Search

Body image concerns often arise during and after treatment and are a major concern in up to 67% of breast cancer survivors. Negative changes in body image are a predictor of worse satisfaction with appearance and poor quality of life outcomes. Opportunities to mitigate the negative impact of cancer treatment on a patient’s body image present during preoperative education or in the neoadjuvant setting, or during surgical management, adjuvant therapy delivery, and survivorship. The surgical management of breast cancer has evolved from breast amputations to procedures that provide improved cosmesis without compromising the oncologic outcome. The advent of the sentinel lymph node biopsy and lymphatic reconstruction techniques has led to decreased axillary morbidity. Modified radiation techniques and systemic therapies tailored to subtype limit unnecessary exposure to skin and systemic toxicities. Finally, incorporating prehabilitation and survivorship support optimizes the physical and psychosocial well-being of these patients. Setting expectations, treatment de-escalation when appropriate, morbidity risk reduction and improved screening and management of psychological sequelae during survivorship can decrease breast cancer treatment’s negative impact on body image. The following review synthesizes interventions during preoperative planning, local and systemic treatment, and survivorship to prevent poor body image outcomes without compromising oncologic success.

Inter-rater reliability between breast surgical oncologists and reconstructive surgeons using cosmesis scales, and the correlation between their observations and patients’ own subjective assessments, is poorly understood. Patients undergoing BCS in a prospective trial rated their cosmetic outcome on a Likert scale (poor/fair/good/excellent) at the postoperative and 1-year time points; photographs were also taken. Three breast surgical oncologists (not involved in these cases) and two reconstructive surgeons were asked to independently rate cosmesis using the Harvard/NSABP/RTOG scale. Overall, 55 and 17 patients had photographs and Likert self-evaluations at the postoperative and 1-year time points, respectively. There was poor agreement between surgeon and patient ratings postoperatively [kappas − 0.042 (p = 0.659), 0.069 (p = 0.226), and 0.076 (p = 0.090) for the breast surgical oncologists; and 0.018 (p = 0.689) and 0.112 (p = 0.145) for the reconstructive surgeons], and poor interobserver agreement between surgeons of the same specialty (kappa − 0.087, 95% confidence interval [CI] − 0.091 to − 0.082, p = 0.223 for breast surgical oncologists; and kappa − 0.150, 95% CI − 0.157 to − 0.144, p = 0.150, for reconstructive surgeons). At 1 year, the interobserver agreement between breast surgical oncologists was better (kappa 0.507, 95% CI 0.501–0.512, p < 0.001); however, there was still poor correlation between the reconstructive surgeons (kappa − 0.040, 95% CI − 0.049 to − 0.031, p = 0.772). Agreement between surgeon and patient ratings remained poor at this time point [kappas − 0.115 (p = 0.477), 0.177 (p = 0.245), and 0.101 (p = 0.475) for breast surgical oncologists; and 0.335 (p = 0.037) and −0.118 (p = 0.221) for reconstructive surgeons]. Despite gradation scales for measuring cosmesis after BCS, high levels of agreement between surgeons is lacking and these do not always reflect patients’ subjective assessments.

Francesca Savioli,1,* Subodh Seth,2,* Elizabeth Morrow,1 Julie Doughty,3 Sheila Stallard,3 Andy Malyon,4 Laszlo Romics1,5 1Academic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK; 2Department of Breast Surgery, Forth Valley Royal Hospital, Larbert, UK; 3Department of Breast Surgery, Gartnavel General Hospital, Glasgow, UK; 4Canniesburn Department of Plastic Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK; 5Department of Breast Surgery, New Victoria Hospital, Glasgow, UK*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Francesca Savioli Email Francesca.savioli@glasgow.ac.ukIntroduction: Extreme Oncoplastic Breast Conservation Surgery (EOBCS) is offered in selected patients with multifocal or multicentric breast cancer (MFMC). Recent evidence has suggested that EOBCS may be a valuable resource for patients with MFMC who may avoid the risk associated with mastectomy in favour of the benefits of breast conservation without risking their oncological outcomes. Our study examined the practice of EOBCS in two regional breast units in Glasgow, United Kingdom.Materials and Methods: A prospectively collected database of 50 patients treated with EOBC in two breast units in Glasgow between 2007 and 2018 were evaluated, and clinical outcomes were observed.Results: Fifty patients (median age 55) underwent EOBCS, of which 43 (86%) had invasive disease. Median tumour size was 55mm (50– 90) and multifocal disease was identified in 22 (44%) patients. Nine patients (18%) were found to have positive margins and underwent a second procedure, with 6 (12%) proceeding to mastectomy. Five-year disease free survival rate was 91.5%, while cancer-specific survival was 95.7%.Conclusion: EOBCS is oncologically safe in short-term follow-up. Large scale studies are required to confirm these preliminary results, in order to offer EOBCS as a valid option to patients with advanced or multifocal breast cancer.Keywords: extreme oncoplasty, therapeutic mammoplasty, breast conservation therapy, multifocal breast cancer, multicentric breast cancer

Introduction: Oncoplastic breast surgery combines oncologic partial mastectomy with ipsilateral defect repair using volume displacement and volume replacement techniques with contralateral symmetrising surgery as appropriate. Oncoplastic surgery aims to maintain quality of life by pre-empting and mitigating against breast asymmetry whilst not compromising oncological effectiveness. Although growing in popularity in North America, many patients still do not have access to these techniques which usually involve longer operation times and require a surgeon with specialized oncoplastic training. This study demonstrates the implementation of an effective oncoplastic surgical practice in a community hospital within Canada and shows low rates of peri-operative complications as well as high levels of patient-reported outcome measures. Methods:A retrospective chart review of consecutive patients diagnosed with Stage 0-3 breast cancer treated with level I and level II oncoplastic techniques by a single breast surgeon was undertaken. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, procedure types, and clinical outcomes were collected. Patient satisfaction was assessed with the Breast-Q questionnaire administered pre-operatively as well as 3 months and 9 months post-operatively. Results:Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery was performed in 340 patients over a 31 month period from 2017-2019. The average size of breast lesion was 1.8 cm with 96 patients having lesions 2-5 cm in size, and 10 patients having tumours >5cm. Thirty (8.8%) patients experienced a complication requiring intervention. Margin revisions were required in 21.8% of patients which reduced to 18% after the implementation of the new margin consensus guidelines. The completion mastectomy rate was 4.7%. Contralateral symmetrizing procedures were performed in 31 (9.1%) of patients by the surgeon performing the patient's breast conservation surgery. Breast Q scores increased across breast satisfaction, process of care, psychosocial, physical, and sexual satisfaction domains post-operatively. Conclusion:This study demonstrates the feasibility of an oncoplastic breast surgery practice in a busy community hospital in Canada. This adds to the growing body of North American data on the clinical and oncological safety of these techniques and introduces the idea of collecting patient-reported outcome measures within a Canadian population. We hope that this will serve to aid in the recruitment of oncoplastic-trained surgeons to both teaching and community hospitals and enable these techniques to become the standard of care in North America. Citation Format: Ashley DiPasquale, Zofia Prus-Czarnecka, Lindsay Delmar, Lashan Peiris. Clinical and patient reported outcomes in oncoplastic breast conservation surgery from a single surgeon's practice in a busy community hospital in Canada [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS1-61.

Significant progress has been made in the treatment and outcome of breast cancer. Some of the most dramatic strides have been in the surgical management of breast cancer. Breast-conserving therapy (BCT), including wide local excision of the tumor followed by irradiation, has become a standard treatment option for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. Large cooperative group trials have contributed to the paradigm shift from mastectomy to BCT. This review reports the landmark BCT trials that provided the data for current surgical practices. The review also describes the body of literature contributing to the increasing use of oncoplastic techniques for patients undergoing BCT.

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) is well established for the management of primary operable breast cancer, with oncologic outcomes comparable to those of mastectomy. It remains unclear whether re-conservation therapy (RCT) is suitable for those patients who develop ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), for whom mastectomy is generally recommended. We identified women who underwent BCT for invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ and developed IBTR as a first event, comparing the pattern of subsequent events and survival for those treated by RCT versus mastectomy. Of 16,968 patents who had BCT, 322 (1.9%) developed an isolated IBTR as a first event between 1999 and 2019. 130 (40%) had RCT and 192 (60%) mastectomy. Compared to mastectomy, the RCT patients were older (66 vs 53

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is a recognized surgical procedure to correct deformities following breast conservation surgery (BCS) for breast cancer. However, there are concerns about the oncological safety of this technique. In this study we have reviewed the current literature to assess whether AFG adversely influences the oncological outcome after BCS for breast cancer. METHODS: We have searched the medical literature using the Embase and PubMed search engines from conception until May 2019 to identify all relevant studies of patients who underwent AFG after BCS. Meta-analysis and meta-regression methodologies were used to calculate the overall relative risk (RR) of loco-regional recurrence (LRR) rates for case-control and case series studies (with historical controls) respectively. RESULTS: We have identified 26 eligible studies with a total of 1640 patients who had undergone fat transfer after lumpectomy for breast cancer. The meta-analysis of 11 studies revealed an overall RR for LRR of 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI):0.14-1.66]. The meta-regression of case series revealed an overall incidence of LRR of 1.85% compared with 2.53% for historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: Our study lends further support to the notion that fat transfer after lumpectomy for breast cancer does not seem to increase the risk of LRR. However further prospective research is required in order to confirm this.

More women with unilateral early stage breast cancer are electing bilateral mastectomy (BM). Many cite anxiety, fear of recurrence, and certain aesthetic desires in their decision-making. Yet conflicting data exist regarding how these factors both inform and are modulated by medical decision-making, especially among women eligible for breast conservation (BCT). This study sought to assess the trajectories of women undergoing various surgical procedures for breast cancer. We performed a prospective longitudinal study of women with unilateral, non-hereditary breast cancer who underwent BCT, unilateral mastectomy (UM), or BM. Women completed surveys before surgery and at 1, 9, and 15 months postop. Surveys included questions about treatment preferences, decisional control, the HADS-A anxiety scale, the Fear of Relapse/Recurrence Scale (FRRS), and the BREAST-Q. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare outcomes between BCT, UM, and BM groups at each time point. 203 women were recruited and 177 (87.2%) completed 15-month follow-up. Of these, 101 (57.0%) underwent BCT, 33 (18.6%) underwent UM, and 43 (24.2%) underwent BM. Generalized anxiety and FRRS scores were similar between BCT, UM, and BM groups and declined uniformly after surgery. Although baseline breast satisfaction was similar between groups, at 15 months, it was significantly lower in BM patients than in BCT patients. Women who felt “very” confident and “very” informed before surgery had lower anxiety, lower fear of recurrence, better psychosocial well-being (PSWB), and greater breast satisfaction at 15 months. While patients who undergo mastectomy have less long-term breast satisfaction, all patients can expect to experience similar improvements in anxiety and PSWB. Efforts should be made to ensure that patients are informed and confident regardless of which surgery is chosen, for this is the greatest predictor of better outcomes.

Margin status is one of the significant prognostic factors for recurrence in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The issue that merits consideration for oncologic safety and cost-effectiveness about the modalities to assure clear margins at initial surgical intervention remains controversial after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The presented study aimed to assess the impact of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS)-guided surgery on accurate localization of tumor site, adequacy of excision with clear margins, and healthy tissue sacrifice in BCS after NAC. Patients who had IOUS-guided BCS ater NAC were reviewed. No patient had preoperative localization with wire or radiotracer. Intraoperative real-time sonographic localization, sonographic margin assessment during resection, macroscopic and sonographic examination of specimen, and cavity shavings (CS) were done as the standard procedure. No frozen assessment was performed. One hundred ninety-four patients were included, in which 42.5% had pCR. IOUS-guided surgery accomplished successful localization of the targeted lesions in all patients. Per protocol, all inked margins on CS specimens were reported to be tumor-free in permanent histopathology. No re-excision or mastectomy was required. For a setting without CS, the negative predictive value (NPV) of IOUS rate was 96%. IOUS was found to over and underestimate tumor response to NAC both in 2% of patients. IOUS-guided surgery seems to be an efficient modality to perform adequate BCS after NAC with no additional localization method. Especially, when CS is integrated as a standard to BCS, IOUS seems to provide safe surgery for patients with no false negativity and a high rate of NPV.

Aims Hypofractionated radiation treatment (HFRT) following breast conservation surgery (BCS) has similar efficacy to conventionally fractionated radiation treatment (CFRT). This study updates outcomes for patients treated with HFRT in Christchurch, New Zealand, and reports on the pattern, timing and method of detection of recurrences to inform follow-up practice. Methods Between 2004 and 2006, 273 women with early breast cancer were treated with HFRT (42.5 Gray (Gy) in 16 fractions). Details of demographics, tumour characteristics, treatments, any recurrence (local, nodal or distant), follow-ups and date of death were collected. The primary endpoint was local recurrence rate (LRR); secondary endpoints were local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS). Results With a median follow-up of 12.9 years, 17 women developed a local recurrence. LRR at 5 and 10 years were 3.1% and 5.3%, respectively. Five-year LRFS was 91.7% and ten-year LRFS was 83.5%. The OS at five years was 93.7% and at ten years was 87.7%. For the 41 patients with a first recurrence at any site, 75.6% were symptomatic, 22% were screen detected with radiology and 2.4% were incidental findings. None of the first recurrences were detected when asymptomatic on clinical examination in follow-up clinics. Conclusions The rate of local recurrence following HFRT for BCS is low. No asymptomatic recurrence was detected by routine clinic follow-up. The utility of regular clinical examination for the detection of recurrence is low and this should inform follow-up strategies.

