response rates in the initial and follow-up surveys were 73.1% and 67.7%, respectively (overall, 49.4%). Of 485 patients reporting mastectomy at the initial survey and remaining disease free, 24.8% underwent immediate and 16.8% underwent delayed reconstruction (total, 41.6%). Factors significantly associated with not undergoing reconstruction were black race (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.16 [95% CI, 1.11-4.20]; P = .004), lower educational level (AOR, 4.49 [95% CI, 2.31-8.72]; P < .001), increased age (AOR in 10-year increments, 2.53 [95% CI, 1.77-3.61]; P < .001), major comorbidity (AOR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.01-5.11]; P = .048), and chemotherapy (AOR, 1.82 [95% CI, 0.99-3.31]; P = .05). Only 13.3% of women were dissatisfied with the reconstruction decision-making process, but dissatisfaction was higher among nonwhite patients in the sample (AOR, 2.87 [95% CI, 1.27-6.51]; P = .03). The most common patient-reported reasons for not having reconstruction were the desire to avoid additional surgery (48.5%) and the belief that it was not important (33.8%), but 36.3% expressed fear of implants. Reasons for avoiding reconstruction and systems barriers to care varied by race; barriers were more common among nonwhite participants. Residual demand for reconstruction at 4 years was low, with only 30 of 263 who did not undergo reconstruction still considering the procedure., Conclusions and Relevance: Reconstruction rates largely reflect patient demand; most patients are satisfied with the decision-making process about reconstruction. Specific approaches are needed to address lingering patient-level and system factors with a negative effect on reconstruction among minority women.

Importance: The growing rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among women diagnosed as having breast cancer has raised concerns about potential for overtreatment. Yet, there are few large survey studies of factors that affect women's decisions for this surgical treatment option., Objective: To determine factors associated with the use of CPM in a population-based sample of patients with breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: A longitudinal survey of 2290 women newly diagnosed as having breast cancer who reported to the Detroit and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries from June 1, 2005, to February 1, 2007, and again 4 years later (June 2009 to February 2010) merged with Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data (n = 1536). Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with type of surgery. Primary independent variables included clinical indications for CPM (genetic mutation and/or strong family history), diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging, and patient extent of worry about recurrence at the time of treatment decision making., Main Outcomes and Measures: Type of surgery received from patient self-report, categorized as CPM, unilateral mastectomy, or breast conservation surgery., Results: Of the 1447 women in the analytic sample, 18.9% strongly considered CPM and 7.6% received it. Of those who strongly considered CPM, 32.2% received CPM, while 45.8% received unilateral mastectomy and 22.8% received breast conservation surgery (BCS). The majority of patients (68.9%) who received CPM had no major genetic or familial risk factors for contralateral disease. Multivariate regression showed that receipt of CPM (vs either unilateral mastectomy or breast conservation surgery) was significantly associated with genetic testing (positive or negative) (vs UM, relative risk ratio [RRR]: 10.48; 95% CI, 3.61-3.48 and vs BCS, RRR: 19.10; 95% CI, 5.67-56.41; P < .001), a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer (vs UM, RRR: 5.19; 95% CI, 2.34-11.56 and vs BCS, RRR: 4.24; 95% CI, 1.80-9.88; P = .001), receipt of magnetic resonance imaging (vs UM RRR: 2.07; 95% CI, 1.21-3.52 and vs BCS, RRR: 2.14; 95% CI, 1.28-3.58; P = .001), higher education (vs UM, RRR: 5.04; 95% CI, 2.37-10.71 and vs BCS, RRR: 4.38; 95% CI, 2.07-9.29; P < .001), and greater worry about recurrence (vs UM, RRR: 2.81; 95% CI, 1.14-6.88 and vs BCS, RRR: 4.24; 95% CI, 1.80-9.98; P = .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Many women considered CPM and a substantial number received it, although few had a clinically significant risk of contralateral breast cancer. Receipt of magnetic resonance imaging at diagnosis contributed to receipt of CPM. Worry about recurrence appeared to drive decisions for CPM although the procedure has not been shown to reduce recurrence risk. More research is needed about the underlying factors driving the use of CPM.

