Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

National trends of synchronous bilateral breast cancer incidence in the United States

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Increase in breast cancer survivorship, advancements in diagnostic imaging and standardization of contralateral breast screening before breast cancer surgery have resulted in increased detection of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). The aim of this study was to assess national trends of synchronous bilateral breast cancer (sBBC) and metachronous bilateral breast cancer (mBBC) incidence in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (1973–2014) was used to identify 11,177 women diagnosed with CBC. CBC was classified as sBBC when primary breast cancer in both breasts is diagnosed in the same year, or as mBBC, when diagnosed more than one year from primary breast cancer. Temporal trends in sBBC incidence were then evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend.

Results

Of the 11,177 women diagnosed with CBC, 4228 (38%) had sBBC and 6949 (62%) had mBBC. The incidence of sBBC increased significantly from 1.4% in 1975 to 2.9% in 2014 (p < 0.001). sBBC was more likely to be diagnosed as early stage in recent years (78% in 1975 vs. 90% in 2014 [p < 0.001]), and 69% of patients were treated with mastectomy in 2014.

Conclusion

The number of sBBC has increased, and contralateral tumors are more likely to be detected at an early stage with the first primary breast cancer. Despite the early stage findings, most were treated with mastectomy. Further studies are needed to define the best therapy for patients with contralateral disease and optimal surveillance and detection methods.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Siegel R, DeSantis C, Virgo K, Stein K, Mariotto A, Smith T, Cooper D, Gansler T, Lerro C, Fedewa S, Lin C, Leach C, Cannady RS, Cho H, Scoppa S, Hachey M, Kirch R, Jemal A, Ward E (2012) Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics. CA 62(4):220–241. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McCaul KA (2006) Bilateral breast cancer incidence and survival. [PhD thesis]. North Terrace, aDELAIDE SA 5005: University of Adelaide 2006. Available from: university of Adelaide. School of population Health and Clinical Practice, Library E-Reserve

  3. AJCC cancer staging manual (2010). (7th ed). Springer, NY

  4. van Ravesteyn NT, van Lier L, Schechter CB, Ekwueme DU, Royalty J, Miller JW, Near AM, Cronin KA, Heijnsdijk EA, Mandelblatt JS, de Koning HJ (2015) Transition from film to digital mammography: impact for breast cancer screening through the national breast and cervical cancer early detection program. Am J Prev Med 48(5):535–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.11.010

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Knox M, O’Brien A, Szabo E, Smith CS, Fenlon HM, McNicholas MM, Flanagan FL (2015) Impact of full field digital mammography on the classification and mammographic characteristics of interval breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 84(6):1056–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Howlader N NA, Krapcho M, Miller D, Bishop K, Kosary CL, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA (eds) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2014, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/, based on November 2016 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2017

  7. Morrow M, Schmidt R, Hassett C (1995) Patient selection for breast conservation therapy with magnification mammography. Surgery 118(4):621–626

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Morrow M, Strom EA, Bassett LW, Dershaw DD, Fowble B, Giuliano A, Harris JR, O’Malley F, Schnitt SJ, Singletary SE, Winchester DP (2002) Standard for breast conservation therapy in the management of invasive breast carcinoma. CA 52(5):277–300

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K (2006) Positive and negative predictive values of BI-RADS-MRI descriptors for focal breast masses. Magn Reson Med Sci 5(1):7–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK, Hendrick RE, Pisano ED, Hanna L, Peacock S, Smazal SF, Maki DD, Julian TB, DePeri ER, Bluemke DA, Schnall MD, Group ATI (2007) MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356(13):1295–1303

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Wong SM, Freedman RA, Sagara Y, Aydogan F, Barry WT, Golshan M (2017) Growing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy despite no improvement in long-term survival for invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg 265(3):581–589. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001698