Background We previously reported that breast conservation was feasible for women with large or irregularly shaped breast cancers when tumor resection was guided by multiple localizing wires. We now report long-term outcomes of multiple-wire versus single-wire localized lumpectomies for breast cancer. Patients and Methods We retrospectively reviewed wire-localized lumpectomies at our institution from May 2000 to November 2006. Rates of ipsilateral in-breast tumor recurrence, metastasis, and subsequent unplanned diagnostic imaging and biopsy were compared between multiple-wire and single-wire cohorts. Results We identified 112 multiple-wire and 160 single-wire breast cancer lumpectomies that achieved clear margins. Median age was 64 years in the multiple-wire cohort and 57 years in the single-wire cohort. Mean lumpectomy volume was 75 mL in multiple-wire patients and 49 mL in single-wire patients (P = .003). Invasive tumor size, axillary node status, and use of radiation and systemic therapy were similar, but the multiple-wire group had more patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ only (38% vs. 28%). At 108 months’ median follow-up, there was no significant difference in local or distant recurrence rates between multiple-wire and single-wire cohorts. Six (5%) multiple-wire patients and 6 (4%) single-wire patients had local recurrences and 3 (3%) multiple-wire and 5 (3%) single-wire patients developed metastatic disease. Unplanned diagnostic imaging was required for 53 (47%) multiple-wire and 65 (41%) single-wire patients. Subsequent ipsilateral biopsy occurred in 15 (13%) multiple-wire and 19 (12%) single-wire patients. Conclusion Breast-conserving surgery with multiple localizing wires is a safe alternative to mastectomy for breast cancer patients with large mammographic lesions.

INTRODUCTION: Increasingly we are dealing with more and more impalpable breast lesions thanks to screening programmes, chemotherapy and in situ disease. There are various techniques already employed for assisting in surgery for impalpable lesions such as radioactive and magnetic markers. All of these have limitations and are only useful in surgery. Ultrasound can be used in clinic and theatre to locate tumours and sonographically visible markers. In our experience in the Cambridge breast unit we have found it is more satisfactory to use guidewires that are intraoperatively or preoperatively placed using ultrasound guidance. This allows for direct approach to the lesion at the same time limiting the dissection and volume of resection. The guidewire allows tactile feedback and helps with precision and accuracy of the excision as reflected in the specimen weights. In this study we look at the outcomes of intraoperatively and preoperatively placed guidewires using ultrasound for impalpable breast lesions between 2015 -2018 in the Cambridge Breast Unit. The primary outcomes are re-excision rate and average specimen weights. METHODS: Patients undergoing breast conservation surgery for impalpable lesions from 01/01/2015 to 30/07/2018 were included. Data was collected retrospectively from our electronic records system EPIC and analysed. RESULTS The results were divided into intraoperative localisations and preoperative localisations. A total of 441 lesions in 415 patients were included in this study. Preoperative localisationIntraoperative localisationNumber of patients193222Number of lesions210231*Re-excision rate per patient %19.2%14.0%Specimen weight per patient (grams)39.4g24.2g*Fishers exact 0.24 (NS) CONCLUSION: Impalpable lesions can be successfully localised using ultrasound guidance and a guidewire both intraoperatively and preoperatively with good outcomes. Intraoperative localisation has lower re-excision rates and specimen weights in our study as well as many other benefits for the patient and surgeon. We have looked into how easily and quickly we can train ultrasound naïve trainees in this technique and have achieved good results. Citation Format: Primeera Wignarajah, Vasiliki Papalouka, Parto Forouhi. The use of intraoperative ultrasound and guidewire placement to obtain low re-excision rates and increased accuracy of excision in impalpable breast lesions at the Cambridge Breast Unit [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-20-21.

Background Round block mammoplasty (RBM) is a type of Oncoplastic procedure to facilitate breast conservation surgery for breast cancer. Methods Retrospective study of 270 patients who underwent this surgery. The surgical and oncological outcomes of RBM were studied. Results The median age was 61 years and median follow-up 39 months. Most cancers (59%) were screen-detected. The location of the cancer was commonly in the upper outer quadrant followed by upper inner quadrant (20%). The average tumor size was 18 mm and in 48% of patients the whole tumor size increased to 23.5 mm due to associated DCIS. The median specimen weight was 41 gm. Forty patients (14.8%) had positive margins. Postoperative complications were seen in 18 patients (6.6%). There were 4 local and 1 axillary recurrences, and 8 distant metastasis. Contralateral symmetrising surgery was required in 13 patients (4.8%). Conclusion RBM is a robust and easily adaptable technique which provides good exposure for a safe oncological excision. The surgical and oncological outcomes are good and contralateral symmetrising surgery is rarely required.

Background: The role of oncoplastic breast conserving therapy (OPBCT) on physical function, morbidity and patient satisfaction has yet to be defined. Additionally, technique selection should be individualised and incorporate patient preference. The study aim was to investigate differences between "standard" (sBCT) and oncoplastic breast conservation (OPBCT) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when patients have been assessed in a standardised manner and technique selection has been reached through shared decision-making (SDM). Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of 215 women treated at a tertiary referral centre. Standardised surgical assessment included breast and lesion volumetry, definition of resection ratio, patient-related risk factors and patient preference. Postoperative morbidity and patient satisfaction were assessed by validated PROs tools (Diseases of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand-DASH and Breast-Q). Patient experience was assessed by semi-structured interviews. Results: There was no difference of the median values between OPBCT and sBCT in postoperative morbidity of the upper extremity (DASH 3.3 vs 5, p = 0.656) or the function of the chest wall (Breast-Q 82 vs 82, p = 0.758). Postoperative satisfaction with breasts did not differ either (Breast-Q 65 vs 61, p = 0.702). On the individual level, women that opted for OPBCT after SDM had improved satisfaction when compared to baseline (+3 vs -1, p = 0.001). Shared decision-making changed patient attitude in 69.8% of patients, leading most often to de-escalation from mastectomy. Conclusions: These findings support that a combination of standardised surgical assessment and SDM allows for tailored treatment and de-escalation of oncoplastic surgery without negatively affecting patient satisfaction and morbidity. De två första författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet.