Purpose: Disparities in receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy may contribute to higher breast cancer fatality rates among black and Hispanic women compared with non-Hispanic whites. We investigated factors associated with receipt of chemotherapy in a diverse population-based sample., Patients and Methods: Women diagnosed with breast cancer between August 2005 and May 2007 (N = 3,252) and reported to the Detroit, Michigan, or Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry were recruited to complete a survey. Multivariable analyses examined factors associated with chemotherapy receipt., Results: The survey was sent to 3,133 patients; 2,290 completed a survey (73.1%), and 1,403 of these patients were included in the analytic sample. In multivariable models, disease characteristics were significantly associated with the likelihood of receiving chemotherapy. Low-acculturated Hispanics were more likely to receive chemotherapy than non-Hispanic whites (odds ratio [OR], 2.00; 95% CI, 1.31 to 3.04), as were high-acculturated Hispanics (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.98). Black women were less likely to receive chemotherapy than non-Hispanic whites, but the difference was not significant (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.08). Increasing age (even in women age < 50 years) and Medicaid insurance were associated with lower rates of chemotherapy receipt., Conclusion: In this population-based sample, disease characteristics were strongly associated with receipt of chemotherapy, indicating that clinical benefit guides most treatment decisions. We found no compelling evidence that black women and Hispanics receive chemotherapy at lower rates. Interventions that address chemotherapy use rates according to age and insurance status may improve quality of systemic treatment.

Purpose: To use patient self-report to provide more valid estimates of whether radiotherapy (RT) is underutilized than possible with registry data, as well as to evaluate for disparities and the influence of preferences and provider interactions., Methods: We considered 2,260 survey respondents who had nonmetastatic breast cancer, were age 20 to 79 years, were diagnosed between July 2005 and February 2007 in Detroit and Los Angeles, and reported to Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registries (72% response rate). Survey responses were merged with SEER data. We assessed rates and correlates of RT receipt among all patients with invasive cancer receiving breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and among patients undergoing mastectomy with indications for RT (ie, positive lymph nodes or T3-4 tumors)., Results: Among 904 patients undergoing BCS with strong indications for RT, 95.4% received RT, and 77.6% received RT among the 135 patients undergoing mastectomy with strong indications (P < .001). Among 114 patients undergoing BCS with weaker indications (ie, elderly) for RT, 80.0% received treatment, and 47.5% received RT among the 164 patients undergoing mastectomy with weaker indications (T1N1, T2N1, or T3N0 disease; P < .001). On multivariate analysis, surgery type (P < .001), indication strength (P < .001), age (P = .005), comorbidity (P < .001), income (P = .03), patient desire to avoid RT (P < .001), level of surgeon involvement in decision to have radiation (P < .001), and SEER site (P < .001) were significantly associated with likelihood of RT receipt., Conclusion: RT receipt was consistently high across sociodemographic subgroups after BCS but was lower after mastectomy, even among patients with strong indications for treatment, in whom clinical benefit is similar. Surgeon involvement had a strong influence on RT receipt.

Context: There is concern that mastectomy is overused in the United States., Objectives: To evaluate the association of patient-reported initial recommendations by surgeons and those given when a second opinion was sought with receipt of initial mastectomy; and to assess the use of mastectomy after attempted breast-conserving surgery (BCS)., Design, Setting, and Patients: A survey of women aged 20 to 79 years with intraductal or stage I and II breast cancer diagnosed between June 2005 and February 2007 and reported to the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries for the metropolitan areas of Los Angeles, California, and Detroit, Michigan. Patients were identified using rapid case ascertainment, and Latinas and blacks were oversampled. Of 3133 patients sent surveys, 2290 responded (73.1%). A mailed survey was completed by 96.5% of respondents and 3.5% completed a telephone survey. The final sample included 1984 female patients (502 Latinas, 529 blacks, and 953 non-Hispanic white or other)., Main Outcome Measures: The rate of initial mastectomy and the perceived reason for its use (surgeon recommendation, patient driven, medical contraindication) and the rate of mastectomy after attempted BCS., Results: Of the 1984 patients, 1468 had BCS as an initial surgical therapy (75.4%) and 460 had initial mastectomy, including 13.4% following surgeon recommendation and 8.8% based on patient preference. Approximately 20% of patients (n = 378) sought a second opinion; this was more common for those patients advised by their initial surgeon to undergo mastectomy (33.4%) than for those advised to have BCS (15.6%) or for those not receiving a recommendation for one procedure over another (21.2%) (P < .001). Discordance in treatment recommendations between surgeons occurred in 12.1% (n = 43) of second opinions and did not differ on the basis of patient race/ethnicity, education, or geographic site. Among the 1459 women for whom BCS was attempted, additional surgery was required in 37.9% of patients, including 358 with reexcision (26.0%) and 167 with mastectomy (11.9%). Mastectomy was most common in patients with stage II cancer (P < .001)., Conclusion: Breast-conserving surgery was recommended by surgeons and attempted in the majority of patients evaluated, with surgeon recommendation, patient decision, and failure of BCS all contributing to the mastectomy rate.