Should breast reconstruction and breast oncoplastic procedures be performed during the coronavirus pandemic?

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the face of the treatment of breast cancer and breast reconstruction globally. Mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction was on the rise due to advances in meshes and implants. However, due to the prioritisation of the critically ill and diversion of the work force, breast cancer treatment has drastically changed. This is an opinion paper written by the authors with experience and importance in the scenario of breast reconstructive surgery. The authors are from different countries with the COVID-19 pandemic in different stages

Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy

Purpose Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion. Methods The panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology. Results Consensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference. Conclusions In case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques

Retrospective, multicenter analysis comparing conventional with oncoplastic breast conserving surgery: oncological and surgical outcomes in women with high-risk breast cancer from the OPBC-01/iTOP2 study

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 <1 mm: 17% vs. 6%, 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

Oncoplastic breast consortium recommendations for mastectomy and whole breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation therapy

Aim: Demand for nipple-and skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recom-mendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BRPeer reviewe

Effect of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene on the Proliferative Activity of the Breast Epithelium in Premenopausal Women

Objectives To compare the effects of tamoxifen and raloxifene on the proliferative activity of normal breast tissue in premenopausal women as measured by Ki-67/MIB-1 expression. Study Design A total of 48 women with benign breast nodules and a recommendation for surgical removal of the lesion took part in this study. They were randomized to use tamoxifen or raloxifene for 22 days, after which they were submitted to surgery. During the surgical procedure, a 1-cm fragment of normal breast tissue was removed to study Ki-67 expression. Results The mean percentage ratios between immunolabeled and non-labeled cells were 2.02 ± 1.09 and 3.13 ± 3.23 for the tamoxifen and raloxifene groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the tamoxifen ( n = 16) and raloxifene ( n = 14) groups in relation to the immunohistochemical analysis of Ki-67 ( P = 0.205). Conclusion The results of this study showed no difference between tamoxifen and raloxifene with respect to the potential of these drugs to reduce the proliferative activity of the normal breast epithelium in premenopausal women

Should breast reconstruction and breast oncoplastic procedures be performed during the coronavirus pandemic?

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the face of the treatment of breast cancer and breast reconstruction globally. Mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction was on the rise due to advances in meshes and implants. However, due to the prioritisation of the critically ill and diversion of the work force, breast cancer treatment has drastically changed. This is an opinion paper written by the authors with experience and importance in the scenario of breast reconstructive surgery. The authors are from different countries with the COVID-19 pandemic in different stages

Omission of axillary dissection following nodal downstaging with neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Importance Data on oncological outcomes after omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with breast cancer that downstages from node positive to negative with neoadjuvant chemotherapy are sparse. Additionally, the best axillary surgical staging technique in this scenario is unknown. Objective To investigate oncological outcomes after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) with dual-tracer mapping or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), which combines SLNB with localization and retrieval of the clipped lymph node. Design, Setting, and Participants In this multicenter retrospective cohort study that was conducted at 25 centers in 11 countries, 1144 patients with consecutive stage II to III biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer were included between April 2013 and December 2020. The cumulative incidence rates of axillary, locoregional, and any invasive (locoregional or distant) recurrence were determined by competing risk analysis. Exposure Omission of ALND after SLNB or TAD. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end points were the 3-year and 5-year rates of any axillary recurrence. Secondary end points included locoregional recurrence, any invasive (locoregional and distant) recurrence, and the number of lymph nodes removed. Results A total of 1144 patients (median [IQR] age, 50 [41-59] years; 78 [6.8%] Asian, 105 [9.2%] Black, 102 [8.9%] Hispanic, and 816 [71.0%] White individuals; 666 SLNB [58.2%] and 478 TAD [41.8%]) were included. A total of 1060 patients (93%) had N1 disease, 619 (54%) had ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–positive illness, and 758 (66%) had a breast pathologic complete response. TAD patients were more likely to receive nodal radiation therapy (85% vs 78%; P = .01). The clipped node was successfully retrieved in 97% of TAD cases and 86% of SLNB cases (without localization). The mean (SD) number of sentinel lymph nodes retrieved was 3 (2) vs 4 (2) (P < .001), and the mean (SD) number of total lymph nodes removed was 3.95 (1.97) vs 4.44 (2.04) (P < .001) in the TAD and SLNB groups, respectively. The 5-year rates of any axillary, locoregional, and any invasive recurrence in the entire cohort were 1.0% (95% CI, 0.49%-2.0%), 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.1%), and 10% (95% CI, 8.3%-13%), respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of axillary recurrence did not differ between TAD and SLNB (0.5% vs 0.8%; P = .55). Conclusions and Relevance The results of this cohort study showed that axillary recurrence was rare in this setting and was not significantly lower after TAD vs SLNB. These results support omission of ALND in this population