Background: Surgical-site infections (SSIs) are the commonest cause of healthcare-related infections. Although a surgical care bundle (SCB), defined as a group of preventative measures, is effective in reducing SSIs, it has not been well documented in breast cancer surgery. We aimed to investigate the impact of SCB on SSI. Methods: A single-centre retrospective comparative cohort study between 2016 and 2020 was carried out. An SCB including eight different measures was implemented in October 2018 at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Patients who underwent non-reconstructive breast cancer surgery were included for analysis. The primary endpoint was SSI within 30 days after surgery. Results: Overall, 10.4% of patients (100/958) developed SSI. After SCB implementation, the overall SSI rate reduced from 11.8% to 8.9% (p = 0.15). The largest SSI rate reduction was seen in the subgroup that underwent breast conservation and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), from 18.8% to 9.8% (p = 0.01). In this multivariable analysis adjusting for patient and treatment factors, the implementation of SCB resulted in a statistically significant reduction in SSI risk (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40–0.99, p = 0.04). Conclusions: The implementation of a SCB could reduce the incidence of SSI in breast cancer surgery.

Introduction Recent data suggest that margins ≥2 mm after breast-conserving surgery may improve local control in invasive breast cancer (BC). By allowing large resection volumes, oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCII; Clough level II/Tübingen 5-6) may achieve better local control than conventional breast conserving surgery (BCS; Tübingen 1-2) or oncoplastic breast conservation with low resection volumes (OBCI; Clough level I/Tübingen 3-4). Methods Data from consecutive high-risk BC patients treated in 15 centers from the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium (OPBC) network, between January 2010 and December 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Results A total of 3,177 women were included, 30% of whom were treated with OBC (OBCI n = 663; OBCII n = 297). The BCS/OBCI group had significantly smaller tumors and smaller resection margins compared with OBCII (pT1: 50% vs. 37%, p = 0.002; proportion with margin p < 0.001). There were significantly more re-excisions due to R1 (“ink on tumor”) in the BCS/OBCI compared with the OBCII group (11% vs. 7%, p = 0.049). Univariate and multivariable regression analysis adjusted for tumor biology, tumor size, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment demonstrated no differences in local, regional, or distant recurrence-free or overall survival between the two groups. Conclusions Large resection volumes in oncoplastic surgery increases the distance from cancer cells to the margin of the specimen and reduces reexcision rates significantly. With OBCII larger tumors are resected with similar local, regional and distant recurrence-free as well as overall survival rates as BCS/OBCI.

Background Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), the most lethal form of breast cancer, constitutes 1–2% of all breast cancers in the United States. Multimodality therapy is the standard in management of non metastatic inflammatory breast cancer patients including neoadjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy and mastectomy followed by post mastectomy radiation. A modified radical mastectomy has been the standard surgical procedure of choice. The objective of this systematic review and metanalysis is to estimate the pooled benefits and adverse effects of performing modified radical mastectomy versus breast conservation surgery in the management of non metastatic IBC. Objective To evaluate, review and analyze the outcome of non metastatic IBC patients treated with mastectomy or breast conservation surgery as an integral part of the multimodality treatment of the disease. To highlight the evidence and quality of the included studies. To share in modifying the current guidelines. Methods An electronic search was conducted from the inception till Jan 2020 in the following bibliographic databases: Medline via PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles. We used different combinations of the following queries: ("Inflammatory Breast cancer" OR "breast cancer") AND ("Conservative Treatment" [Mesh] OR "conservative surgery" OR "breast conservative surgery" OR "partial mastectomy"). The search have been done with no limit regarding the year publication. Results After reviewing five studies we found that our results favors the use of modified radical mastectomy over breast conservation surgery in terms of the overall survival and breast cancer specific free survival, however, partial mastectomy could be an effective and safe option in selected group of patients with non metastatic IBC based on the response to NAC an patient’s preference. Conclusions Breast surgery is of great significance to the clinical outcomes of IBC. Standard mastectomy shouldn’t be the only recommended surgical treatment. Individualized surgical procedures can be safely performed in non-metastatic IBC patients based on the response of NAC and patient’s preference.

Aim We sought to compare breast conservation therapy & mastectomy as treatment of occult breast cancer in terms of recurrence. Methods It is a retrospective cross sectional study conducted on patients diagnosed to have occult breast cancer and going for either breast conservation therapy or mastectomy at The Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi between January 200o to December 2018, patients will be divided into two groups, first group will be consisting of patients who underwent breast conservation therapy and 2nd one will be of patients who had mastectomy. Patients will be included by consecutive sampling technique. Hospital database will be used to identify patients and data collected on a self designed tool using files and electronic patient records. Patients in both groups will be followed to see local recurrence from date of diagnosis to 2 years post operatively in hospital data base and their files, and then their data will be compared with the reference studies reported in this article. Results Awaited as the study is ongoing. Conclusions Awaited as study is ongoing.

BACKGROUND In early studies, local recurrence (LR) rates were higher after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in comparison with upfront surgery. Modern outcomes are uncertain, particularly among those who are initially breast-conserving surgery-ineligible (BCSi) and downstage to being breast-conserving surgery-eligible (BCSe). METHODS Among patients with cT1-3 breast cancer treated from 2014 to 2018 who were BCSe after NAC, clinicopathologic characteristics and LR were compared between initially BCSe patients and BCSi patients who downstaged. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) eligibility was determined prospectively. RESULTS Among 685 patients, 243 (35%) were BCSe before and after NAC and had BCS; 282 (41%) were BCSi before NAC, downstaged to BCSe, and had BCS; and 160 (23%) were BCSi before NAC, downstaged to BCSe, and chose mastectomy. The median age was 52 years, and most cancers were cT1-2 (84%), cN+ (61%), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+; 38%) or triple-negative (34%). Those who were BCSe before NAC had a lower cT stage, whereas those who chose mastectomy were younger (P < .05). NAC was usually ACT (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and a taxane)-based (92%), 99% of HER2+ patients received dual blockade, and 99% of BCS patients received adjuvant radiation. At a median follow-up of 35 months, 22 patients (3.2%) had developed LR. The Kaplan-Meier 4-year LR rates were not different among the groups (1.9% for those who were BCSe before and after NAC, 6.3% for those who downstaged to being BCSe and underwent BCS, and 2.7% for those who downstaged and underwent mastectomy; P = .17). CONCLUSIONS LR rates are low after NAC and BCS, even among BCSi patients who downstage, and they are not improved in patients who downstage and choose mastectomy. Mastectomy can be safely avoided in BCSi patients who downstage with NAC.

