Classification of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast-conserving therapy: New primary cancer allows a good prognosis

PURPOSE: To classify and assess ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy. METHODS: Between 1986 and 2001, 2,137 patients who had breast cancer underwent breast-conserving surgery with or without radiotherapy at the Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research. Of these patients, 83 (3.9%) had an IBTR. We classified the IBTR as a new primary cancer (NP) if the primary tumor had completely negative margins at first operation by detailed pathological examination and if the IBTR had an intraductal component. All other IBTRs were judged true local recurrence (TR). RESULTS: Of the 83 patients, 42 patients were classified as TR (29 had no radiotherapy) and 41 as NP (40 had no radiotherapy). Mean time to disease recurrence was 37 months for TR (52% were within 2 years) versus 55 months for NP (19% were within 2 years) (p=0.031). Six patients (14%) with TR did not receive re-operation, and 67% received salvage mastectomy and 19% re-lumpectomy. All cases of NP were operable, 78% underwent salvage mastectomy and 22% underwent re-lumpectomy. Distant metastases were observed in 33% of patients with TR and 5% of patients with NP, and cause-specific death occurred in 6 cases with TR and in one with NP. The patients with NP had improved 5-year rates of overall survival (NP 91% vs. TR 76%, P=0.0627) and distant disease-free survival (NP 93% vs. TR 61%, P=0.0028). Patients with NP more often developed contralateral breast cancer (NP 37% vs. TR 12%, P=0.018) CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NP had better survival rates than those with TR. Distinguishing new primary breast carcinomas from local disease recurrences may have importance in therapeutic decisions and chemoprevention strategies.     

Analysis of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after breast-conserving treatment based on the classification of true recurrences and new primary tumors

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTR) after breast-conserving treatment include two different entities: true recurrence (TR) thought to occur when residual cancer cells grow gradually to detectable size and new primary (NP) thought to be de novo cancer independently arising in the preserved breast. The patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) are potentially at high risk for subsequent distant metastasis, but many studies do not distinguish between these types of recurrence. The aim of this study is to clarify the biological difference between TR and NP, and to show the clinical significance of classifying IBTR into these two types of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 172 patients with IBTR after breast-conserving therapy from the cohort of a long-term large scale study (Research of cancer treatment from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan (no.13-9)) were analyzed. We classified IBTRs as TR or NP based on tumor location and pathological findings. The characteristics of the primary tumors of TR and NP were compared. Survival rates and risk factors of each type of IBTR were examined by the Kaplan-Meier method. The results of salvage surgery were also analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 172 patients, 135 patients were classified as TR and 26 as NP. Eleven cases could not be categorized. The primary tumor of TR was characterized by a high rate of lymph node metastasis (37.8%) and short disease-free interval (mean DFI; 46.6 months) while that of NP showed a rather low lymph node positivity (8.7%) and longer DFI (62.1 months). The risk factors for TR were young age, positive surgical margin, omission of irradiation and positive lymph node metastasis. Those for NP were young age, omission of irradiation and contralateral breast cancer after the primary operation. The 5-year survival rates after IBTR were 71.0% in TR and 94.7% in NP (p=0.022). Salvage operation was performed in 136 IBTRs. Eighty-one patients underwent salvage mastectomy and 55 patients underwent repeat lumpectomy. Five-year survival rates after salvage operation were 75.7% for mastectomy and 84.2% for lumpectomy (N.S.). Twenty percent of patients who underwent repeat lumpectomy developed secondary local relapse within 5 years after salvage treatment. The risk factors for secondary local relapse were analyzed. Limited to cases of IBTR which received radiation therapy after the primary operation, NP was the only factor influencing secondary local relapse by univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: TR and NP show clinically quite different features; time to occurrence, characteristics of the original tumor, prognosis and risk factor profile for IBTR were all different. Classifying IBTR as TR or NP can provide clinically significant data for the management of IBTR.     

True recurrence vs. new primary ipsilateral breast tumor relapse: an analysis of clinical and pathologic differences and their implications in natural history, prognoses, and therapeutic management

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to classify all ipsilateral breast tumor relapses (IBTR) in patients treated with conservative surgery and radiation therapy (CS+RT) as either new primary tumors (NP) or true local recurrences (TR) and to assess the prognostic and therapeutic implications of this classification.

Methods and Materials: Of the 1152 patients who have been treated at Yale–New Haven Hospital before 1990, 136 patients have experienced IBTR as their primary site of failure. These relapses were classified as either NP or TR. Specifically, patients were classified as NP if the recurrence was distinctly different from the primary tumor with respect to the histologic subtype, the recurrence location was in a different location, or if the flow cytometry changed from aneuploid to diploid. This information was determined by a detailed review of each patient’s hospital and/or radiotherapy record, mammograms, and pathologic reports.

Results: As of 2/99, with a mean follow-up of 14.2 years, the overall ipsilateral breast relapse-free rate for all 1152 patients was 86% at 10 years. Using the classification scheme outlined above, 60 patient relapses were classified as TR, 70 were classified as NP and 6 were unable to be classified. NP patients had a longer mean time to breast relapse than TR patients (7.3 years vs. 3.7 years, p < 0.0001) and were significantly younger than TR patients (48.9 years vs. 54.5 years, p < 0.01). Patients developed both TR and NP at similar rates until approximately 8 years, when TR rates stabilized but NP rates continued to rise. By 15 years following original diagnosis, the TR rate was 6.8% compared to 13.1% for NP. Of the patients who had been previously tested for BRCA1/2 mutations, 17% (8/52) had deleterious mutations. It is noteworthy that all patients with deleterious mutations had new primary IBTR, while patients without deleterious mutations had both TR and NP (p = 0.06). Ploidy was evenly distributed between TR and NP but NP had a significantly lower S phase fraction (NP 13.1 vs. TR 22.0, p < 0.05). The overall survival following breast relapse was 64% at 10 years and 49% at 15 years. With a mean follow-up of 10.4 years following breast relapse, patients with NP had better 10-year overall survival (TR 55% vs. NP 75%, p < 0.0001), distant disease-free survival (TR 41% vs. NP 85%, p < 0.0001), and cause-specific survival (TR 55% vs. NP 90%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion: It appears that a significant portion of patients who experience ipsilateral breast tumor relapse following conservative surgery and radiation therapy have new primary tumors as opposed to true local recurrences. True recurrence and new primary tumor ipsilateral breast tumor relapses have different natural histories, different prognoses, and, in turn, different implications for therapeutic management.     

The use of molecular assays to establish definitively the clonality of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences and patterns of in-breast failure in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy

BACKGROUND: Results from numerous trials have indicated that breast-conserving therapy (BCT) produces outcomes equivalent to those produced by mastectomy in terms of both locoregional control and survival. However, conservative treatment has resulted in the dilemma of how best to address recurrences when they appear in a breast treated previously with radiation therapy. Attempts have been made to characterize ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs) as either true recurrences of the treated malignancy or new primary carcinomas, because cancers that represent new primary tumors may be associated with a more favorable prognosis compared with cancers that represent true recurrences. METHODS: The authors studied the clonality of IBTRs relative to the initial invasive carcinomas by using a polymerase chain reaction loss-of-heterozygosity molecular comparison assay in 29 patients who received breast-conserving therapy (BCT). RESULTS: Twenty-two IBTRs (76%) were related clonally to the initial carcinoma, and 7 IBTRs (24%) were clonally different. Clonally related IBTRs were more frequently higher grade (72.2% vs 14.3%; P = .009) and developed sooner after initial treatment (mean time to IBTR, 4.04 years in clonally related IBTRs vs 9.25 years in clonally different IBTRs; P = .002). Six patients subsequently developed distant metastases, and 5 of those patients (83.3%) had clonally related IBTRs. Clinical IBTR classification and molecular clonality assay results differed in 30% of all patients. The proportion of IBTRs that were related clonally at 5 years, 10 years, and 15 years after BCT were 93%, 67%, and 33%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical classifications of IBTRs were unreliable methods for determining clonality in many patients. Molecular clonality assays provided a reliable means of identifying patients who may benefit from aggressive systemic therapy at the time of IBTR and also provided a more accurate assessment of the efficacy of various forms of local therapy.     

Factors associated with local recurrence and cause-specific survival in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated with breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy

PURPOSE: We reviewed our institution's experience treating patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast to determine risk factors for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and cause-specific survival (CSS) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1981 and 1999, 410 cases of DCIS (405 patients) were treated at our institution; 367 were managed with breast-conserving surgery (54 with lumpectomy alone and 313 with adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) [median dose, 45 Gy]). Of these 313 patients, 298 received also a supplemental boost of RT to the lumpectomy cavity (median dose, 16 Gy). Forty-three patients underwent mastectomy; 2 (5%) received adjuvant RT to the chest wall. A true recurrence/marginal miss (TR/MM) IBTR was defined as failure within or adjacent to the tumor bed in patients undergoing BCT. Median follow-up for all patients was 7 years (mean: 6.1 years). RESULTS: Thirty patients (8.2%) experienced an IBTR after BCT (25 [8%] after RT, 5 [9.3%] after no RT), and 2 patients (4.7%) developed a chest wall recurrence after mastectomy. Of the 32 local failures, 20 (63%) were invasive (18/30 [60%] after BCT and 2/2 [100%] after mastectomy), and 37% were DCIS alone. Twenty-four (80%) of the IBTRs were classified as TR/MM. The 10-year freedom from local failure, CSS, and overall survival after BCT or mastectomy were 89% vs. 90% (p = 0.4), 98% vs. 100% (p = 0.7), and 89% vs. 100% (p = 0.3), respectively. Factors associated with IBTR on Cox multivariate analysis were younger age (p = 0.02, hazard ratio [HR] 1.06 per year), electron boost energy < or = 9 MeV (p = 0.03, HR 1.41), final margins < or = 2 mm (p = 0.007; HR, 3.65), and no breast radiation (p = 0.002, HR 5.56). On Cox univariate analysis for BCT patients, IBTR, TR/MM failures, and predominant nuclear Grade 3 were associated with an increased risk of distant metastases and a reduced CSS. CONCLUSIONS: After treatment for DCIS, 10-year rates of local control, CSS, and overall survival were similar after mastectomy and BCT. Young age (<45 years), close/positive margins (< or = 2 mm), no breast radiation, and lower electron boost energies (< or = 9 MeV) were associated with IBTR. Local failure and predominant nuclear Grade 3 were found to have a small (4%-12%) but statistically significantly negative impact on the rates of distant metastasis and CSS. These results suggest that optimizing local therapy (surgery and radiation) is crucial to improve local control and CSS in patients treated with DCIS.     

