Breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy: cancer practice by general surgeons in Iran

BACKGROUND: There appear to be geographical differences in decisions to perform mastectomy or breast conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer. This study was carried out to evaluate general surgeons' preferences in breast cancer surgery and to assess the factors predicting cancer practice in Iran. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was mailed to 235 general surgeons chosen from the address list of the Iranian Medical Council. The questionnaire elicited information about the general surgeons' characteristics and about their work experience, posts they have held, number of breast cancer operations performed per year, preferences for mastectomy or breast conserving surgery, and the reasons for these preferences. RESULTS: In all, 83 surgeons returned the completed questionnaire. The results indicated that only 19% of the surgeons routinely performed breast conserving surgery (BCS) and this was significantly associated with their breast cancer case load (P < 0.01). There were no associations between BCS practice and the other variables studied. The most frequent reasons for not performing BCS were uncertainty about conservative therapy results (46%), uncertainty about the quality of available radiotherapy services (32%), and the probability of patients' non-compliance in radiotherapy (32%). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that Iranian surgeons do not routinely perform BCS as the first and the best treatment modality. Further research is recommended to evaluate patients' outcomes after BCS treatment in Iran, with regard to available radiotherapy facilities and cultural factors (patients' compliance)

Predictors of patients’ choices for breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy: a prospective study

A study was undertaken to describe the treatment preferences and choices of patients with breast cancer, and to identify predictors of undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy (MT). Consecutive patients with stage I/II breast cancer were eligible. Information about predictor variables, including socio-demographics, quality of life, patients' concerns, decision style, decisional conflict and perceived preference of the surgeon was collected at baseline, before decision making and surgery. Patients received standard information (n = 88) or a decision aid (n = 92) as a supplement to support decision making. A total of 180 patients participated in the study. In all, 72% decided to have BCT (n = 123); 28% chose MT (n = 49). Multivariate analysis showed that what patients perceived to be their surgeons' preference and the patients' concerns regarding breast loss and local tumour recurrence were the strongest predictors of treatment preference. Treatment preferences in itself were highly predictive of the treatment decision. The decision aid did riot influence treatment choice. The results of this study demonstrate that patients' concerns and their perceptions of the treatment preferences of the physicians are important factors in patients' decision making. Adequate information and communication are essential to base treatment decisions on realistic concerns, and the treatment preferences of patients, (C) 2004 Cancer Research U

Effects of patient selection on the applicability of results from a randomised clinical trial (EORTC 10853) investigating breast-conserving therapy for DCIS

Selection of patients for randomised clinical trials may have a large impact on the applicability of the study results to the general population presenting the same disorder. However, clinical characteristics and outcome data on non-entered patients are usually not available. The effects of patient selection for the EORTC 10853 trial investigating the role of radiotherapy in breast conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ have been studied, in an analysis of all patients treated for ductal carcinoma in situ in five participating institutes. The reasons for not entering patients were evaluated and treatment results of the randomised patients were compared to those not entered. A total of 910 patients were treated for ductal carcinoma in situ. Of these, 477 (52%) were ineligible, with the size of the lesion being the main reason for ineligibility (30% of all ductal carcinoma in situ). Of the 433 eligible patients, 278 (64%) were randomised into the trial. The main reasons for non-entry of eligible patients were either physicians' preference for one of the treatment arms (26%) or patients' refusal (9%). These percentages showed significant variation among the institutes. At 4 years follow-up, those patients not entered in the trial and treated with local excision and radiotherapy, had higher local recurrence rates than the patients randomised in the trial and treated with the same approach, (17 vs 2%, P=0.03). The patients treated with local excision alone had equal local recurrence rates (11% in both groups). Selection of patients may explain the differences in outcome of the randomised patients, and those not-entered. Thus, the results of this trial may not be applicable to all patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

An unusual initial presentation of mantle cell lymphoma arising from the lymphoid stroma of warthin tumor

BACKGROUND: Warthin tumors presenting concomitantly with a lymphoma is vanishingly rare with only 15 reported cases in English literature. Herein, we report an unusual initial presentation of a mantle cell lymphoma involving the lymphoid stroma of a Warthin tumor. CASE PRESENTATION: A seventy-seven year old otherwise healthy gentleman with a 50-pack year smoking history presents with a slowly enlarging left cheek mass. CT scan of the neck demonstrated a left parotid gland tumor measuring 3.4 cm in greatest dimension. He underwent a left superficial parotidectomy, with subsequent histopathologic examination revealing a Warthin tumor with extensive expansion of the lymphoid stroma. Flow cytometric, immunohistochemical, and cytogenetic studies of the stromal component of the tumor confirmed the presence of a mantle cell lymphoma. Clinical staging demonstrated stage IVa disease, and was considered to be at low to intermediate risk due to the slow growth of the parotid lesion. The patient is undergoing close follow up with repeat PET-CT scans at six months. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first well documented collision tumor between mantle cell lymphoma and a Warthin tumor. This case also brings to light the significance of thorough evaluation of the lymphoid component of Warthin tumor

Certification of breast centres in Germany: proof of concept for a prototypical example of quality assurance in multidisciplinary cancer care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The main study objectives were: to develop a set of requirements of comprehensive breast centres; to establish a nationwide voluntary certification programme for breast centres based on such requirements, a certified quality management system (QMS), and scheduled independent, external audits and periodic recertification; and to demonstrate the general acceptance of such a certification programme with a view to introducing similar certification programmes for other major cancers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Breast centres introduced a QMS and voluntarily participated in an external certification procedure based on guideline-derived Requirements of Breast Centres specifically developed for the application procedure, all subsequent audits and recertification. All data (numbers of pending and successful applications, sites/centre, etc.) were collected by a newly founded, independent organisation for certification of cancer services delivery. Data analysis was descriptive.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Requirements of Breast Centres were developed by the German Cancer Society (DKG), the German Society of Senology (DGS) and other relevant specialist medical societies in the form of a questionnaire comprising 185 essential items based on evidence-based guidelines and the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists' (EUSOMA) requirements of specialist breast units. From late 2002 to mid 2008, the number of participating breast centres rose from 1 to 175. As of mid 2008, 77% of an estimated 50,000 new breast cancers in Germany were diagnosed and treated at certified breast centres, 78% of which were single-site centres.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Nationwide voluntary certification of breast centres is feasible and well accepted in Germany. Dual certification of breast centres that involves certification of breast services to guideline-derived requirements in conjunction with independent certification of a mandatory QMS can serve as a model for other multidisciplinary site-specific cancer centres.</p