Secretory carcinoma is a rare and indolent breast cancer with a lack of established treatment paradigms. We describe a case of a woman who underwent breast conservative therapy in the modern era. A 48 year old woman with a screen-detected left breast cancer was found to have early-stage secretory carcinoma after definitive breast conservation surgery. Further management with adjuvant radiation was recommended. After definitive breast conservative surgery, final pathology was notable for secretory breast carcinoma due to the immunohistologic characteristics of the tumor, ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion, and histologic findings. After multi-disciplinary discussion, it was recommended that the patient proceed with adjuvant radiation. She was treated using a modestly hypofractionated regimen of 4256 cGy in 16 fractions. She tolerated the treatment well, developing only grade 1 radiation dermatitis. At 1 year follow-up she was clinically and radiographically free of disease. With a shift in management toward breast conservative therapy, defining the role of adjuvant radiation for secretory carcinomas in the modern era is of increasing importance. Modestly hypofractionated radiation is well-tolerated. Oncologic outcomes will be assessed with continued long-term follow-up.

With the advent of breast conservation options in the 1970s, as well as wider acceptance of breast reconstruction in cancer patients in 1980/1990, ending up with evolution of oncoplastic concepts in the early 2000s, detailed surgical anatomy of the breast became important. This short article reviews surgical anatomy of breast with particular emphasis on innervation and blood supply to the skin and nipple-areolar complex, as well as points out the concept of compartmental breast cancer anatomy. Meticulous dissection and avoidance of transection of major vessels and nerves constitutes the crucial factor for satisfactory results of surgery in terms of preservation of sensation as well as appropriate vitality of skin.

BACKGROUND Patients with an in-breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy have a high risk of distant metastasis and disease-related mortality. Classifying clinical parameters that increase risk for recurrence after IBTR remains a challenge. AIM To describe primary and recurrent tumor characteristics in patients who experience an IBTR and understand the relationship between these characteristics and disease outcomes. METHODS Patients with stage 0-II breast cancer treated with lumpectomy and adjuvant radiation were identified from institutional databases of patients treated from 2003-2017 at our institution. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival, and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. We identified patients who experienced an isolated IBTR. Concordance of hormone receptor status and location of tumor from primary to recurrence was evaluated. The effect of clinical and treatment parameters on disease outcomes was also evaluated. RESULTS We identified 2164 patients who met the eligibility criteria. The median follow-up for all patients was 3.73 [interquartile range (IQR) 2.27-6.07] years. Five-year OS was 97.7% (95%CI: 96.8%-98.6%) with 28 deaths; 5-year LRFS was 98.0% (97.2-98.8) with 31 IBTRs. We identified 37 patients with isolated IBTR, 19 (51.4%) as ductal carcinoma in situ and 18 (48.6%) as invasive disease, of whom 83.3% had an in situ component. Median time from initial diagnosis to IBTR was 1.97 (IQR: 1.03-3.5) years. Radiotherapy information was available for 30 of 37 patients. Median whole-breast dose was 40.5 Gy and 23 patients received a boost to the tumor bed. Twenty-five of thirty-two (78.1%) patients had concordant hormone receptor status, HER-2 receptor status, and estrogen receptor (ER) (P = 0.006) and progesterone receptor (PR) (P = 0.001) status from primary to IBTR were significantly associated. There were no observed changes in HER-2 status from primary to IBTR. The concordance between quadrant of primary to IBTR was 10/19 [(62.2%), P = 0.008]. Tumor size greater than 1.5 cm (HR = 0.44, 95%CI: 0.22-0.90, P = 0.02) and use of endocrine therapy upfront (HR = 0.36, 95%CI: 0.18-0.73, P = 0.004) decreased the risk of IBTR. CONCLUSION Among patients with early stage breast cancer who had breast conserving surgery treated with adjuvant RT, ER/PR status and quadrant were highly concordant from primary to IBTR. Tumor size greater than 1.5 cm and use of adjuvant endocrine therapy were significantly associated with decreased risk of IBTR.

Purpose: To assess the cosmetic impact of breast conserving surgery (BCS), whole breast irradiation (WBI) fractionation and tumour bed boost (TBB) use in a phase III trial for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Materials and methods: Baseline and 3-year cosmesis were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Cosmetic Rating System and digital images in a randomised trial of non-low risk DCIS treated with postoperative WBI +/− TBB. Baseline cosmesis was assessed for four geographic clusters of treating centres. Cosmetic failure was a global score of fair or poor. Cosmetic deterioration was a score change from excellent or good at baseline to fair or poor at three years. Odds ratios for cosmetic deterioration by WBI dose-fractionation and TBB use were calculated for both scoring systems. Results: 1608 women were enrolled from 11 countries between 2007 and 2014. 85–90% had excellent or good baseline cosmesis independent of geography or assessment method. TBB (16 Gy in 8 fractions) was associated with a >2-fold risk of cosmetic deterioration (p < 0.001). Hypofractionated WBI (42.5 Gy in 16 fractions) achieved statistically similar 3-year cosmesis compared to conventional WBI (50 Gy in 25 fractions) (p ≥ 0.18). The adverse impact of a TBB was not significantly associated with WBI fractionation (interaction p ≥ 0.30). Conclusions: Cosmetic failure from BCS was similar across international jurisdictions. A TBB of 16 Gy increased the rate of cosmetic deterioration. Hypofractionated WBI achieved similar 3-year cosmesis as conventional WBI in women treated with BCS for DCIS.

Objectives Extreme oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (eOPBCS) allows breast conservation for tumours ≥ 50 mm, but long-term outcomes are unclear. We investigated early complications and the longer-term clinical and oncological outcomes following eOPBCS to assess the clinical utility and safety of this technique. Materials and methods A prospectively collected database of all eOPBCS procedures (1993–2016) using LD miniflaps (LDm) and therapeutic mammoplasties (TM) was interrogated and cross-checked with hospital records to establish length of follow up (FU), clinical outcomes (complications, revisions), local recurrence (LR) and survival. Results Ninety eOPBCS procedures (62 LDm, 28 TM) performed for large tumours (mean 67 [50–177] mm) were identified, overall FU 80 (10–308) months (LDm 91 [13–308], TM 54 [10–120] months). Forty two per cent were node positive, and 2 were benign (benign cases excluded from LR and FU analysis). Eleven patients required surgery for involved excision margins (LDm 3 re-excisions and 2 mastectomies, TM 6 mastectomies). Surgery for complications and subsequent revision was required in 6% and 37% of LDm and 18% and 7% of TM patients, respectively. Seven patients developed LR (LDm 5 versus TM 2) giving a predicted 5 and 10 year LR rate of 1.1% and 16%. Conclusion Long-term FU of this unique series has confirmed that eOPBCS is a safe procedure for patients with bulky tumours normally treated by mastectomy, without risking local control. TM patients experienced more early complications but LDm patients required more revisions over a more prolonged period of FU.

Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in Bangladeshi women. Breast sacrificing treatment is still now the common practice in our country. Now a day’s breast conservative treatment is the standard treatment of breast cancer without compromising the survival. Objective: To observe local recurrence and distant metastasis free survival and overall survival of patients with breast cancer. Methods: Between January 1996 and December 2010, breast conserving treatment was carried out in 237 female patients with breast cancer in different Institutions of Bangladesh. Clinical staging was recorded by physical examination, relevant investigations as well as surgical records. Revised breast conserving surgery was carried out in those who had positive surgical margins or palpable disease. The patients with large but operable cancer or locally advanced cancer were treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by breast conserving surgery. Systemic adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy and or hormone therapy) and adjuvant radiotherapy were given in all patients. After completion of treatment, the patients were followed up with a standard protocol and data were compiled and analysed. Results: Among 237 patients who underwent breast conserving therapy 13 patients were excluded from the study for various reasons. Total 224 female patients with breast cancer who followed all the treatment schedules and attended for regular follow up were included in the study. They were between 22- 74 years of age, mean age 42.35 years; premenopausal 152 (68%). Sixty five percent (146 patients) was localized cancer (T1-2N0M0), 31.6% was regional cancer (T1-3N1M0), five cases were locally advanced stage (T4bN12M0) and two metastastatic cancer (T2-3N1M1). All most all (98%) were Infiltrating duct cell carcinoma except four which were Intraductal carcinoma in situ (IDIS). Estrogen and progesterone receptors were positive in 57% , HER2 positive (+++) in 24% of Patients. Lumpectomy/quandrentectomy with/without axillary clearance was done in 158 patients, revised breast conserving surgery in 53 cases, mastectomy in 8 cases and only biopsy done but no surgical treatment in five cases.Chemotherapy was given in 192 patients (86%); adjuvant 122 cases and neoadjuvant 70 cases. Hormone therapy in 182 patients. Radiotherapy: in 222 cases. Follow up period was 4 years to 19 years, median 10 years. Overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) was 84% and 70% respectively. Local recurrence occurred in 14(6%) cases and distant metastasis in 54 cases (24%). Conclusion: Breast conserving treatment was satisfactory for appropriate case selection and optimized therapy. Survival was no way worse than breast sacrificing treatment. Journal of Surgical Sciences (2015) Vol. 19 (2) : 55-60

We queried the National Cancer Database for nonmetastatic breast angiosarcoma, yielding 808 patients (202 de novo, 606 secondary). The median survival was 53.7 months. Secondary tumors were more likely to undergo mastectomy than de novo lesions (OR = 3.99, P 0.001). Treatments included lumpectomy (10%), lumpectomy/radiation (3%), mastectomy alone (73%), or mastectomy/radiation (14%), with no difference in survival (P = 0.68). Lumpectomy correlated with positive margin rate (OR 3.29), which was a predictor for death (HR = 2.37, P 0.01), along with older age, higher comorbidity scores, size5 cm, and high-grade disease (P 0.05). While breast angiosarcoma is usually treated with mastectomy, lumpectomy may be feasible for well-selected tumors.

For clinically low-volume breast cancer patients subjected to BCS, there is a concern regarding achieving microscopically negative margins and avoiding inadvertent resection of excessive volume of breast tissue. In this study, we utilized intraoperative ultrasound to guide resection in patients subjected to BCS. This was compared with palpation-guided resection. A total of 80 patients of invasive breast carcinoma (T1-2, N0-1, M0) (39 patients in USG-guided BCS (group A) and 41 patients in palpation-guided BCS (group B)) were enrolled. In group A, intraoperative localization was performed using a multifrequency 10-MHz linear array ultrasound probe and tumors were excised under USG guidance. In group B, tumor excision was guided by the palpation skills of the surgeon with the aim of achieving grossly negative margin circumferentially. Specimen volume was measured using water displacement technique. One out of 39 patients (2.56%) in group A and 5 out of 41(12.19%) in group B had positive margin in histopathology report. Mean of specimen volume in groups A and B was 42.67 and 57.97 ml respectively (P = 0.011). Mean of excess volume removed in study group was 4.19 ml and in control group, it was 24.11 ml (P =

Background Radiation therapy (RT) for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) undergoing breast‐conserving surgery (BCS) may be overtreatment for some, especially for those in which DCIS is eradicated, and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) risk approaches the contralateral breast cancer (CBC) level. The aim of this study was to clarify whether the polygon method, a new systematic method of en face (tangential, shaved) margin assessment, can identify a subset of DCIS that can be safely treated by BCS alone. Methods A key tool of the polygon method is an adjustable mold that prevents the “pancake phenomenon” (flattening) of breast tissue after surgical removal so that the specimen is fixed in the shape of a polygonal prism. This preanalytical procedure enables us to command a panoramic view of entire en face margins 3‐5‐mm deep from the real peripheral cut surfaces. Competing risk analysis was used to quantify rates of IBTR and CBC and to evaluate risk factors. Results From 2000 to 2013, we identified 146 DCIS patients undergoing BCS with a contralateral breast at risk. In 100 DCIS patients whose margin was negative by the polygon method, 5 IBTR (3 DCIS and 2 invasive ductal carcinoma [IDC]) and 10 CBC (6 DCIS and 4 IDC) cases were identified during a median follow‐up of 7.6 years (range, 0.9‐17.4). Five‐ and 10‐year cumulative incidence rates were 3.0% and 5.3% for IBTR, and 7.1% and 13.3% for CBC, respectively. Thus, patients with a negative margin consistently showed at least twofold lower IBTR than CBC despite omission of RT. Conclusions Japanese women classified with a negative margin by the polygon method show a very low risk of IBTR and account for approximately half of CBC cases. In this subset of DCIS patients, additional RT is not beneficial.

Oncoplastic surgery is a form of breast conservation surgery that involves volume displacement and replacement techniques to reconstruct the breast after a partial mastectomy. We aimed to report our clinical experiences with support from the literature as to the optimal application of oncoplastic surgery with regard to patient and disease selection and presentation, and discuss common technical considerations. Based on clinical experience and recent literature, oncoplastic surgery has several oncologic and reconstructive strengths including a decreased positive margin rate, high patient satisfaction, and additional benefit when applied to patients with both breast cancer and symptomatic macromastia. Oncoplastic surgery constitutes an additional breast conservation option that is safe, well tolerated, and can provide autologous reconstruction after a large oncologic resection in a one-staged surgical effort that adds value for the appropriate breast cancer patient.