Improving local control with breast-conserving therapy: a 27-year single-institution experience

BACKGROUND: The risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is associated with treatment and tumor-related variables, such as surgical margin status and the use of systemic therapy, and these variables have changed over time. Correspondingly, the authors of the current study hypothesized that the contemporary multidisciplinary management of breast carcinoma would lead to an improvement in IBTR rates after BCT. METHODS: Between 1970 and 1996, 1355 patients with pathologic Stage I-II invasive breast carcinoma underwent BCT (breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy) at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Contemporary methods of analyzing surgical margins were in routine use by 1994. To analyze the effect of this variable and others, patient and tumor characteristics and IBTR rates in patients treated during 1994-1996 were compared with those in patients treated from 1970 to 1993. RESULTS: Characteristics were similar in patients treated during 1994-1996 (n = 381) and those treated before 1994 (n = 974) except for patients aged >50 years (63.3% vs. 51.7%, P < 0.001), and patients who had a family history of breast carcinoma (37.9% vs. 30.8%, P = 0.017). Patients treated after 1994 were less likely to have positive or unknown margins (2.9 % vs. 24.1 %, P = 0.0001), more likely to receive chemotherapy (40.5% vs. 26%, P < 0.001), and more likely to receive hormonal therapy (33.3% vs. 19.4%, P < 0.001), but less likely to receive radiation boosts to the primary tumor bed (59.8% vs. 89%, P < 0.001). The 5-year cumulative IBTR rate was significantly lower among patients treated in 1994-1996 than among patients treated before 1994 (1.3% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.001) largely because of the drop in IBTR rates among patients aged < or = 50 years (1.4 % vs. 9.1 %, P = 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, age > 50 (hazards ratio [HR] = 0.401; P = 0.0001), presence of negative surgical margins (HR = 0.574; P = 0.017), and use of adjuvant hormonal therapy (HR = 0.402; P = 0.05) were independent predictors of improved 5-year IBTR-free survival. On subgroup analysis, use of chemotherapy was associated with increased IBTR-free survival among women aged < or = 50 years (HR = 0.383; P = 0.001). Although 5-year cumulative IBTR rates were lower among women aged > 50 years than among younger women before 1994 (2.6 % vs. 9.1%, P < 0.0001), no such difference was found in the group treated in 1994-1996 (1.2 % for age > 50 yrs vs. 1.4 % for < or = 50 yrs, P = 0.999). CONCLUSIONS: The IBTR rate after BCT appears to be declining, especially among patients < 50 years of age. However, long-term follow-up is necessary to confirm this finding. This finding may reflect changes in surgical approaches and pathologic evaluation as well as an increased use of systemic therapy. The current low incidence of IBTR with multidisciplinary management of breast carcinoma may result in more patients choosing BCT over mastectomy.     

Positive surgical margins and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence predict disease-specific survival after breast-conserving therapy