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yamauchi H, Okawa M, Yokoyama S, Nakagawa C, Yoshida R, Suzuki K, Nakamura S, Arai M (2018) High rate of occult cancer found in prophylactic mastectomy specimens despite thorough presurgical assessment with MRI and ultrasound: findings from the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer Registration 2016 in Japan. Breast Cancer Res Treat 172(3):679–687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4953-1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. McLaughlin SA, Stempel M, Morris EA, Liberman L, King TA (2008) Can magnetic resonance imaging be used to select patients for sentinel lymph node biopsy in prophylactic mastectomy? Cancer 112(6):1214–1221. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Sprundel TC, Schmidt MK, Rookus MA, Brohet R, van Asperen CJ, Rutgers EJ, Van’t Veer LJ, Tollenaar RA (2005) Risk reduction of contralateral breast cancer and survival after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br J Cancer 93(3):287–292. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602703

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Boughey JC, Khakpour N, Meric-Bernstam F, Ross MI, Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, Babiera GV, Arun B, Hunt KK, Bedrosian I (2006) Selective use of sentinel lymph node surgery during prophylactic mastectomy. Cancer 107(7):1440–1447. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yao K, Liederbach E, Tang R, Lei L, Czechura T, Sisco M, Howard M, Hulick PJ, Weissman S, Winchester DJ, Coopey SB, Smith BL (2015) Nipple-sparing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: an interim analysis and review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol 22(2):370–376. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3883-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Development and update of the NCCN guidelines. Version 3.2018

  18. NIH consensus conference Treatment of early-stage breast cancer (1991). JAMA 3:391-395

  19. Frank TS, Deffenbaugh AM, Reid JE, Hulick M, Ward BE, Lingenfelter B, Gumpper KL, Scholl T, Tavtigian SV, Pruss DR, Critchfield GC (2002) Clinical characteristics of individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: analysis of 10,000 individuals. J Clin Oncol 20(6):1480–1490. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.20.6.1480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Couch FJ, DeShano ML, Blackwood MA, Calzone K, Stopfer J, Campeau L, Ganguly A, Rebbeck T, Weber BL (1997) BRCA1 mutations in women attending clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 336(20):1409–1415. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199705153362002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Orvieto E, Maiorano E, Bottiglieri L, Maisonneuve P, Rotmensz N, Galimberti V, Luini A, Brenelli F, Gatti G, Viale G (2008) Clinicopathologic characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: results of an analysis of 530 cases from a single institution. Cancer 113(7):1511–1520. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23811

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR (2005) Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 93(9):1046–1052. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602787

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Mellemkjaer L, Steding-Jessen M, Frederiksen K, Andersson M, Ejlertsen B, Jensen MB et al (2014) Risk of contralateral breast cancer after tamoxifen use among Danish women. Ann Epidemiol 24(11):843–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.08.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nichols HB, Berrington de González A, Lacey JV, Rosenberg PS, Anderson WF (2011) Declining incidence of contralateral breast cancer in the United States from 1975 to 2006. J Clin Oncol 29:1564–1569. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.32.7395

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was used in the preparation, design, or writing of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Takehiko Sakai, Enver Ozkurt, Stephanie M. Wong, Laurel Rosenbaum & Mehra Golshan

  2. Breast Oncology Program, Dana Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Takehiko Sakai, Enver Ozkurt, Stephen DeSantis & Mehra Golshan

  3. McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Stephanie M. Wong

  4. Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Hui Zheng

Authors
  1. Takehiko Sakai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Enver Ozkurt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen DeSantis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie M. Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Laurel Rosenbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hui Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mehra Golshan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehra Golshan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This study was epidemiological study using de-identified data from the SEER database. Therefore, consent for patient participation and study publication was not required. Because this study did not meet the definition of human subject research, the protocol was considered exempt from review from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Institutional Review Board (DFCI Protocol No.: 18-034).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sakai, T., Ozkurt, E., DeSantis, S. et al. National trends of synchronous bilateral breast cancer incidence in the United States. Breast Cancer Res Treat 178, 161–167 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05363-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05363-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation