Tying a surgical knot in breast cancer outcomes

The main aim of this thesis was to add knowledge on how to improve outcomes of breast cancer surgery. Cosmetic outcome and quality of life play an important role in the treatment decision between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. First of all, a new tool to predict cosmetic outcome after BCS was investigated and found to be of value. Based on this tool, a treatment decision model was presented between BCS and mastectomy. This decision model is clinically relevant since it is the first objective aid for patients and surgeons in the complex and subjective decision they face. Secondly, different options were explored to reduce reexcision rates. This is relevant since it potentially improves cosmetic outcome, improves quality of life, reduces secondary mastectomies, reduces health care costs and reduces surgical complications. Use of preoperative MRI was found not to reduce reexcision rate. The safety of omitting a reexcision in case of focally positive margins after BCS was studied. Local recurrence rate, disease-free survival and overall survival was comparable and it appeared safe. Finally, quality indicators for breast cancer care monitored in the Netherlands were studied. Between hospital differences are increasingly being reported. However this information can be misinterpreted if quality indicators are not valid or reliable. It was concluded that comparisons and judgments of individual hospital performance should be made with caution. Consequently, a new summarizing measure was presented to rank hospitals and discriminate outliers. This potentially increases the impact and use of quality of care information

Curatieve resectie van solitaire claviculametastase

Achtergrond Het gemetastaseerd mammacarcinoom wordt beschouwd als niet-curabele ziekte waarbij patiënten alleen in aanmerking komen voor palliatieve systemische behandeling. Bij geselecteerde patiënten met beperkte metastasen wordt echter langdurige ziektevrije overleving beschreven na chirurgische resectie als onderdeel van de multidisciplinaire behandeling. Casus Een 49-jarige vrouw had pijn en een zwelling ter plaatse van haar linker sleutelbeen. Zij was 4 jaar eerder behandeld met mammasparende therapie en adjuvante systemische therapie voor een lobulair mammacarcinoom links (stadium pT1N0M0). Aanvullend beeldvormend onderzoek en histologisch onderzoek van een biopt resulteerden in de diagnose ‘solitaire claviculametastase’. Er werd besloten in opzet curatief te behandelen met inductiechemotherapie gevolgd door een mediale clavicularesectie en aanvullende radiotherapie, en een wijziging van de endocriene therapie. Conclusie Een solitaire claviculametastase van een mammacarcinoom is zeldzaam. Bij patiënten met een solitaire ossale metastase van een mammacarcinoom met gunstige prognostische factoren kan chirurgische resectie worden overwogen als onderdeel van een multidisciplinaire behandeling met curatieve intentie

A preliminary prediction model for potentially guiding patient choices between breast conserving surgery and mastectomy in early breast cancer patients; a Dutch experience

Purpose: To guide early stage breast cancer patients to choose between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (MST) considering the predicted cosmetic result and quality of life (QoL). Methods: A decision model was built to compare QoL after BCS and MST. Treatment could result in BCS with good cosmesis, BCS with poor cosmesis, MST only, and MST with breast reconstruction. QoL for these treatment outcomes were obtained from a previous study and the literature and translated into EuroQoL-5D derived utilities. Chance of good cosmesis after BCS was predicted based on tumor location and tumor/breast volume ratio. The decision model determined whether the expected QoL was superior after BCS or MST based on chance of good cosmesis. Results: The mean utility for the treatments such as BCS with good cosmesis, BCS with poor cosmesis, MST only, and MST with breast reconstruction were 0.908, 0.843, 0.859, and 0.876, respectively. BCS resulted in superior QoL compared to MST in patients with a chance of good cosmesis above 36%. This 36% threshold is reached in case the tumor is located in the upper lateral, lower lateral, upper medial, lower medial, and central quadrant of the breast with a tumor/breast volume ratio below 21.6, 4.1, 15.1, 3.2, and 14.7, respectively. Conclusions: BCS results in superior QoL in patients with tumors in the upper breast quadrants or centrally and a tumor/breast volume ratio below 15. MST results in superior QoL in patients with tumors in the lower breast quadrants and a tumor/breast volume ratio above 4

Omitting re-excision for focally positive margins after breast-conserving surgery does not impair disease-free and overall survival

Purpose: In contrast to other countries, the Dutch breast cancer guideline does not recommend re-excision for focally positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in invasive tumor and does recommend whole-breast irradiation including boost. We investigated whether omitting re-excision as compared to performing re-excision affects prognosis with a retrospective population-based cohort study. Methods: The total cohort included 32,119 women with primary BCS for T1–T3 breast cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2008 from the nationwide Netherlands cancer registry. The subcohort included 10,433 patients in whom the resection margins were registered. Outcome measures were 5-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) rate, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate, and 10-year overall survival (OS) rate. Results: In the total cohort, 25,878 (80.6%) did not have re-excision, 2368 (7.4%) had re-excision by BCS, and 3873 (12.1%) had re-excision by mastectomy. Five-year IBTR rates were 2.1, 2.8, and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). In the subcohort, 7820 (75.0%) had negative margins without re-excision, 492 (4.7%) had focally positive margins without re-excision, 586 (5.6%) had focally positive margins and underwent re-excision, and 1535 (14.7%) had extensively positive margins and underwent re-excision. Five-year IBTR rate was 2.3, 2.9, 1.1, and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.099). Compared to omitting re-excision, performing re-excision for focally positive margins was associated with lower risk of IBTR (adjusted HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11–0.82), but not with DFS (adjusted HR 0.83 95% CI 0.59–1.17) nor with OS (adjusted HR 1.17 95% CI 0.87–1.59). Conclusion: Omitting re-excision in breast cancer patients for focally positive margins after BCS does not impair DFS and OS, provided that whole-breast irradiation including boost is given

Breast and Tumour Volume Measurements in Breast Cancer Patients Using 3-D Automated Breast Volume Scanner Images

Background: The resection volume in relation to the breast volume is known to influence cosmetic outcome following breast-conserving therapy. It was hypothesised that three-dimensional ultrasonography (3-D US) could be used to preoperatively assess breast and tumour volume and show high association with histopathological measurements. Methods: Breast volume by the 3D-US was compared to the water displacement method (WDM), mastectomy specimen weight, 3-D MRI and three different calculations for breast volume on mammography. Tumour volume by the 3-D US was compared to the histopathological tumour volume and 3-D MRI. Relatedness was based on the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Bland–Altman plots were used to graphically display the agreement for the different assessment techniques. All measurements were performed by one observer. Results: A total of 36 patients were included, 20 and 23 for the evaluation of breast and tumour volume (ductal invasive carcinomas), respectively. 3-D US breast volume showed ‘excellent’ association with WDM, ICC 0.92 [95% CI (0.80–0.97)]. 3-D US tumour volume showed a ‘excellent’ association with histopathological tumour volume, ICC 0.78 [95% CI (0.55–0.91)]. Bland–Altman plots showed an increased overestimation in lager tumour volumes measured by 3-D MRI compared to histopathological volume. Conclusions: 3-D US showed a high association with gold standard WDM for the preoperative assessment of breast volume and the histopathological measurement of tumour volume. 3-D US is an patient-friendly preoperative available technique to calculate both breast volume and tumour volume. Volume measurements are promising in outcome prediction of intended breast-conserving treatment

From Multiple Quality Indicators of Breast Cancer Care Toward Hospital Variation of a Summary Measure

Objectives: To improve quality in breast cancer care, large numbers of quality indicators are collected per hospital, but benchmarking remains complex. We aimed to assess the validity of indicators, develop a textbook outcome summary measure, and compare case-mix adjusted hospital performance. Methods: From a nationwide population-based registry, all 79 690 nonmetastatic breast cancer patients surgically treated between 2011 and 2016 in 91 hospitals in The Netherlands were included. Twenty-one indicators were calculated and their construct validity tested by Spearman's rho. Between-hospital variation was expressed by interquartile range (IQR), and all valid indicators were included in the summary measure. Standardized scores (observed/expected based on case mix) were calculated as above (>100) or below (<100) expected. The textbook outcome was presented as a continuous and all-or-none score. Results: The size of between-hospital variation varied between indicators. Sixteen (76%) of 21 quality indicators showed construct validity, and 13 were included in the summary measure after excluding redundant indicators that showed collinearity with others owing to strong construct validity. The median all-or-none textbook outcome score was 49% (IQR 42%-54%) before and 49% (IQR 48%-51%) after case-mix adjustment. From the total of 91 hospitals, 3 hospitals were positive (3%) and 9 (10%) were negative outlier

TUmor-volume to breast-volume RAtio for improving COSmetic results in breast cancer patients (TURACOS); a randomized controlled trial

Background: Cosmetic result following breast conserving surgery (BCS) for cancer influences quality of life and psychosocial functioning in breast cancer patients. A preoperative prediction of expected cosmetic result following BCS is not (yet) standard clinical practice and therefore the choice for either mastectomy or BCS is still subjective. Recently, we showed that tumour volume to breast volume ratio as well as tumour location in the breast are independent predictors of superior cosmetic result following BCS. Implementation of a prediction model including both factors, has not been studied in a prospective manner. This study aims to improve cosmetic outcome by implementation of a prediction model in the treatment decision making for breast cancer patients opting for BCS. Methods/design: Multicentre, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing standard preoperative work-up to a preoperative work-up with addition of the prediction model. Tumour volume to bre

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures May Add Value in Breast Cancer Surgery

Purpose: Considering the comparable prognosis in early-stage breast cancer after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy, quality of life should be a focus in treatment decision(s). We retrospectively collected PROs and analyzed differences per type of surgery delivered. We aimed to obtain reference values helpful in shared decision-making. Patients and Methods: pTis-T3N0-3M0 patients operated between January 2005 and September 2016 were eligible if: (1) no chemotherapy was administered < 6 months prior to enrolment, and (2) identical surgeries were performed in case of bilateral surgery. After consent, EQ-5D-5L, EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23, and BREAST-Q were administered. PROs were evaluated per baseline characteristics using multivariable linear regression models. Outcomes were compared for different surgeries as well as for primary (PBC) and second primary or recurrent (SBC) breast cancer patients using analyses of variance (ANOVAs). Results: The response rate was 68%. PROs in 612 PBC patients were comparable to those in 152 SBC patients. Multivariable analyses showed increasing age to be associated with lower “physical functioning” [β − 0.259, p < 0.001] and “sexual functioning” [β − 0.427, p < 0.001], and increasing time since surgery with less “fatigue” [β − 1.083, p < 0.001]. Mastectomy [β − 13.596, p = 0.003] and implant reconstruction [β − 13.040, p = 0.007] were associated with lower “satisfaction with breast” scores than BCT. Radiation therapy was associated with lower satisfaction scores than absence of radiotherapy. Discussion: PRO scores were associated with age, time since surgery, type of surgery, and radiation therapy in breast cancer patients. The scores serve as a reference value for different types of surgery in the study population and enable prospective use of PROs in shared decision-making