BACKGROUND: The current study identified determinants of systemic recurrence and disease-specific survival (DSS) in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy (breast-conserving therapy, or BCT). METHODS: The study population consisted of 1,043 consecutive women with Stages I or II breast carcinoma who underwent BCT between 1970 and 1994. Clinical and pathologic characteristics evaluated included age, tumor size, tumor grade, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, surgical margins, axillary lymph node involvement, and use of adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 8.4 years, 127 patients (12%) had developed an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), and 184 patients (18%) had developed a systemic recurrence. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, tumor size greater than 2 cm, positive lymph nodes, lack of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy, and positive margins (odds ratio [OR], 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-12.3; P = 0.034) were predictors of systemic recurrence. When IBTR was added into the model, adjuvant therapy and surgical margins were not independent predictors; however, IBTR was an independent predictor of systemic recurrence (IBTR vs. no IBTR; OR, 6.2; 95% CI, 3.1-12.3; P < 0.001). The 10 year DSS rate after BCT was 87%. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis, the following factors were independent predictors of poor DSS: tumor size greater than 2 cm (vs. < or = 2 cm; relative risk [RR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3; P = 0.010), negative progesterone receptor status (vs. positive; RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.4-5.1; P = 0.003), positive margins (vs. negative; RR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.4-11.5; P = 0.011), and IBTR (vs. no IBTR; RR, 5.5; 95% CI, 2.8-11.0; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Positive surgical margins and IBTR are predictors of systemic recurrence and disease-specific survival after BCT. Aggressive local therapy is necessary to ensure adequate surgical margins and to minimize IBTR.     

The impact of lobular carcinoma in situ in association with invasive breast cancer on the rate of local recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy

PURPOSE: The significance of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) associated with invasive breast cancer in patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) remains controversial. We examined the impact of the presence and extent of LCIS associated with invasive breast cancer on clinical outcome in BCT patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 1980 to 1996, 607 cases of invasive breast cancer were treated with BCT. All slides were reviewed by a single pathologist. Positive margin was defined as presence of invasive carcinoma/ductal carcinoma in situ at the inked margin. Multiple clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related variables were analyzed for their association with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and true recurrence/marginal miss (TR/MM). Median follow-up was 8.7 years. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients (9%) had LCIS in association with invasive cancer. On univariate analysis, positive final margin, positive/no reexcision, smaller maximum specimen dimension, and the presence of LCIS predicted for IBTR. The 10-year IBTR rate was 14% for cases with LCIS vs. 7% without LCIS (p=0.04). On multivariate analysis, positive margin (p<0.01), positive/no reexcision (p=0.04), and presence of LCIS (p=0.02) remained independently associated with IBTR; positive margin (p<0.01) and LCIS (p=0.04) were also associated with TR/MM failure. When examining only cases with negative final margins, the presence of LCIS remained associated with higher IBTR and TR/MM rates (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: The presence of LCIS was independently associated with higher rate of IBTR and TR/MM after BCT for invasive breast cancer. LCIS may have significant premalignant potential and progress to an invasive IBTR at the site of index lesion. The adequacy of excision of LCIS associated with invasive carcinoma should be considered in patients undergoing BCT.     

Changes in temporal patterns of local failure after breast-conserving therapy and their prognostic implications

PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate patterns and rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) over time based on the type of failure (true recurrence/marginal miss [TR/MM] vs. elsewhere [E]) and to compare these to rates of contralateral failure in women with Stages I/II breast cancer treated with conservative surgery (CS) and radiation therapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1980 and 1997, 1448 patients with Stages I/II invasive breast carcinoma were treated with CS and RT to a median total dose of >60 Gy. IBTRs were analyzed in terms of their location as follows: TR/MM, referring to those occurring in the same quadrant, and E, referring to the development of a malignancy remote from the index lesion. Outcomes were characterized in terms of their temporal recurrence patterns and correlated with rates of contralateral breast failure (CL). The median follow-up was 8.5 years. RESULTS: A total of 79 ipsilateral and 98 contralateral failures were observed during the follow-up period corresponding to 5-, 10-, and 15-year actuarial rates of 2%, 7%, and 10% and 4%, 9%, and 12% respectively. Fifty-nine ipsilateral failures (74.7%) were designated as TR/MM and 20 (25.3%) as E. The corresponding 5-, 10-, and 15-year actuarial rates of TR/MM and E failures were 2%, 5%, and 8% and 0.1%, 2%, and 3%, respectively. The median times to total ipsilateral, TR/MM, E, and contralateral failure were 6.5, 5.7, 7.4, and 5.2 years, respectively. Between 0 and 5 years of follow-up, E failures represented 7% of the total ipsilateral failures observed. From 5-10 and 10-15 years, E failures represented 39% and 27% of the total, respectively (p = 0.01). Contralateral failure was significantly more likely to occur in the first 5 years of follow-up than IBTR, accounting for 50 (63.3%) of the 79 failures in that interval (p = 0.02). No significant differences in survival rates were detected between any of the various failure types. On multivariate analysis, only reduced time to tumor recurrence was found to be adversely associated with overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The rates and patterns of IBTR vary with time and, after 5 years, approach the rates of development of a contralateral breast cancer. E failures are, overall, less frequent than TR/MM but contribute increasingly to the IBTR rate after 5 years. Time to tumor recurrence is the most reliable predictor of prognosis after IBTR.     