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the association between patient decision involvement and surgery received among racially and ethnically diverse patients or patients' attitudes about surgery and the role of family and friends in surgical treatment choices., Methods: Women diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer from June 2005 through February 2007 and reported to the Los Angeles or Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were mailed a survey after diagnosis (N = 3133). Latina and African American women were oversampled. The response rate was 72.4%. The analytic sample (N = 1651) excluded those with stage IIIA or higher disease, self-reported clinical contraindications to breast-conserving surgery with radiation, and unclear race or ethnicity. The dependent variable was receipt of mastectomy initially. The primary independent variables were patient involvement in decision making, race or ethnicity, attitudes about recurrence, the effects of radiation, the impact of surgery on body image, and the role of others in decision making. Latinas were categorized as low or high acculturated. The association between patient involvement in decision making and the receipt of mastectomy was evaluated using logistic regression while controlling for other independent variables. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: The analytic sample was 23.9% Latina (12.0% low acculturated, 11.9% high acculturated), 27.1% African American, and 48.9% white, and 17.2% received a mastectomy initially. For each racial or ethnic group, more women who reported a patient-based decision received mastectomy than those who reported a shared or surgeon-based decision (P = .022 for low-acculturated Latinas, P < .001 for other groups). Women who reported that concerns about recurrence or radiation effects were very important in their surgery decision were more likely to receive mastectomy than those less concerned (for recurrence concerns, estimated relative risk [RR] = 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28 to 2.10; for radiation concerns, estimated RR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.88 to 2.85). Women who reported that body image concerns and their spouse's opinion were very important in their surgery decision less often received mastectomy than those less concerned about body image or who placed less weight on their spouse's opinion (for body image concerns, estimated RR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.74; for spouse's opinion, estimated RR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.78)., Conclusion: Greater patient involvement in decision making was associated with receipt of mastectomy for all racial and ethnic groups. Patient attitudes about surgery and the opinions of family and friends contribute to surgical choices made by women with breast cancer.

Radiation therapy is an integral component of the multimodal treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. Even after mastectomy and systemic therapy, occult residual disease in the chest wall and/or regional lymph nodes may serve as the source of morbid locoregional recurrence as well as the source of distant seeding or reseeding of metastases. Thus, postmastectomy radiation therapy offers substantial benefits in appropriately selected patients. This review article summarizes the data from randomized trials revealing a significant benefit from postmastectomy radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced disease as well as results from other relevant studies. It concludes with a summary of consensus guideline recommendations in this important area.

Background: Given accumulating evidence supporting postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in selected patients, it is important to evaluate patterns and correlates of PMRT utilization, including communication and attitudinal factors., Methods: The authors surveyed 2382 patients diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002 and reported to the Los Angeles and Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries (n=1844, 77.4% response rate). Analyses were restricted to patients with nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer treated by mastectomy who had decided whether or not to undergo PMRT (n=396). The authors assessed rates of explanation, recommendation, and receipt of radiation by indication grouping, defined primarily by the 2001 American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. They evaluated correlates of PMRT receipt, including tumor and sociodemographic characteristics. They also explored patients' self-reported reasons for nonreceipt of PMRT., Results: The adjusted proportion in each indication group reporting that a provider had explained radiation was high (77% of those in whom PMRT was indicated, 76% of those in whom medical opinion was divided, and 73% of those in whom PMRT was not indicated; P=.10). The adjusted proportions reporting recommendations for radiation (86%, 35%, and 17%, respectively) and receipt (81%, 34%, and 10%, respectively) varied significantly by indication grouping (P<.001). On multivariate analysis, tumor size (P<.001), lymph node status (P<.001), comorbidity (P=.02), and chemotherapy receipt (P=.003) were found to be independent significant correlates of PMRT receipt. The most common reasons cited for not pursuing PMRT were lack of physician recommendation and perceived lack of need., Conclusions: PMRT receipt is strongly correlated with clinical indication. The authors found no sociodemographic disparities in utilization. However, approximately one-fifth of patients with strong indications did not receive treatment., (Copyright (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.)

