Abstract
Purpose
The optimal treatment strategy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) continues to evolve and should consider the consequences of initial treatment on the likelihood, type, and treatment of recurrences.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using two data sources of patients who experienced a recurrence (DCIS or invasive cancer) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for index DCIS: patients with an index DCIS diagnosed from 1997 to 2008 at the academic institutions of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN; N = 88) and patients with an index DCIS diagnosed from 1990 to 2001 at community-based integrated healthcare delivery sites of the Health Maintenance Organization Cancer Research Network (CRN) (N = 182).
Results
Just under half of local recurrences in both cohorts were invasive cancer. While 40 % of patients in both cohorts underwent mastectomy alone at recurrence, treatment of the remaining patients varied. In the earlier CRN cohort, most other patients underwent repeat BCS (39 %) with only 18 % receiving mastectomy with reconstruction, whereas only 16 % had repeat BCS and 44 % had mastectomy with reconstruction in the NCCN cohort. Compared with patients not treated with radiation, those who received radiation for index DCIS were less likely to undergo repeat BCS (NCCN: 6.6 vs. 37 %, p = 0.001; CRN: 20 vs. 48 %, p = 0.0004) and more likely to experience surgical complications after treatment of recurrence (NCCN: 15 vs. 4 %, p = 0.17; CRN: 40 vs. 25 %, p = 0.09).
Conclusion
We found that treatment of recurrences after BCS and subsequent complications may be affected by the use of radiotherapy for the index DCIS. Initial treatment of DCIS may have long-term implications that should be considered.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sumner WE 3rd, Koniaris LG, Snell SE, et al. Results of 23,810 cases of ductal carcinoma-in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1638–43.
Morrow M, Schmidt R, Cregger B, Hassett C, Cox S. Preoperative evaluation of abnormal mammographic findings to avoid unnecessary breast biopsies. Arch Surg. 1994;129:1091–6.
Alexander HR, Candela FC, Dershaw DD, Kinne DW. Needle-localized mammographic lesions: results and evolving treatment strategy. Arch Surg. 1990;125:1441–4.
Silverstein MJ, Gamagami P, Colburn WJ, et al. Nonpalpable breast lesions: diagnosis with slightly overpenetrated screen-film mammography and hook wire-directed biopsy in 1,014 cases. Radiology. 1989;171:633–8.
Wilhelm MC, Edge SB, Cole DD, de Paredes E, Frierson HF Jr. Nonpalpable invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1991;213:600–3. discussion 3–5.
American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2008. Atlanta: American Cancer Society;2008.
Bijker N, Meijnen P, Peterse JL, et al. Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma-in situ: ten-year results of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized phase III trial 10853: a study by the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3381–7.
Fisher B, Land S, Mamounas E, Dignam J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Semin Oncol. 2001;28:400–18.
Emdin SO, Granstrand B, Ringberg A, et al. SweDCIS: radiotherapy after sector resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Results of a randomised trial in a population offered mammography screening. Acta Oncol. 2006;45:536–43.
Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J, Duggan C, Fentiman IS, Spittle M. Radiotherapy and tamoxifen in women with completely excised ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand: randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;362:95–102.
Baxter NN, Virnig BA, Durham SB, Tuttle TM. Trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:443–8.
Rakovitch E, Pignol JP, Chartier C, et al. The management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a screened population-based analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;101:335–47.
Solin LJ, Gray R, Baehner FL, et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:701–10.
Vicini FA, Beitsch PD, Quiet CA, et al. First analysis of patient demographics, technical reproducibility, cosmesis, and early toxicity: results of the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite breast brachytherapy trial. Cancer. 2005;104:1138–48.
Benitez PR, Streeter O, Vicini F, et al. Preliminary results and evaluation of MammoSite balloon brachytherapy for partial breast irradiation for pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a phase II clinical study. Am J Surg. 2006;192:427–33.
Beitsch PD, Wilkinson JB, Vicini FA, et al. Tumor bed control with balloon-based accelerated partial breast irradiation: incidence of true recurrences versus elsewhere failures in the American Society of Breast Surgery MammoSite® Registry Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3165–70.
Shah C, McGee M, Wilkinson JB, et al. Clinical outcomes using accelerated partial breast irradiation in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Breast Cancer. 2012;12:259–63.
Park SS, Grills IS, Chen PY, et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation for pure ductal carcinoma in situ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:403–8.
Smith BD, Arthur DW, Buchholz TA, et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation consensus statement from the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:987–1001.
Parrett BM, Schook C, Morris D. Breast reduction in the irradiated breast: evidence for the role of breast reduction at the time of lumpectomy. Breast J. 2010;16:498–502.
Khansa I, Colakoglu S, Curtis MS, et al. Postmastectomy breast reconstruction after previous lumpectomy and radiation therapy: analysis of complications and satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66:444–51.
Cordeiro PG, Snell L, Heerdt A, McCarthy C. Immediate tissue expander/implast breast reconstruction after salvage mastectomy for cancer recurrence following lumpectomy/irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:341–50.
Chadha M, Feldman S, Boolbol S, Wang L, Harrison LB. The feasibility of a second lumpectomy and breast brachytherapy for localized cancer in a breast previously treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for breast cancer. Brachytherapy. 2008;7:22–8.
Trombetta M, Julian T, Bhandari T, Werts ED, Miften M, Parda D. Breast conservation surgery and interstitial brachytherapy in the management of locally recurrent carcinoma of the breast: the Allegheny General Hospital experience. Brachytherapy. 2008;7:29–36.
Trombetta M, Julian TB, Werts DE, et al. Long-term cosmesis after lumpectomy and brachytherapy in the management of carcinoma of the previously irradiated breast. Am J Clin Oncol. 2009;32:314–8.
Forman DL, Chiu J, Restifo RJ, Ward BA, Haffty B, Ariyan S. Breast reconstruction in previously irradiated patients using tissue expanders and implants: a potentially unfavorable result. Ann Plast Surg. 1998;40:360–3. discussion 3–4.
Habel LA, Achacoso NS, Haque R, et al. Declining recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery in the community setting. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11:85.
Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:117–28.
Punglia RS, Schnitt SJ, Weeks JC. Treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ after excision: would a prophylactic paradigm be more appropriate? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(20):1527–33.
Punglia RS, Burstein HJ, Weeks JC. Radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a decision analysis. Cancer. 2012;118(3):603–11.
Soeteman DI, Stout NK, Ozanne EM, Greenberg CC, Hassett MJ, Schrag D, et al. Modeling the effectiveness of initial management strategies for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Can Inst. 2013;105(11):774–781.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by Contract No. HHSA29020050016I from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), US Department of Health and Human Services, as part of the Developing Evidence to Inform Decisions About Effectiveness program. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors, and no official endorsement by AHRQ or the US Department of Health and Human Services is intended or should be inferred. This work was also supported by grant no. CA89393 from the National Cancer Institute to the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Grant No. R01 CA 81302 to Kaiser Permanente Northern California, and grant no. 2U19CA079689 to Group Health Cooperative (Laurel Habel, Project Leader).
Conflict of interest
Caprice C. Greenberg, Laurel A. Habel, Melissa E. Hughes, Larissa Nekhlyudov, Ninah Achacoso, Luana Acton, Deborah Schrag, Wei Jiang, Stephen Edge, Jane C. Weeks, and Rinaa S. Punglia have no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Greenberg, C.C., Habel, L.A., Hughes, M.E. et al. Characterization and Treatment of Local Recurrence Following Breast Conservation for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Ann Surg Oncol 21, 3766–3773 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3802-7
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3802-7