Lobular carcinoma in situ increases the risk of local recurrence in selected patients with stages I and II breast carcinoma treated with conservative surgery and radiation

BACKGROUND: Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is a known risk factor for the development of invasive breast carcinoma. However, little is known regarding the impact of LCIS in association with an invasive carcinoma on the risk of an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in patients who are treated with conservative surgery (CS) and radiation therapy (RT). The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of LCIS on the local recurrence rate in patients with early stage breast carcinoma after breast-conserving therapy. METHODS: Between 1979 and 1995, 1274 patients with Stage I or Stage II invasive breast carcinoma were treated with CS and RT. The median follow-up time was 6.3 years. RESULTS: LCIS was present in 65 of 1274 patients (5%) in the study population. LCIS was more likely to be associated with an invasive lobular carcinoma (30 of 59 patients; 51%) than with invasive ductal carcinoma (26 of 1125 patients; 2%). Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) occurred in 57 of 1209 patients (5%) without LCIS compared with 10 of 65 patients (15%) with LCIS (P = 0.001). The 10-year cumulative incidence rate of IBTR was 6% in women without LCIS compared with 29% in women with LCIS (P = 0.0003). In both groups, the majority of recurrences were invasive. The 10-year cumulative incidence rate of IBTR in patients who received tamoxifen was 8% when LCIS was present compared with 6% when LCIS was absent (P = 0.46). Subsets of patients in which the presence of LCIS was associated with an increased risk of breast recurrence included tumor size < 2 cm (T1), age < 50 years, invasive ductal carcinoma, negative lymph node status, and the absence of any adjuvant systemic treatment (chemotherapy or hormonal therapy) (P < 0.001). LCIS margin status, invasive lobular carcinoma histology, T2 tumor size, and positive axillary lymph nodes were not associated with an increased risk of breast recurrence in these women. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that the presence of LCIS significantly increases the risk of an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence in certain subsets of patients who are treated with breast-conserving therapy. The risk of local recurrence appears to be modified by the use of tamoxifen. Further studies are needed to address this issue.     

Second invasive breast cancers in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy

ObjectiveSecond breast cancers after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) include ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Each IBTR is further classified as true recurrence (TR) or new primary tumor (NP). We aim to compare survival outcomes of TR, NP and CBC, and explore the optimal treatments.Methods168,427 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent BCT between 1990 and 2005 were identified in the SEER database. The risks of IBTR and CBC were estimated by annual hazard rate. The breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analysis.ResultsWith median follow-up of 13 years after BCT, 5413 patients developed an IBTR and 4050 patients had a CBC. The risk of IBTR peaked between 10 and 15 years after BCT, while the risk of CBC distributed evenly. 45.9% of IBTRs were classified as a TR and 54.1% as an NP. The time interval from primary breast cancer to NP was longer than to TR and CBC (P < 0.001). Patients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP (P = 0.003) and CBC (P = 0.002). There was no difference in BCSS between mastectomy and repeat BCT for treating TR (P = 0.584) or NP (P = 0.243). The BCSS of CBCs treated with BCT was better than mastectomy (P = 0.010). Chemotherapy didn't improve the survival of patients with TR (P = 0.058). However, TRs with grade III or negative hormone receptors benefited from chemotherapy significantly.ConclusionPatients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP and CBC. Classifying IBTR may provide clinical significance for treatments.     

Relation between the method of detection of initial breast carcinoma and the method of detection of subsequent ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Mammography and physical examination are routine methods for the detection of ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma in patients initially undergoing breast conservation treatment. The current study reports the relation between the method of detection of the initial breast carcinoma and the method of detection of subsequent ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of the records of female patients with initial American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Stage I and II invasive breast carcinoma who developed ipsilateral local recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma after breast conservation treatment. The method of detection of local recurrence in the ipsilateral breast and the method of detection of contralateral breast carcinoma were compared with the method of detection of the primary tumor. RESULTS: There were 125 ipsilateral breast local recurrences and 71 contralateral breast carcinoma cases detected. Of the 125 recurrences in the ipsilateral breast, 38% (48 recurrences) were detected by mammography only, 37% (46 recurrences) were detected by physical examination only, and 25% (31 recurrences) were detected by both methods. Of the 71 contralateral breast carcinoma cases, 53% (38 cases) were detected by mammography only, 23% (16 cases) were detected by physical examination only, and 24% (17 cases) were detected by both methods. When the primary tumors were detected by mammography only, 21% of the local recurrences (3 of 14 local recurrences) and 19% of the contralateral breast carcinoma cases (4 of 21 cases) were detected by physical examination only. When the primary tumors were detected by physical examination only, 24% of the local recurrences (14 of 58 local recurrences) and 42% of the contralateral breast carcinoma cases (8 of 19 cases) were detected by mammography only. When stratified by the interval between diagnosis of the primary tumor and ipsilateral local recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma (< or = 5 years vs. > 5 years) or age of the patient at the time of ipsilateral breast recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma (age < or = 49 years vs. age > or = 50 years), both breast examination and mammography were found to be important in the detection of locally recurrent tumor and contralateral breast carcinoma in each subgroup of the patients, regardless of the method of presentation of the primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Both mammography and physical examination were found to be significant in the detection of locally recurrent tumor in the ipsilateral breast and in the detection of contralateral breast carcinoma, regardless of the method of detection of the primary tumor.     

Predictors of systemic recurrence and disease-specific survival after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence

BACKGROUND: In patients with breast carcinoma, ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is an independent predictor of systemic recurrence and disease-specific survival (DSS). However, only a subgroup of patients with IBTR develop systemic recurrences. Therefore, the management of isolated IBTR remains controversial. The objective of the current study was to identify determinants of systemic recurrence and DSS after IBTR. METHODS: The medical records of 120 women who underwent BCT for Stage 0-III breast carcinoma between 1971 and 1996 and who subsequently developed isolated IBTR were reviewed. Clinicopathologic factors were studied using univariate and multivariate analyses for their association with DSS and the development of systemic recurrence after IBTR. RESULTS: The median time to IBTR was 59 months. At a median follow-up of 80 months after IBTR, 45 patients (37.5%) had a systemic recurrence. Initial lymph node status was the strongest predictor of systemic recurrence according to the a univariate analysis (P = 0.001). Other significant factors included lymphovascular invasion (LVI) in the primary tumor, time to IBTR < or = 48 months, clinical and pathologic IBTR tumor size > 1 cm, LVI in the recurrent tumor, and skin involvement at IBTR. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, initially positive lymph node status (relative risk [RR], 5.3; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.4-20.1; P = 0.015) and skin involvement at IBTR (RR, 15.1; 95% CI, 1.5-153.8; P = 0.022) remained independent predictors of systemic recurrence. The 5-year and 10-year DSS rates after IBTR were 78% and 68%, respectively. In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis, only LVI in the recurrent tumor was found to be an independent predictor of DSS (RR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.5-14.1; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who initially had lymph node-positive disease or skin involvement or LVI at IBTR represented especially high-risk groups that warranted consideration for aggressive, systemic treatment and novel, targeted therapies after IBTR. Determinants of prognosis after IBTR should be taken into account when evaluating the need for further systemic therapy and designing risk-stratified clinical trials.     

Uncontrolled local disease after salvage treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence.

AIM: Uncontrolled local disease (ULD) following breast conservation constitutes a clinical problem with a major impact on quality of life. The current study analysed the outcome following treatment of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) and the risk for ULD with the aim to identify risk factors for ULD. METHODS: In a cohort of 5502 patients treated for invasive breast cancer Stage I-II with breast-conserving surgery 1976-1998 in Stockholm, 307 patients with subsequent IBTR were identified. The majority (n = 219) had received postoperative radiotherapy. Twenty-six per cent of the patients received adjuvant tamoxifen, for 2 or 5 years, and 9% received adjuvant polychemotherapy. Median follow-up time was 11(2-23) years. 50/307 patients developed ULD, defined as the appearance of clinically manifest invasive adenocarcinoma in the remaining breast or on the ipsilateral chest wall which could not be eradicated within 3 months of detection. Multivariate linear logistic regression was used in the statistical analysis to identify prognostic factors for ULD. RESULTS: Five years following the diagnosis of IBTR the cumulative incidence of ULD was 13%. Five independent risk factors for ULD were identified; non-surgical treatment of IBTR, disseminated disease concurrent with IBTR, axillary lymph node metastases (at primary breast conservation), time < 3 years between breast conservation and IBTR, no adjuvant endocrine therapy. Eighty-eight per cent of the patients were treated with salvage mastectomy (n = 207) or re-excision (n = 62). The cumulative incidence at 5 years of ULD following salvage mastectomy and salvage re-excision were 10% and 16% respectively compared to 32% among patients treated non-surgically. Following IBTR, the 5-year overall survival among patients with local control was 78% in contrast to 21% among patients with ULD. CONCLUSION: Uncontrolled local disease is an infrequent but important outcome following breast-conserving surgery. Primary postoperative radiotherapy reduces the risk for IBTR and is therefore recommended as part of the primary treatment to avoid both IBTR and ULD. In addition to radiotherapy, adjuvant therapy reduces the risk for IBTR and thereby the risk for subsequent ULD. Patients with IBTR, independent of concurrent distant metastases, should when feasible be recommended for salvage surgery as it provides superior local control compared to salvage systemic therapy alone.     

Factors associated with local recurrence of mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ in patients given breast-conserving therapy

BACKGROUND: The authors reviewed their institution's experience treating patients with mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) to determine 10-year rates of local control and survival and to identify factors associated with local recurrence. METHODS: From January 1980 to December 1993, 132 breasts in 130 patients were treated with BCT for mammographically detected DCIS at William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan. All patients underwent an excisional biopsy, and 64% were reexcised. All patients received postoperative whole-breast irradiation to a median dose of 45.0 Gray (Gy) (range: 43.1-56.0 Gy). One hundred twenty-four cases (94%) received a boost to the tumor bed for a median total dose of 60.4 Gy (range: 45.0-71.8 Gy). All cases underwent complete pathologic review by one pathologist. The median follow-up was 7.0 years. RESULTS: Of the entire study group, 13 patients developed recurrence within the ipsilateral breast, for 5- and 10-year actuarial rates of 8.9% and 10.3%, respectively. Nine of the 13 recurrences (69%) occurred within or immediately adjacent to the lumpectomy cavity and were designated as true recurrences or marginal misses (TR/MM). Four patients (31%) had recurrence elsewhere in the breast. Ten of the 13 recurrences (77%) were invasive, whereas 3 (23%) were pure DCIS. Only 1 patient died of disease, corresponding to 5- and 10-year actuarial cause specific survival rates of 100% and 99.0%, respectively. Multiple clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related factors were analyzed for association with ipsilateral breast failure or TR/MM. In multivariate analysis, only the absence of pathologic calcifications was significantly associated with ipsilateral breast failure. When specifically analyzed for TR/MM, younger age at diagnosis, number of slides with DCIS, number of DCIS and cancerization of lobules (COL) foci within 5 mm of the margin, and the absence of pathologic calcifications demonstrated a statistically significant association. Close or positive margin status did not significantly predict for either TR/MM (P = 0.14) or ipsilateral breast failure (P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mammographically detected DCIS treated with BCT, adequate excision of all DCIS prior to RT can result in improved rates of local control. However, margin status may not adequately predict complete tumor extirpation. The volume of DCIS within 5 mm of the margin appears to be a more reliable surrogate for the adequacy of excision. In addition, young patient age and the absence of pathologic calcifications are independent risk factors for the development of local recurrence.     

Long-term results of local recurrence after breast conservation treatment for invasive breast cancer

PURPOSE: The outcome for women with a local failure after breast conservation treatment is not well described in the literature. Because local recurrence is a potentially salvageable event, this study was performed to evaluate the outcome of patients with local recurrence after breast conservation surgery and definitive radiation treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study population consisted of 112 patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence. There were 100 isolated local recurrences and 12 local-plus-regional recurrences. There were 93 invasive local recurrences and 19 DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) local recurrences. Local recurrences were detected by physical examination alone in 42 patients, mammography alone in 47 patients, and both modalities in 23 patients. All patients were initially treated with breast conservation treatment with or without systemic therapy and subsequently treated at the time of local recurrence with salvage mastectomy with or without systemic therapy. The mean and median follow-up times after local recurrence were 49 and 44 months, respectively. RESULTS: For the entire group of 112 patients, the overall survival at 10 years after local recurrence was 69%, the cause-specific survival was 71%, and the freedom from distant metastases was 47%. For the 93 patients with an invasive local recurrence, the overall survival at 10 years was 64%, cause-specific survival was 67%, and freedom from distant metastases was 44%. For the 93 patients with an invasive local recurrence, interval from diagnosis to local recurrence (< or =2 years vs. 2.1-5 years vs. >5 years) predicted for overall survival at 5 years (65% vs. 84% vs. 89%; p = 0.03). Method of detection of local recurrence (physical examination vs. mammography vs. both methods) also predicted for 5-year overall survival (73% vs. 91% vs. 93%, respectively; p = 0.04). On multivariable analysis, interval from diagnosis to local recurrence was an independent predictor of overall survival (p = 0.03). Method of detection of local recurrence (physical examination vs. mammography vs. both methods) was borderline in predicting for 5-year cause-specific survival (73% vs. 91% vs. 93%, respectively; p = 0.06). Similarly, interval from diagnosis to local recurrence (< or =2 years vs. 2.1-5 years vs. >5 years) was a borderline predictor of 5-year cause-specific survival (65% vs. 84% vs. 89%; p = 0.08). No factors that predicted for freedom from distant metastases were identified. There were three second locoregional failures on the chest wall. Two of the 19 patients with a DCIS local recurrence have died of metastatic breast cancer. Death was probably not related to their local recurrence, but rather a result of persistent risk from an invasive primary cancer. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides long-term data after salvage treatment for patients who experience local recurrence after breast conservation treatment. The variables of method of detection and interval from diagnosis to local recurrence are identified as having prognostic significance for overall and cause-specific survival. In view of the potential for long-term survival, aggressive attempt at salvage treatment is warranted for the patient with local recurrence after breast conservation treatment. Second local recurrence after salvage mastectomy is an uncommon event. Although DCIS local recurrences may not in themselves cause an increase in the risk of mortality, the risk from the primary invasive cancer persists.     

