College of American Pathologists protocol for the reporting of ductal carcinoma in situ
Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (Impact Factor: 2.84). 02/2009; 133(1):13-4. DOI: 10.1043/1543-2165-133.1.13
Article: Reply to C. Mazouni et alJournal of Clinical Oncology 01/2010; 29(2):e45-e46. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2010.32.4228 · 18.43 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To integrate margin status information into the decision to undergo radiation therapy (RT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We developed a decision-analytic Markov model to project quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for a hypothetical cohort of 55-year-old women with DCIS over a lifetime horizon treated with or without RT following BCS. We estimated the transition probabilities of local DCIS and invasive recurrences based on the margin status (free, close, or positive) from a systematic literature review. Other probability estimates and utilities were collected from the published literature. Using the conditions defined in this model, expected QALYs after BCS alone were better than those after BCS with RT under the free-margin scenario (15.72 vs. 15.58) and worse in the close-margin (15.44 vs. 15.50) and positive-margin scenarios (15.20 vs. 15.33). The probability of receiving a salvage mastectomy varied from 10 to 28%, depending on margin status and treatment. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the optimal treatment was sensitive to patients' preferences and RT side effects. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that BCS alone would be the best strategy in 54% of the cases under the free-margin scenario, 48% under the close-margin scenario, and 44% under the positive-margin scenario. This study illustrates that margin status is able to provide supplementary information on the decision of DCIS treatment. Our analyses also highlight the importance of patients' preferences in decision making. Our findings suggest that RT is not necessary for all patients with DCIS undergoing BCS.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 11/2010; 124(2):393-402. DOI:10.1007/s10549-010-1166-7 · 3.94 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: While ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is seldom life threatening, the management of DCIS remains a dilemma for patients and their physicians. Aggressive treatment reduces the risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), but has never been proven to improve survival. There is interest in identifying the prognostic factors for determining low-risk DCIS patients, but a comprehensive review of high-quality evidence on tumor characteristics in predicting local recurrence has never been carried out. We examined the following tumor characteristics: biomarkers, comedonecrosis, focality, surgical margin, method of detection, tumor grade, and tumor size. For this systematic review we restricted the analyses to the results of subgroup analyses from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and multivariate analyses from RCTs and observational studies. We identified 44 eligible articles. The pooled random-effects risk estimates for IBTR are comedonecrosis 1.71(95% CI, 1.36-2.16), focality 1.95(95% CI, 1.59-2.40), margin 2.25(95% CI, 1.77-2.86), method of detection 1.35(95% CI, 1.12-1.62), tumor grade 1.81(95% CI, 1.53-2.13), and tumor size 1.63(95% CI, 1.30-2.06). Limited evidence indicated that women whose DCIS is ER-negative, PR-negative, or HER2/neu receptor positive have an IBTR higher than those whose DCIS is ER-positive, PR-positive, and HER2/neu receptor negative. A variety of tumor characteristics are significant predictors for IBTR. These results are important for both clinicians and patients to interpret the risk of local recurrence and to decide on a course of treatment.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 02/2011; 127(1):1-14. DOI:10.1007/s10549-011-1387-4 · 3.94 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.