Several definitions of oncoplastic surgery have been reported in the literature. In an effort to facilitate communication regarding oncoplastic surgery to patients, trainees, and among colleagues, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) aimed to create a consensus definition and classification system for oncoplastic surgery. We performed a comprehensive literature search for oncoplastic surgery definitions using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Following this, a consensus definition and classification system was created by the ASBrS. Overall, 30 articles defining oncoplastic surgery were identified, with several articles contradicting each other. The ASBrS definition for oncoplastic surgery defines this set of breast-conserving operations using volume displacement and volume replacement principles as: “Breast conservation surgery incorporating an oncologic partial mastectomy with ipsilateral defect repair using volume displacement or volume replacement techniques with contralateral symmetry surgery as appropriate”. Volume displacement is defined as closing the lumpectomy defect and redistributing the resection volume over the preserved breast, and is divided into two levels: level 1 (

BACKGROUND: A margin of “no ink on tumor” has been established for primary breast conservation therapy (BCT), but the appropriate margin following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) remains controversial. We examined the impact of margin width on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in the NAC-BCT population. METHODS: Consecutive patients receiving NAC-BCT were identified from a prospective database. The association between clinicopathologic characteristics, margin width and isolated IBTR was evaluated. RESULTS: From 2013–2019, we identified 582 patients with 586 tumors who received NAC-BCT. The median age of the cohort was 54 years (IQR 45, 62); 84% of patients had cT1/T2 tumors and 61% were clinically node positive. The majority of tumors were HER2+ (38%) or triple negative (TN) (31%). Pathologic complete response was observed in 29%. Margin width was >2 mm in 517 tumors (88%) and ≤2 mm in 69 (12%). At a median follow-up of 39 months, 14 patients had IBTR as a first event, with 64% occurring within 24 months of surgery. The 4-year IBTR rate was 2% (95% CI 1–4%), and there was no difference based on margin width (3% ≤2 mm vs. 2% >2 mm; p = not significant). On univariate analysis, clinical and pathologic T stage and receptor subtype, but not margin width, were associated with IBTR (p < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, TN subtype and higher pathologic T stage were associated with isolated IBTR (both p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Pathologic features and tumor biology, not margin width, were associated with IBTR in NAC-BCT patients.

INTRODUCTION: Breast conservation is the standard of care for early breast cancer. Several oncoplastic approaches have been described for the reconstruction of partial breast defects. The multiplicity of techniques indicates that the ideal reconstructive technique is yet to be identified. There has been a recent emphasis on minimizing the magnitude of surgery. In this report, we describe our experience using the pectoralis major muscle to fill relatively large post-tumorectomy breast defects. PATIENTS AND TECHNIQUE: Nine patients were operated on for malignant breast lesions. Tumorectomy resection with surgical margin rendered a 40–50% breast defect. The parenchymal defect was repaired with an advancement muscle flap of the ipsilateral pectoralis major muscle. RESULTS: All patients experienced a non-eventful postoperative course. The early cosmetic outcome was excellent in four patients, good in another four, and fair in one patient. CONCLUSION: The pectoralis major flap is useful for local repair of upper half partial breast defects in non-ptosed, cup A–B breasts.

Mastectomy has long been the preferred approach for local salvage of recurrent breast cancer following breast-conservation therapy (BCT). Growing interest in avoiding mastectomy prompted RTOG 1014, a landmark phase two study demonstrating the feasibility of repeat BCT using a novel radiotherapy (RT) regimen (i.e., 45 Gy administered in 30 fractions of 1.5 Gy twice-daily to the partial breast, “rePBI”). We adopted this regimen as our institutional standard and report our observations regarding the safety and efficacy of rePBI as salvage therapy. All patients at our institution who underwent repeat BCT and subsequently received rePBI from 2011 to 2019 were identified. Clinicopathologic features and treatment characteristics for both primary breast cancers and recurrences were collected, as were rates of subsequent recurrence and treatment-associated toxicities. The cohort included 34 patients with a median age of 65.8 (46.2–78.2) at the time of rePBI. At a median follow-up of 23.5 months, there were two subsequent locoregional recurrences (2-year local control rate 97%). There was no grade ≥ 3 toxicity. The most common acute toxicity ( 3 months) included fibrosis in 14 (41%), breast asymmetry in 12 (35%), and chest wall pain in 11 (32%). Repeat breast conservation using the hyperfractionated partial breast RT regimen defined by RTOG 1014 (45 Gy administered in 30 1.5 Gy twice-daily fractions) appears effective and well tolerated. No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed and local control was excellent. Longer term follow-up among larger cohorts will define whether salvage mastectomy should remain the preferred standard.

Xiaoliang Sun, Jun Liu, Haoyang Ji, Meng Yang, Yao Lu Department of General Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Yao LuDepartment of General Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, No. 2 Yinghua East Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100029, People’s Republic of ChinaEmail zrluyao@163.comObjective: Breast cancer (BC) in young women tends to be more aggressive. This study highlights the clinicopathological features and outcomes of young breast cancer (YBC) patients in a developing country.Methods: Consecutive patients aged 35 years or younger with a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer treated and followed up at our department were included. Medical records and follow-up databases were reviewed and documented.Results: The rate of breast conservation and reconstruction surgery is higher in YBC patients. YBC patients are more likely to have tumors over 5cm, high-grade, hormone receptor negative, triple negative and stage III than old patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the pathological type, lymph node metastasis, and HER2 status. The median follow-up time was 96 months. The disease-free survival (DFS) was significantly worse in the YBC group. However, the overall survival (OS) had no difference between the two groups.Conclusion: YBC patients had more aggressive pathological features, such as hormone receptor negative, triple negative, high-grade and advanced stage, and poorer DFS than the old counterparts.Keywords: young age, breast cancer, clinicopathological characteristics, survival, molecular subtypes

Breast conservation rate is being increasingly used nowadays as a marker of breast cancer care among hospitals. Searching for the ideal technique to predict the feasibility of BCS is ongoing. For this matter, the preoperative MRIs of 169 patients operated with radical or conservative surgery were reviewed. We estimated the tumor volume (TV) and breast volume (BV) on enhanced 3D-MRI and compared the tumor-to-breast volume ratio (TV/BV) in both groups. The mean ratio was 9.5% in the mastectomy group and 1.7% in the BCS group. A tumor-to-breast volume ratio less than 4% seemed to favor the adoption of a conservative option. Our data suggest that preoperative 3D-MRI can orient the surgical approach by assessing the TV/BV ratio, increasing lumpectomy rates with clear margins and good cosmetic outcome.