Outcome After Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treated With Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation

PurposeLimited outcomes exist in patients who develop an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). The purpose of this study was to evaluate these outcomes and patterns of failure in our cohort of patients undergoing APBI.Methods and MaterialsA total of 534 patients with early-stage breast cancer were treated with APBI between 1993 and 2010. Clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related variables were analyzed. Clinical outcomes, including further IBTR, regional recurrence, disease-free survival, cause-specific survival, and overall survival were analyzed.ResultsEighteen (3.3%) patients developed an IBTR, for a 5-year actuarial rate of 2.0%; 14 (77.8%) of the recurrences were thought to represent new primary cancers. After IBTR, 13 (72.2%) patients were managed with salvage mastectomy and 4 (22.2%) patients with a second attempt at breast-conserving therapy. Five-year rates of disease-free survival, cause-specific survival, and overall survival after salvage mastectomy for IBTR were 81%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. In the 4 patients treated with a second attempt at breast-conserving therapy, no IBTR, axillary failure, regional recurrence, or distant metastases were noted at 5 years.ConclusionsIBTRs that developed after APBI resulted in excellent clinical outcomes comparable with those observed after whole-breast irradiation.     

Mutant p53 protein overexpression in women with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence following lumpectomy and radiation therapy

BACKGROUND: The p53 tumor suppressor gene encodes a nuclear phosphoprotein that is thought to be important to cell cycle regulation and DNA repair and that also may regulate induction of apoptosis by ionizing radiation. Somatic p53 gene mutations occur in 30-50% of breast carcinomas and are associated with poor prognosis. Mutations in the p53 gene result in prolonged stability of the protein that can be detected by immunohistochemical techniques. In a matched case-control study of breast carcinoma patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) following lumpectomy and radiation therapy, the authors investigated the frequency and prognostic significance of somatic p53 mutations as well as the clinical characteristics of patients with these mutations. METHODS: Between 1973 and 1995, there were 121 breast carcinoma patients with IBTR following lumpectomy and radiation therapy, and the authors identified 47 patients in whom the paraffin embedded tissue blocks from the primary breast tumors were available for further molecular analysis. Forty-seven control breast carcinoma patients from the breast carcinoma data base were individually matched to the index cases who did not have IBTR for age, treatment date, follow-up, histology, margin status, radiation dose, and adjuvant treatment. Immunohistochemistry using a monoclonal antibody to mutant p53 protein was used to determine mutant p53 protein overexpression in breast tumors and appropriately scored. RESULTS: A total of 12 of 47 tumor specimens (26%) from index patients with breast tumor relapses demonstrated mutant p53 protein overexpression, whereas only 4 of 47 specimens from controls (9%) demonstrated high mutant p53 immunoreactivity (P = 0.02). The authors found that 9 of 23 patients (39%) with early breast tumor recurrences (recurrences within 4 years of diagnosis) had overexpression of mutant p53 protein, whereas only 1 of 23 control cases (4%) had high mutant p53 protein immunoreactivity (P = 0.003). In contrast, index cases from patients with late breast tumor relapses (more than 4 years after diagnosis), which are more likely to represent de novo breast tumors, and control cases from the breast carcinoma data base without IBTR had similar levels of mutant p53 protein overexpression (P = not significant). The 10-year distant disease free survival for patients with mutant p53 protein was 48%, compared with 67% for breast carcinoma patients without detection of mutant p53 protein (P = 0. 08). The authors found that 13 of 14 primary breast tumors (93%) with mutant p53 protein overexpression were estrogen receptor negative (P = 0.01) and 11 of 14 (79%) were progesterone receptor negative (P = not significant). CONCLUSIONS: In a matched case-control study, overexpression of mutant p53 protein has prognostic significance with respect to IBTR following lumpectomy and radiation therapy. Breast tumors with p53 mutations are generally estrogen receptor negative and are associated with compromised distant disease free survival.     

When can a second conservative approach be considered for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence?

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy is considered the treatment of choice in patients with ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one patients with invasive IBTR who underwent a second conservative approach were retrospectively evaluated in order to describe prognosis, determine predictive factors of outcome and select the subset of patients with the best local control. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients (35.4%) relapsed after IBTR. Thirty-four patients (21.1%) had further in-breast recurrences and four patients (2.5%) had skin relapses. Five years cumulative incidence of local relapse was 31.4%. Twenty-four patients (17.8%, 5 years cumulative incidence) died during the follow-up. At the multivariate analysis, recurrent tumour size >2 cm was found to affect local-disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR): 2.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-6.2], whereas Ki-67 >or=20% and time to relapse 48 months, eight (12.8%, 5 years cumulative incidence) had further local relapses. CONCLUSIONS: Some patients with IBTR might receive a second BCS, especially when a good local control can be estimated (small recurrent tumour, late relapse), also taking into account patients' preference.