The indications and benefits of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) continue to evolve. Advances in systemic adjuvant therapy and targeted therapy for breast cancer are likely to play an increasingly important role in control of locoregional as well as distant disease. Ongoing scrutiny of patterns of chest wall failure will be required to define the net benefit derived from PMRT. This article discusses the 2001 American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines for PMRT and current practices using PMRT in selected groups of patients who have breast cancer.

Purpose: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) reduces locoregional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer. Survival appears improved in patients at higher risk for LRR. This study addresses whether subsets of node-negative patients with sufficiently high risk of LRR might benefit from PMRT., Methods: Retrospective analysis of a cohort of 877 cases of node-negative breast cancer treated with mastectomy, without adjuvant radiation, from 1980 to 2000., Results: Median follow-up was 100 months. Ten-year cumulative incidence of LRR as first event was 6.0%. Size greater than 2 cm, margin less than 2 mm, premenopausal status, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were independently significant prognostic factors. Ten-year LRR was 1.2% for those with 0 risk factors, 10.0% for those with 1 risk factor, 17.9% for those with 2 risk factors, and 40.6% for those with 3 risk factors. The chest wall was the site of failure in 80% of patients., Conclusion: Postmastectomy radiation therapy has not been recommended for node-negative patients because the LRR rate is low in that population overall. This study suggests, however, that node-negative patients with multiple risk factors, including close margins, T2 or larger tumors, premenopausal status, and LVI, are at higher risk for LRR and might benefit from PMRT. Because the chest wall is the most common site of failure, treating the chest wall alone in these patients to minimize toxicity is reasonable.

PurposeAccrual to clinical trials that challenge well-established treatment paradigms represents a unique challenge. Physician opinions on investigation of a novel approach to breast cancer treatment, in which patients with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are offered omission of lumpectomy, are unknown. NRG-CC006 sought to describe physician attitudes toward a novel approach to breast cancer treatment.MethodsWe recruited 18 participants in the fields of surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology to participate in the semi-structured telephone interviews. Main outcomes are qualitative themes associated with omission of surgery.ResultsOf 18 interview participants, specialty and gender were evenly represented across surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Qualitative themes included general attitudes toward treatment de-escalation, stakeholder considerations, and trial/protocol considerations. The vast majority of participants expressed interest in investigation of omission of surgery, with all participants endorsing need for further investigation into treatment de-escalation. Stakeholder considerations in opening such a trial emphasized need for multidisciplinary involvement and, particularly, the unique role of surgeons as gatekeepers in breast cancer treatment. Finally, participants endorsed a need for further foundational studies to develop ways to predict complete pathologic response to chemotherapy without surgical intervention.ConclusionsPhysicians expressed interest in investigating a novel approach to breast cancer treatment that would omit surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary input, and specifically surgeon engagement, will be key to the success of future investigations. Ongoing work to develop approaches to predict pathologic complete response accurately is needed to achieve the promise of this idea. ClinTrials #: BR005: NCT03188393 June 13, 2017.

Background: Despite mandated insurance coverage for breast reconstruction following mastectomy, health care costs are increasingly passed on to women through cost‐sharing arrangements and high‐deductible health plans. In this population‐based study, the authors assessed perceived financial and employment declines related to breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Methods: Women with early‐stage breast cancer (stages 0‐II) diagnosed between July 2013 and May 2015 who underwent mastectomy were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles and were surveyed. Primary outcome measures included patients' appraisal of their financial and employment status after cancer treatment. Multivariable models evaluated the association between breast reconstruction and primary outcomes. Results: Among 883 patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy, 44.2% did not undergo breast reconstruction, and 55.8% underwent reconstruction. Overall, 21.9% of the cohort reported being worse off financially since their diagnosis (25.8% with reconstruction vs 16.6% without reconstruction; P =.002). Women who underwent reconstruction reported higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses (32.1% vs 15.6% with expenses greater than $5000; P <.001). Reconstruction was independently associated with a perceived decline in financial status (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.15‐3.22; P =.013). Among women who were employed at the time of their diagnosis, there was no association between reconstruction and a perceived decline in employment status (P =.927). Conclusions: In this diverse cohort of women who underwent mastectomy, those who elected to undergo reconstruction experienced higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses and self‐reported financial decline. Patients, providers, and policymakers should be aware of the potential financial implications related to reconstruction despite mandatory insurance coverage. Among 883 patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy, women who underwent reconstruction reported higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses and were independently more likely to report a perceived decline in their financial status. Patients, providers, and policymakers should be aware of the potential financial implications related to reconstruction despite mandatory insurance coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many patients with breast cancer work for pay at the time of their diagnosis, and the treatment plan may threaten their livelihood. Understanding work experiences in a contemporary population-based sample is necessary to inform initiatives to reduce the burden of cancer care.Methods: Women who were 20 to 79 years old and had been diagnosed with stage 0 to II breast cancer, as reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries in 2014-2015, were surveyed. Of the 3672 eligible women, 2502 responded (68%); 1006 who reported working before their diagnosis were analyzed. Multivariate models evaluated correlates of missing work for >1 month and stopping work altogether versus missing work for ≤1 month.Results: In this diverse sample, most patients (62%) underwent lumpectomy; 16% underwent unilateral mastectomy (8% with reconstruction); and 23% underwent bilateral mastectomy (19% with reconstruction). One-third (33%) received chemotherapy. Most (84%) worked full-time before their diagnosis; however, only 50% had paid sick leave, 39% had disability benefits, and 38% had flexible work schedules. Surgical treatment was strongly correlated with missing >1 month of work (odds ratio [OR] for bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction vs lumpectomy, 7.8) and with stopping work altogether (OR for bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction vs lumpectomy, 3.1). Chemotherapy receipt (OR for missing >1 month, 1.3; OR for stopping work altogether, 3.9) and race (OR for missing >1 month for blacks vs whites, 2.0; OR for stopping work altogether for blacks vs whites, 1.7) also correlated. Those with paid sick leave were less likely to stop working (OR, 0.5), as were those with flexible schedules (OR, 0.3).Conclusions: Working patients who received more aggressive treatments were more likely to experience substantial employment disruptions. Cancer 2017;123:4791-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Little is known about how the individual decision styles and values of breast cancer patients at the time of treatment decision making are associated with the consideration of different treatment options and specifically with the consideration of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). METHODS Newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer who were treated in 2013-2014 were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Los Angeles and Georgia and were surveyed approximately 7 months after surgery (n = 2578; response rate, 71%). The primary outcome was the consideration of CPM (strong vs less strong). The association between patients' values and decision styles and strong consideration was assessed with multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS Approximately one-quarter of women (25%) reported strong/very strong consideration of CPM, and another 29% considered it moderately/weakly. Decision styles, including a rational-intuitive approach to decision making, varied. The factors most valued by women at the time of treatment decision making were as follows: avoiding worry about recurrence (82%) and reducing the need for more surgery (73%). In a multivariate analysis, patients who preferred to make their own decisions, those who valued avoiding worry about recurrence, and those who valued avoiding radiation significantly more often strongly considered CPM ( P < .05), whereas those who reported being more logical and those who valued keeping their breast did so less often. CONCLUSIONS Many patients considered CPM, and the consideration was associated with both decision styles and values. The variability in decision styles and values observed in this study suggests that formally evaluating these characteristics at or before the initial treatment encounter could provide an opportunity for improving patient clinician discussions. Cancer 2017;123:4547-4555. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guideline-concordant local therapy options for early breast cancer include lumpectomy plus whole breast irradiation (Lump+WBI), lumpectomy plus brachytherapy, mastectomy alone, mastectomy plus reconstruction, and, in older women, lumpectomy alone. We performed a comparative examination of each treatment's complications and cost to assess their relative values.Methods: Using the MarketScan database of younger women with private insurance and the SEER-Medicare database of older women with public insurance, we identified 105 211 women with early breast cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2011. We used diagnosis and procedural codes to identify treatment complications within 24 months of diagnosis and compared complications by treatment using two-sided logistic regression. Mean total and complication-related cost, relative to Lump+WBI, were calculated from a payer's perspective and adjusted for differences in covariables using linear regression. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Lump+WBI was the most commonly used treatment. Mastectomy plus reconstruction was associated with nearly twice the complication risk of Lump+WBI (Marketscan: 54.3% vs 29.6%, relative risk [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.82 to 1.91, P < .001; SEER-Medicare: 66.1% vs 37.6%, RR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.69 to 1.82, P < .001) and was also associated with higher adjusted total cost (Marketscan: $22 481 greater than Lump+WBI; SEER-Medicare: $1748 greater) and complication-related cost (Marketscan: $9017 greater; SEER-Medicare: $2092 greater). Brachytherapy had modestly higher total cost and complications than WBI. Lumpectomy alone entailed lower cost and complications in the SEER-Medicare cohort only.Conclusions: Mastectomy plus reconstruction results in substantially higher complications and cost than other guideline-concordant treatment options for early breast cancer. These findings are relevant to patients evaluating their local therapy options and to value-based population health management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry data have been used to suggest underuse and disparities in receipt of radiotherapy. Prior studies have cautioned that SEER may underascertain radiotherapy but lacked adequate representation to assess whether underascertainment varies by geography or patient sociodemographic characteristics. The authors sought to determine rates and correlates of underascertainment of radiotherapy in recent SEER data. METHODS: The authors evaluated data from 2290 survey respondents with nonmetastatic breast cancer, aged 20 to 79 years, diagnosed from June of 2005 to February 2007 in Detroit and Los Angeles and reported to SEER registries (73% response rate). Survey responses regarding treatment and sociodemographic factors were merged with SEER data. The authors compared radiotherapy receipt as reported by patients versus SEER records. The authors then assessed correlates of radiotherapy underascertainment in SEER. RESULTS: Of 1292 patients who reported receiving radiotherapy, 273 were coded as not receiving radiotherapy in SEER (underascertained). Underascertainment was more common in Los Angeles than in Detroit (32.0% vs 11.25%, P < .001). On multivariate analysis, radiotherapy underascertainment was significantly associated in each registry (Los Angeles, Detroit) with stage ( P = .008, P = .026), income ( P < .001, P = .050), mastectomy receipt ( P < .001, P < .001), chemotherapy receipt ( P < .001, P = .045), and diagnosis at a hospital that was not accredited by the American College of Surgeons ( P < .001, P < .001). In Los Angeles, additional significant variables included younger age ( P < .001), nonprivate insurance ( P < .001), and delayed receipt of radiotherapy ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: SEER registry data as currently collected may not be an appropriate source for documentation of rates of radiotherapy receipt or investigation of geographic variation in the radiation treatment of breast cancer. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few studies have evaluated the association between patient decision involvement and surgery received among racially and ethnically diverse patients or patients’ attitudes about surgery and the role of family and friends in surgical treatment choices. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose: To document and explain the current radiotherapeutic management of invasive breast cancer in North America and Europe. We also identified a number of areas of agreement, as well as controversy, toward which additional clinical research should be directed. Methods and materials: An original survey questionnaire was developed to assess radiation oncologists'' self-reported management of breast cancer. The questionnaire was administered to physician members of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. We present the results of the comparative analysis of 702 responses from North America and 435 responses from Europe. Results: Several areas of national and international controversy were identified, including the selection of appropriate candidates for postmastectomy radiation therapy (RT) and the appropriate management of the regional lymph nodes after mastectomy, as well as after lumpectomy. Only 40.7% and 36.1% of respondents would use postmastectomy RT in patients with 1–3 positive lymph nodes in North America and Europe, respectively. Sentinel lymph node biopsy was offered more frequently by North American than European respondents (p <0.0001) and more frequently by academic than nonacademic respondents in North America (p < 0.05). The average radiation fraction size was larger in Europe than in North America (p < 0.01). European respondents offered RT to the internal mammary chain more often than did the North American respondents (p < 0.001). North American respondents were more likely to offer RT to the supraclavicular fossa (p < 0.001) and axilla (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Marked differences were found in physician opinions regarding the management of breast cancer, with statistically significant international differences in patterns of care. This survey highlighted areas of controversy, providing support for international randomized trials to optimize the RT management of invasive breast cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• We present multidisciplinary consensus-based target volume definitions for chest wall irradiation after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. • Practical guidelines for target volume contouring in case of a retro-pectoral as well as a pre-pectoral implant are now available. • These guidelines allow anatomically risk-adapted radiation therapy planning, avoiding the inclusion of non-target tissue like the implant. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) rates after mastectomy are increasing. Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) contouring guidelines for target volumes in the setting of IBR are lacking. Therefore, many patients who have had IBR receive PMRT to target volumes similar to conventional simulator-based whole breast irradiation. The aim of this paper is to describe delineation guidelines for PMRT after implant-based IBR based on a thorough understanding of the surgical procedures, disease stage, patterns of recurrence and radiation techniques. They are based on a consensus endorsed by a global multidisciplinary group of breast cancer experts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: For older women with breast cancer, local therapy options may include lumpectomy plus whole-breast irradiation (Lump + WBI), lumpectomy plus brachytherapy (Lump + Brachy), lumpectomy alone (Lump alone), mastectomy without radiation therapy (Mast alone), and mastectomy plus radiation therapy (Mast + RT). We surveyed a population-based cohort of older breast cancer survivors to assess the association of local therapy with long-term quality-of-life outcomes.Methods and Materials: We used nationally comprehensive Medicare claims to identify women aged ≥67 years in whom nonmetastatic breast cancer was diagnosed in 2009, who were treated with 1 of the 5 aforementioned treatment options, and who were still alive in 2015. From this cohort, 1650 patients (330 patients per treatment) were randomly selected. A survey that included the CanSORT (Cancer Surveillance and Outcomes Research Team) Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcome, BREAST-Q, Decisional Regret Scale, and EQ-5D-3L was mailed to potential participants. We used multivariable linear regression to assess associations between local therapy and outcomes after adjusting for patient, disease, and treatment covariates.Results: Among the 489 women who returned the surveys (30% response rate), the median age at diagnosis was 72 years (range, 67-87 years). The interval from diagnosis to survey completion was approximately 6 years for all patients. Compared with Lump + WBI (adjusted score, 3.40), the CanSORT cosmetic satisfaction scores were higher for Lump + Brachy (score, 3.77; P = .007) and Lump alone (score, 3.80; P = .04) and lower for Mast + RT (score, 3.01; P = .006). Similar trends were seen for BREAST-Q cosmetic satisfaction. BREAST-Q psychosocial, sexual, and physical well-being and EQ-5D-3L global health status tended to be better in patients treated with less irradiation and less surgery. BREAST-Q adverse radiation effects were worse for Lump + WBI compared with Lump + Brachy. Decisional regret regarding surgery and radiation therapy did not differ across groups. Compared with patients treated with Lump + WBI, patients treated with Lump + Brachy and Lump alone reported slightly higher rates of in-breast recurrence (excess risk of 5.8% and 6.4%, respectively; P = .01).Conclusions: In this nationally diverse cohort, less irradiation and less surgery were associated with better long-term quality-of-life outcomes. However, patient regret regarding surgery and radiation therapy was similar across all groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To quantify lung perfusion changes after breast/chest wall radiation therapy (RT) using pre- and post-RT single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) attenuation-corrected perfusion scans; and correlate decreased perfusion with adjuvant RT dose for breast cancer in a prospective clinical trial.Methods and Materials: As part of an institutional review board-approved trial studying the impact of RT technique on lung function in node-positive breast cancer, patients received breast/chest wall and regional nodal irradiation including superior internal mammary node RT to 50 to 52.2 Gy with a boost to the tumor bed/mastectomy scar. All patients underwent quantitative SPECT/CT lung