Trade-offs between survival and breast preservation for 3 initial treatments of ductal carcinoma-in-situ of the breast

Massey Cancer Center, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond 23298-0170, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 18.43). 02/1996; 14(1):70-7.
Source: PubMed


To assess the trade-offs between survival and breast preservation of currently accepted approaches for ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) of the breast.
Decision analysis was performed using the Markov model of hypothetical cohorts of 55-year-old white women with nonpalpable mammographic abnormalities found to be DCIS. Strategies were breast-conserving surgery (BCS), BCS with 50-Gy radiation (RT) or initial mastectomy. Recurrence rates were derived from the published literature. Main outcomes were overall, breast cancer-free, and event-free survival plus years of both breasts preserved.
Using the conditions defined in this model, the actuarial survival rates at 10 and 20 years were 91.7% and 74.1% for the initial mastectomy strategy, 91.0% and 72.1% for BCS plus RT, and 89.6% and 68.2% for BCS alone. At 20 years, the initial mastectomy strategy also had a greater breast cancer-free survival rate of 74.5%, compared with 63.3% for BCS plus RT, or 46.8% for BCS alone. However, BCS alone had the highest survival rate with both breasts preserved (64.2%) compared with BCS plus RT (56.0%) or initial mastectomy (0%). Of the breast-conserving strategies at 20 years, the breast event-free survival rate (no invasive cancer or DCIS) was greater for BCS plus RT (47.2%) compared with BCS alone (28.4%). Using just survival as the primary end point, mastectomy is the optimal strategy by a small margin. However, if quality-adjusted survival is at issue, mastectomy is the choice only if the yearly reduction in quality of life due to mastectomy is less than 1%.
BCS with or without radiation compared with mastectomy as initial management of DCIS of the breast trades a slight decrease in survival rates for the value of breast preservation. This model should aid clinicians in matching treatments to their patients' preferences.

1 Read
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Interferon alfa-2b (IFN) in a randomized clinical trial (E1684) prolonged relapse-free and total survival in high-risk resected melanoma. However, the costs and toxicities of IFN are barriers to its widespread use. This study was undertaken to analyze the projected costs and long-term benefits of IFN by combining prospectively collected data on IFN actual dosage, time of recurrence, and survival with secondary data on long-term melanoma recurrence risks to project the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant IFN compared with observation. Two hypothetical cohorts of 50-year-old melanoma patients whose mean IFN dosage and clinical results were directly taken from E1684 were included in the study. Melanoma recurrence risks beyond 5 years were derived from international databases. Melanoma recurrence care costs and quality-of-life adjustments, when considered, were based on expert consensus. End points were incremental costs, life-years gained, and cost per life-year gained with and without quality-of-life adjustments. The IFN cohort was projected to have an increased (undiscounted) survival of 0.52 years at 7 years and 1.90 years over a lifetime. The projected incremental cost (in 1996 United States dollars) per life-year gained in the IFN cohort ranged from $13,700 after 35 years to $32,600 at 7 years, the median follow-up of E1684. Using assigned quality-of-life values for IFN and recurrence, the lifetime cost per quality adjusted life-year increased to $15,200. Even if treatment costs for recurrence were excluded, the lifetime incremental cost per life-year gained was $21,600. The cost and toxicity of IFN must be balanced against its projected benefits in high-risk melanoma. The derived cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios for IFN were comparable to other cancer interventions for which cost-effectiveness analysis has been performed.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 07/1997; 15(6):2351-8. · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • Source

    JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 08/1997; 89(14):991-3. DOI:10.1093/jnci/89.14.991 · 12.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increasing incidence and biological heterogeneity of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast have made the management of this entity challenging and controversial. This paper reviews data on the natural history of the disease and results obtained with various management approaches. Computerized MEDLINE search of articles related to DCIS published since 1966. Randomized trials were given higher value; however, because these were relatively scarce, retrospective studies and data published in abstract form were also included. The authors reviewed all sources critically. No formal statistical calculations were made. The incidence of DCIS is increasing, and a greater proportion of diagnoses are being made in asymptomatic patients. No data from randomized trials compare mastectomy and breast-conserving therapy for the treatment of DCIS. A large randomized trial comparing lumpectomy with lumpectomy plus radiotherapy showed lumpectomy plus radiotherapy to be effective for management of this disease. The presence of comedo necrosis and surgical margin status are frequently used as predictors of subsequent recurrence, although this practice is controversial. The risk for in-breast recurrence at 5 years after lumpectomy and radiotherapy is approximately 8%. With more refined molecular analysis, the relation of DCIS to invasive breast cancer will be better defined. Treatment strategies for DCIS have evolved, and lumpectomy followed by radiotherapy is an appropriate alternative for most patients. The use of lumpectomy alone in selected patients remains controversial.
    Annals of internal medicine 01/1998; 127(11):1013-22. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-127-11-199712010-00013 · 17.81 Impact Factor
Show more