Simple Summary Breast cancer survivors are at risk for recurrence, and the early detection of recurrence improves survival. Therefore, imaging surveillance is performed for women who have breast-conserving surgery. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare routine mammography with contrast-enhanced mammography in the screening (asymptomatic) post-treatment setting. We confirmed that when screening women with breast conservation surgery, contrast-enhanced mammography had a higher cancer detection rate (15.4/1000) and positive predictive value of biopsies (42.9%) than full-field digital mammography (6.2/1000 and 37.5%, respectively). Abstract To investigate the value of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) compared to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in screening breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective, single-institution study included 971 CEM exams in 541 asymptomatic patients treated with BCS who underwent screening CEM between January 2013 and November 2018. Histopathology, or at least a one-year follow-up, was used as the standard of reference. Twenty-one of 541 patients (3.9%) were diagnosed with ipsi- or contralateral breast cancer: six (28.6%) cancers were seen with low-energy images (equivalent to FFDM), an additional nine (42.9%) cancers were detected only on iodine (contrast-enhanced) images, and six interval cancers were identified within 365 days of a negative screening CEM. Of the 10 ipsilateral cancers detected on CEM, four were detected on low-energy images (40%). Of the five contralateral cancers detected on CEM, two were detected on low-energy images (40%). Overall, the cancer detection rate (CDR) for CEM was 15.4/1000 (15/971), and the positive predictive value (PPV3) of the biopsies performed was 42.9% (15/35). For findings seen on low-energy images, with or without contrast, the CDR was 6.2/1000 (6/971), and the PPV3 of the biopsies performed was 37.5% (6/16). In the post-BCS screening setting, CEM has a higher CDR than FFDM.

This chapter focuses on the techniques of radiation treatment delivery both in post-mastectomy and breast conservation scenarios.

Tremendous progress has been made over the past several decades in the treatment of breast cancer. Mortality and recurrence rates continue to decline. Our ability to tailor patient- and tumor-specific treatments has rapidly advanced. The vast majority of our patients can safely have breast conservation. Unfortunately, for many patients, survivorship is burdened by ongoing quality-of-life issues. Most breast cancer patients are asymptomatic at presentation, and the onus is on us to preserve this. Surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy can result in long-term toxicities that can be amplified with multimodality approaches. We must strive to apply minimally effective therapies rather than a maximally tolerated approach. Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a particularly dreaded chronic complication. This review strives to give the reader a better understanding of BCRL and shed light on wisely choosing an integration of treatment modalities that minimizes BCRL risk. Key literature on emerging concepts is highlighted.

With early detection, breast conservation surgery with adequate surgical margins is the standard of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of pre-operative duct endoscopy (DE) to target surgical resection, improve adequate margins and reduce re-excision operations. Women with DCIS, stage I and II breast cancer suitable for breast conservation were randomized to DE-assisted wide local excision versus standard wide local excision (without DE). The primary endpoint was margin re-excision rates between the two groups. Secondary end points were: (i) volume differences of the surgical specimen; (ii) whether an extensive in situ component (EIC) influenced successful DE-guided resection. 78 women were randomized: 44 patients to no-DE and 34 patients to the DE group. The median age was 59 (49–65) and 56 (48–64) years in the two groups respectively with mean follow-up of 9.1 (4.2–11.1) years. There were 23 positive findings in 17 women in 30 successful DE procedures (17/30 = 56.7%). The surgical specimen volume, no-DE (17 [IQR 10–29] cm3) and DE 20 [IQR 12–28] cm3), did not differ, p = 0.377. The overall re-excision rate was 20/78 (26%), 9 (20%) and 11 (32% in the no-DE and DE groups, respectively, p = 0.233. This randomized clinical trial was limited by incomplete accrual. DE did not contribute to improved margin excision rates whether a target lesion was visualized or not. The presence of EIC did not improve efficacy of DE.

The aim of a breast conservation surgery (BCS) is to achieve complete excision of the tumor with clear surgical margins while preserving the normal breast as much as possible. Intra-operative margin assessment helps to achieve negative margins, decreasing the need for re-excision. Intra-operative gross margin evaluation is a cost-effective and easy technique; however, data available regarding its adequacy are limited. We aim to find the minimum adequate gross margin required to achieve microscopic tumor-free margins and assess the relation if any of margin status with the tumor type, grade, nodal status and immunohistochemical (IHC) markers. A total of 178 patients who underwent BCS from the years 2013–2018 in our tertiary care center were selected, excluding the ones who underwent prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy and excision biopsy. A retrospective chart review was done, and the minimum adequate cutoff of gross margins required to achieve negative margins, without any positive or close margins, was evaluated. Ten exceptional cases were excluded. Among the 168 cases, 147 (87.5%) had negative and 21 (12.5%) had close or positive margins. On evaluation, maintaining an average gross margin of 5.5 mm gave a positive predictive value of 95.45%. The sensitivity and specificity were 71.43% and 76.19%, respectively, with an accuracy of 72%. No correlation was obtained between gross margin status and tumor characteristics. Gross margin evaluation is a fast and cost-effective method which can be easily set up in any hospital setting with limited resources to ensure negative margins during BCS.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses current and future challenges in the maintenance of surgical operating capacity. In the United Kingdom surgery has continued—in a reduced capacity—through the establishment of regional ‘cancer hubs’ using independent sector facilities to treat public healthcare patients. It is essential that these scarce operating facilities available are optimally utilized and that logistical challenges that result from remote operating away from the surgeon’s primary hospital site are considered. These issues are best addressed through the application of currently available medical technology and enhanced training in advanced oncoplastic techniques, which extend the limits of breast conservation.

Background Breast-conserving surgery, especially with oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS), is becoming the standard of care in the surgical management of breast cancer. We investigated the applied technique of OBS and oncologic outcomes in a large series of patients. Patients and Methods This study was conducted between January 2008 and June 2018 in two centers in Iran. Patients underwent OBS. Early and late postoperative complications, oncologic outcomes, and follow-up data were documented. Results Nine hundred thirty-seven patients with a mean ± standard deviation age of 48.1 ± 11.3 underwent OBS. Most of the patients were diagnosed with early-stage disease, of which the most common pathology was invasive ductal carcinoma (83.3%). Lateral oncoplasty was the most commonly used OBS technique (324 cases, 34.6%). The most common complication was seroma formation. Reduction-type OBS technique had the highest rate of complications (13.1%). Thirty-four patients (5.4%) experienced local recurrence, with a median recurrence time of 26.4 months. Nine patients (1.3%) died from cancer recurrence. Conclusion OBS is a safe procedure with minor complications and good oncologic outcomes. These techniques can be applied to most patients who are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.