perfusion scanning before RT and 1 year after RT. The SPECT/CT scans were co-registered, and the ratio of decreased perfusion after RT relative to the pre-RT perfusion scan was calculated to allow for direct comparison of SPECT/CT perfusion changes with delivered RT dose. The average ratio of decreased perfusion was calculated in 10-Gy dose increments from 0 to 60 Gy.Results: Fifty patients had complete lung SPECT/CT perfusion data available. No patient developed symptoms consistent with pulmonary toxicity. Nearly all patients demonstrated decreased perfusion in the left lung according to voxel-based analyses. The average ratio of lung perfusion deficits increased for each 10-Gy increment in radiation dose to the lung, with the largest changes in regions of lung that received 50 to 60 Gy (ratio 0.72 [95% confidence interval 0.64-0.79], P<.001) compared with the 0- to 10-Gy region. For each increase in 10 Gy to the left lung, the lung perfusion ratio decreased by 0.06 (P<.001).Conclusions: In the assessment of 50 patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with RT in a prospective clinical trial, decreased lung perfusion by SPECT/CT was demonstrated. Our study allowed for quantification of lung perfusion defects in a prospective cohort of breast cancer patients for whom attenuation-corrected SPECT/CT scans could be registered directly to RT treatment fields for precise dose estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Population-based studies suggest underuse of radiation therapy, especially after mastectomy. Because radiation oncology is a referral-based specialty, knowledge and attitudes of upstream providers, specifically surgeons, may influence patients' decisions regarding radiation, including whether it is even considered. Therefore, we sought to evaluate surgeons' knowledge of pertinent risk information, their patterns of referral, and the correlates of surgeon knowledge and referral in specific breast cancer scenarios. Methods and Materials: We surveyed a national sample of 750 surgeons, with a 67% response rate. We analyzed responses from those who had seen at least 1 breast cancer patient in the past year (n=403), using logistic regression models to identify correlates of knowledge and appropriate referral. Results: Overall, 87% of respondents were general surgeons, and 64% saw >10 breast cancer patients in the previous year. In a scenario involving a 45-year-old undergoing lumpectomy, only 45% correctly estimated the risk of locoregional recurrence without radiation therapy, but 97% would refer to radiation oncology. In a patient with 2 of 20 nodes involved after mastectomy, 30% would neither refer to radiation oncology nor provide accurate information to make radiation decisions. In a patient with 4 of 20 nodes involved after mastectomy, 9% would not refer to radiation oncology. Fewer than half knew that the Oxford meta-analysis revealed a survival benefit from radiation therapy after lumpectomy (45%) or mastectomy (32%). Only 16% passed a 7-item knowledge test; female and more-experienced surgeons were more likely to pass. Factors significantly associated with appropriate referral to radiation oncology included breast cancer volume, tumor board participation, and knowledge. Conclusions: Many surgeons have inadequate knowledge regarding the role of radiation in breast cancer management, especially after mastectomy. Targeted educational interventions may improve the quality of care. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

[Display omitted] • Our systematic review of bolus use during PMRT made two important findings: • Bolus use leads to more acute toxicity. • Bolus use does not seem to improve local control, unless patient is high risk. • Bolus may be only indicated for patients with a high risk of local recurrence. Post mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) reduces locoregional recurrence (LRR) and breast cancer mortality for selected patients. Bolus overcomes the skin-sparing effect of external-beam radiotherapy, ensuring adequate dose to superficial regions at risk of local recurrence (LR). This systematic review summarizes the current evidence regarding the impact of bolus on LR and acute toxicity in the setting of PMRT. 27 studies were included. The use of bolus led to higher rates of acute grade 3 radiation dermatitis (pooled rates of 9.6% with bolus vs. 1.2% without). Pooled crude LR rates from thirteen studies (n = 3756) were similar with (3.5%) and without (3.6%) bolus. Bolus may be indicated in cases with a high risk of LR in the skin, but seems not to be necessary for all patients. Further work is needed to define the role of bolus in PMRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To examine the frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including "older" elderly (age ≥80 years).Methods and Materials: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate cancer (n=86,544) from 2006 to 2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson χ2 tested associations between age and guideline concordance.Results: Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in stage III breast cancer, receipt of postmastectomy RT (70%, 46%, and 21% in patients aged 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years, respectively; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 years: 85% and 82% in age 66-69 and 70-75 years; and ≤10 years: 70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in stage I to II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated postlumpectomy RT (9%, 16%, and 23% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001).Conclusion: Actual treatment of older elderly cancer patients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]