Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 29, Issue 8, pp 1001–1006 | Cite as

Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence after Breast-conserving Therapy: A Comparison of Quadrantectomy versus Lumpectomy at a Single Institution

  • Woo Chul Noh
  • Nam Sun Paik
  • Min Suk Kim
  • Kwang Mo Yang
  • Chul Koo Cho
  • Dong Wook Choi
  • Jong Inn Lee
  • Sung Ku Kang
  • Sang Bum Kim
  • Nan Mo Moon
Article

Abstract

The aims of study were to compare the rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), for patients treated with either quadrantectomy or lumpectomy at a single institution, and to identify predictors of IBTR after breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The database and medical records of 807 patients who underwent BCT for breast cancer between 1987 and 2002 were reviewed. The age of the patient, tumor size, lymph node status, extensive intraductal component (EIC), re-excision, final margin status, and the extent of surgery were examined in reference to IBTR rates. Of the total 807 patients, 456 (56.5%) had undergone quadrantectomy and 351 patients (43.5%) had lumpectomy. Apart from the higher re-excision rate in the lumpectomy group (p < 0.001), there were no significant differences in clinical and pathologic characteristics between the patients in the two groups. At the median follow-up time of 72 months, 28 cases of IBTR (3.4%) and 56 cases of systemic recurrence (6.9%) had developed in 72 patients (8.9%). On multivariate analysis, young age (≤ 35) (p = 0.041), positive lymph node (p <0.001), and the presence of EIC (p = 0.004) were independent predictors of IBTR. However, we could not find a significant difference in IBTR rate between the two groups (p = 0.546). Thus, the extent of breast surgery (quadrantectomy or lumpectomy) did not make a significant difference in IBTR if adequate surgical margins could be achieved.

Keywords

Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence Systemic Recurrence Extensive Intraductal Component Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence Rate Original Pathology Report 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Veronesi U, Saccozzi R, Del Vecchio M, et al. Comparing radical mastectomy with quadrantectomy, axillary dissection, and radiotherapy in patients with small cancers of the breast. N. Engl. J. Med. 1981;305:6–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, et al. Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1985;312:665–673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Veronesi U, Banfi A, Saccozzi R, et al. Conservative treatment of breast cancer: a trial in progress at the Cancer Institute in Milan. Cancer 1977;39(Supp):2822–2826PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002:347:1227–1232CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002:347:1233–1241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fredriksson I, Liljegren G, Palm-Sjovall M, et al. Risk factors for local recurrence after breast conserving surgery. Br. J. Surg. 2003;90:1093–1102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith TE, Daesung L, Turner BC, et al. True recurrence vs. new primary ipsilateral breast tumor relapse: analysis of clinical and pathologic differences and their implications in natural history, prognosis, and therapeutic management. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2000;48:1281–1289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang E, Buchholz TA, Meric F, et al. Classifying local disease recurrence after breast conservation therapy based on location and histology. Cancer 2002;95:2059–2067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Katz A, Strom EA, Buchholz T, et al. Locoregional recurrence pattern after mastectomy and doxorubicin-based chemotherapy: implication for postoperative irradiation. J. Clin. Oncol. 2000:18:2817–2827PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacquemier J, Kurtz JM, Amalric R, et al. An assessment of extensive intraductal component as a risk factor for local recurrence after breast conserving therapy. Br. J. Cancer 1990:61:873–876PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, Meric F, et al. Predictors of locoregional recurrence among patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2002;9:256–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sinn HP, Anton HW, Magener A, et al. Extensive and predominant in situ components in breast carcinoma: their influence on treatment results after breast-conserving therapy. Eur. J. Cancer 1998;34:646–653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tartter PI, Kaplan J, Bleiweiss I, et al. Lumpectomy margins, re-excision, and local recurrence of breast cancer. Am. J. Surg. 2000;179:81–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moorthy K, Asopa V, Wiggins E, et al. Is the re-excision rate higher if breast conservation surgery is performed by surgical trainees? Am. J. Surg. 2004;188:45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smitt M, Nowels K, Carlson RW, et al. Predictors of re-excision findings and recurrence after breast conservation. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2003;57:979–987CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Freedman G, Fowble B, Hanlon A, et al. Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1999:44:1005–1015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A, et al. Outcome at 8 years after breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J. Clin. Oncol. 2000;18:1668–1675PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Solin LJ, Fowble BL, Schults DJ, et al. The significance of the pathology margins of the tumor excision on the outcome of patients treated with definitive irradiation for early stage breast cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1991;21:279–287PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Jong JS, van Diest PJ, Baak JP. Hot spot microvessel density and the mitotic activity index are strong additional prognostic indicators in invasive breast cancer. Histopathology 2000;36:306–312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jobsen JJ, Palen J, Ong F, et al. The value of a positive margin for invasive carcinoma in breast-conservative treatment in relation to local recurrence is limited to young women only. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2003;56:724–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meric F. Breast conservation in breast cancer: surgical and adjuvant consideration. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2004:16:31–36Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fisher B, Dignam J, Manounas EP, et al. Sequential methotraxate and fluorouracil for the treatment of node-negative breast cancer patients with estrogen receptor negative tumors: eight year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-13 and the first report of findings from NSABP B-10 comparing methotrexate and fluorouracil with conventional cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. J. Clin. Oncol. 1996;14:1982–1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher B, Bryant J, Dignam JJ, et al. Tamoxifen, radiation therapy, or both for prevention of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after lumpectomy in women with invasive breast cancers of one centimeter or less. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002:20:4141–4149CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2003:349:1793–1802CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fisher B, Dignam JJ, Wolmark N, et al. Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for lymph node negative, estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1997:89:1673–1684CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, Fisher ER, et al. Significance of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after lumpectomy. Lancet 1991;338:327–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Veronesi U, Marubini E, Del Vecchio M, et al. Local recurrence and distant metastasis after conservative breast cancer treatment: partly independent events. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1993:87:19–27Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Meric F, Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, et al. Positive surgical margins and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence predict disease-specific survival after breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 2003;97:926–933CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vicini FA, Kestin L, Huang R, et al. Does local recurrence affect the rate of distant metastasis and survival in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy? Cancer 2002:97:910–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Woo Chul Noh
    • 1
  • Nam Sun Paik
    • 1
  • Min Suk Kim
    • 2
  • Kwang Mo Yang
    • 3
  • Chul Koo Cho
    • 3
  • Dong Wook Choi
    • 1
  • Jong Inn Lee
    • 1
  • Sung Ku Kang
    • 1
  • Sang Bum Kim
    • 1
  • Nan Mo Moon
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryKorea Cancer Center HospitalNowon-guKorea
  2. 2.Department of Anatomic PathologyKorea Cancer Center HospitalNowon-guKorea
  3. 3.Department of Radiation OncologyKorea Cancer Center HospitalNowon-guKorea

Personalised recommendations