Breast conservation therapy (BCT): surgery as the cornerstone of multi-specialty care.

Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Box 356410, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
Breast Cancer (Impact Factor: 1.51). 02/2000; 7(4):273-5. DOI: 10.1007/BF02966388
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Surgical care has been the mainstay of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. As care has evolved, increased collaborative approaches among surgeons, radiologists, radiation oncologists and medical oncologists have improved the quality of breast cancer treatment for the patient. Breast conservation therapy (BCT) exemplifies how multi-specialty care can increase cancer cure rates at the same time that the disfiguring aspects of breast cancer treatment can be minimized. New questions are being raised within clinical forums about how to do better both for the patient and for her oncologic treatment. The following questions represent three current issues in BCT: 1. What general operative approaches in BCT can minimize morbidity and optimize the cosmetic outcome from surgery? 2. What role does radiation therapy play in BCT for invasive and non-invasive breast cancer to supplement surgical intervention? 3. What role can neoadjuvant chemotherapy play in improving BCT rates?

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies. Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response. There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model. Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 08/1998; 16(8):2672-85. · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this randomised trial was to determine advantages and drawbacks of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancers > 3 cm. Two hundred and seventy-two women (age 70) with operable breast cancers larger than 3 cm (T2-3/N0-1/M0) were included in a randomised trial from January 1, 1985 to April 30, 1989. Patients in group A (n = 138) were treated by mastectomy and axillary node dissection. Adjuvant chemotherapy was indicated for 104 patients with axillary node involvement (n = 82) or negative oestrogen and progesterone receptors (EPR-) (n = 22). Patients in group B (n = 134) were treated by initial chemotherapy (identical as in group A) followed by locoregional treatment according to the response. Before treatment, the average of clinical tumoural diameter was 43 mm. The median follow-up was 124 months. In group B, 49 patients (36.5%) were resistant to chemotherapy; a conservative breast surgical treatment was performed in the other 84 patients sensitive to chemotherapy (62.6%). In this last subgroup, 19 (22.6%) needed a secondary mastectomy because of locoregional recurrence. Survival rates were not different in groups A and B, but loco-regional recurrences were frequent in group B. At 10 years, the overall survival rate was 60% and half of living patients in group B were free of cancer and with their breast. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy permitted in two-thirds of cases breast conservation treatment, initially considered to be impossible. Locoregional recurrences are more frequent than after mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy.
    Chirurgie 07/1998; 123(3):247-56.
  • Source
    Annals of Surgery 08/1907; 46(1):1-19. DOI:10.1097/00000658-190707000-00001 · 8.33 Impact Factor