Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Association of Surgical Margins and Local Recurrence in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Meta-Analysis

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

There is no consensus on adequate negative margins in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We systematically reviewed the evidence on margins in BCS for DCIS.

Methods

A study-level meta-analysis of local recurrence (LR), microscopic margin status and threshold distance for negative margins. LR proportion was modeled using random-effects logistic meta-regression (frequentist) and network meta-analysis (Bayesian) that allows for multiple margin distances per study, adjusting for follow-up time.

Results

Based on 20 studies (LR: 865 of 7883), odds of LR were associated with margin status [logistic: odds ratio (OR) 0.53 for negative vs. positive/close (p < 0.001); network: OR 0.45 for negative vs. positive]. In logistic meta-regression, relative to >0 or 1 mm, ORs for 2 mm (0.51), 3 or 5 mm (0.42) and 10 mm (0.60) showed comparable significant reductions in the odds of LR. In the network analysis, ORs relative to positive margins for 2 (0.32), 3 (0.30) and 10 mm (0.32) showed similar reductions in the odds of LR that were greater than for >0 or 1 mm (0.45). There was weak evidence of lower odds at 2 mm compared with >0 or 1 mm [relative OR (ROR) 0.72, 95 % credible interval (CrI) 0.47–1.08], and no evidence of a difference between 2 and 10 mm (ROR 0.99, 95 % CrI 0.61–1.64). Adjustment for covariates, and analyses based only on studies using whole-breast radiotherapy, did not change the findings.

Conclusion

Negative margins in BCS for DCIS reduce the odds of LR; however, minimum margin distances above 2 mm are not significantly associated with further reduced odds of LR in women receiving radiation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Shamliyan T, Kane RL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review of incidence, treatment, and outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:170–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:478–88.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Irwig L, Bennetts A. Quality of life after breast conservation or mastectomy: a systematic review. Aust N J Surg. 1997;67:750–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang S-Y, Chu H, Shamliyan T, et al. Network meta-analysis of margin threshold for women with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:507–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M, Kell MR. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1615–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pilewskie M, Morrow M. Extent and role of margin control for DCIS managed by breast-conserving surgery. In: Newman LA, Bensenhaver JM, editors. Ductal carcinoma in situ and microinvasive/borderline breast cancer. New York: Springer; 2015. pp. 67–83.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1507–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. American Society of Breast Surgeons. The American Society of Breast Surgeons position statement on breast cancer lumpectomy margins. 2013. https://www.breastsurgeons.org/new_layout/about/statements/PDF_Statements/Lumpectomy_Margins.pdf. Accessed 28 Jul 2016.

  9. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, breast cancer version 1. 2016. http://www.nccn.org. Accessed 14 Dec 2015.

  10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Early and locally advanced breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment: NICE guidelines [CG80]. 2009. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg80/chapter/guidance#surgery-to-the-breast. Accessed 14 Dec 2015.

  11. New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG). Ductal carcinoma in situ. Management of early breast cancer: evidence-based best practice guideline. Wellington: New Zealand Guidelines Group; 2015. pp. 133–41.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:v8–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology—American Society for Radiation Oncology—American Society of Clinical Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016. doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5449-z.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vicini FA, Recht A. Age at diagnosis and outcome for women with ductal carcinoma-in situ of the breast: a critical review of the literature. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:2736–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kong I, Narod SA, Taylor C, et al. Age at diagnosis predicts local recurrence in women treated with breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a population-based outcomes analysis. Curr Oncol. 2014;21:e96–104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, Morrow M. The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:717–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:3219–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vicini F, Beitsch P, Quiet C, et al. Five-year analysis of treatment efficacy and cosmesis by the American Society of Breast Surgeons mammosite breast brachytherapy registry trial in patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;79:808–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hathout L, Hijal T, Theberge V, et al. Hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87:1058–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ben-David MA, Sturtz DE, Griffith KA, et al. Long-term results of conservative surgery and radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ using lung density correction: The University of Michigan experience. Breast J. 2007;13:392–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Solin LJ, Fourquet A, Vicini FA, et al. Long-term outcome after breast-conservation treatment with radiation for mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer. 2005;103:1137–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rodrigues N, Carter D, Dillon D, Parisot N, Choi DH, Haffty BG. Correlation of clinical and pathologic features with outcome in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;54:1331–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cutuli B, Cohen-Solal-Le NC, De LB, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast results of conservative and radical treatments in 716 patients. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:2365–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hiramatsu H, Bornstein BA, Recht A, et al. Local recurrence after conservative surgery and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: possible importance of family history. Cancer J Sci Am. 1995;1:55–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cataliotti L, Distante V, Ciatto S, et al. Intraductal breast cancer: review of 183 consecutive cases. Eur J Cancer. 1992;28:917–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Turaka A, Freedman GM, Li T, et al. Young age is not associated with increased local recurrence for DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery and radiation. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100:25–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Van Zee KJ, Subhedar P, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M. Relationship between margin width and recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery for 30 years. Ann Surg. 2015;262:623–31.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Meattini I, Livi L, Franceschini D, et al. Role of radiotherapy boost in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center experience in a series of 389 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39:613–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chuwa EWL, Tan VHS, Tan P-H, Yong W-S, Ho G-H, Wong C-Y. Treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ in an Asian population: outcome and prognostic factors. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:42–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. MacAusland SG, Hepel JT, Chong FK, et al. An attempt to independently verify the utility of the Van Nuys prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 2007;110:2648–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chasle J, Delozier T, Denoux Y, Marnay J, Michels J-J. Immunohistochemical study of cell cycle regulatory proteins in intraductal breast carcinomas: a preliminary study. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:1363–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nakamura S, Woo C, Silberman H, Streeter J, Lewinsky BS, Silverstein MJ. Breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: A 20 year experience with excision plus radiation therapy. Am J Surg. 2002;184:403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Neuschatz AC, DiPetrillo T, Safaii H, Lowther D, Landa M, Wazer DE. Margin width as a determinant of local control with and without radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Int J Cancer. 2001;96:97–104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Fowble B, Hanlon AL, Fein DA, et al. Results of conservative surgery and radiation for mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;38:949–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sweldens C, Peeters S, Van LE, et al. Local relapse after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a European single-center experience and external validation of the memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center DCIS nomogram. Cancer J. 2014;20:1–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim H, Noh JM, Choi DH, et al. Excision alone for small size ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast. 2014;23:586–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004;23:3105–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Jansen JP, Trikalinos T, Cappelleri JC, et al. Indirect treatment comparison/network meta-analysis study questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC good practice task force report. Value Health. 2014;17:157–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Pathologic findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast project (NSABP) eight-year update of protocol b-17: intraductal carcinoma. Cancer. 1999;86:429–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Fish EB, Chapman J-A, Miller NA, et al. Assessment of treatment for patients with primary ductal carcinoma in situ in the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 1998;5:724–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sahoo S, Recant WM, Jaskowiak N, Tong L, Heimann R. Defining negative margins in DCIS patients treated with breast conservation therapy: The University of Chicago experience. Breast J. 2005;11:242–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Macdonald HR, Silverstein MJ, Mabry H, et al. Local control in ductal carcinoma in situ treated by excision alone: incremental benefit of larger margins. Am J Surg. 2005;190:521–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Correa C, McGale P, Taylor C, et al. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;162–77.

  45. Cutuli B, Cohen-Solal-Le NC, De LB, et al. Breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the French Cancer Centers’ experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:868–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tunon-De-Lara C, De-Mascarel I, Mac-Grogan G, et al. Analysis of 676 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast from 1971 to 1995: diagnosis and treatment. The experience of one institute. Am J Clin Oncol Cancer Clin Trials. 2001;24:531–36.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chan KC, Fiona KW, Sinha G, et al. Extent of excision margin width required in breast conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 2001;91:9–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Warneke J, Grossklaus D, Davis J, et al. Influence of local treatment on the recurrence rate of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180:683–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kestin LL, Goldstein NS, Martinez AA, et al. Mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ treated with conservative surgery with or without radiation therapy. Patterns of failure and 10 year results. Ann Surg. 2000;231:235–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Ringberg A, Idvall I, Ferno M, et al. Ipsilateral local recurrence in relation to therapy and morphological characteristics in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2000;26:444–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rudloff U, Brogi E, Reiner AS, et al. The influence of margin width and volume of disease near margin on benefit of radiation therapy for women with DCIS treated with breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg. 2010;251:583–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Gelman A, Rubin DB. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences (with discussion). Stat Sci. 1992;7:457–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, Van Der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J R Stat Soc Series B. 2002;64:583–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

M.L. Marinovich is supported by a Cancer Institute NSW (CINSW) Early Career Fellowship. N. Houssami receives research support via a National Breast Cancer Foundation (NBCF) Australia Breast Cancer Research Leadership Fellowship. This work was partly supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) program Grant to the STEP.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Screening and Test Evaluation Program (STEP), Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    M. Luke Marinovich MPH, PhD, Lamiae Azizi PhD, Petra Macaskill PhD, Les Irwig MBBCh, PhD & Nehmat Houssami MBBS, FAFPHM, PhD

  2. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Monica Morrow MD

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein Healthcare Network, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Lawrence J. Solin MD, FACR, FASTRO

Authors
  1. M. Luke Marinovich MPH, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lamiae Azizi PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Petra Macaskill PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Les Irwig MBBCh, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Monica Morrow MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lawrence J. Solin MD, FACR, FASTRO
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nehmat Houssami MBBS, FAFPHM, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Luke Marinovich MPH, PhD.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 258 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marinovich, M.L., Azizi, L., Macaskill, P. et al. The Association of Surgical Margins and Local Recurrence in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Meta-Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 23, 3811–3821 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5446-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5446-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation