The Cambridge post-mastectomy radiotherapy (C-PMRT) index: A practical tool for patient selection

Background and purpose

Post mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) reduces loco-regional recurrence (LRR) and has been associated with survival benefit. It is recommended for patients with T3/T4 tumours and/or ?4 positive lymph nodes (LN). The role of PMRT in 1–3 positive LN and LN negative patients is contentious. The C-PMRT index has been designed for selecting PMRT patients, using independent prognostic factors for LRR. This study reports a 10 year experience using this index.

Materials and methods

The C-PMRT index was constructed using the following prognostic factors (a) number of positive LN/lymphovascular invasion, (b) tumour size (c) margin status and (d) tumour grade. Patients were categorised as high (H) risk, intermediate (I) risk and low (L) risk. PMRT was recommended for H and I risk patients. The LRR, distant metastasis and overall survival (OS) rates were measured from the day of mastectomy.

Results

From 1999 to 2009, 898 invasive breast cancers in 883 patients were treated by mastectomy (H: 323, I: 231 and L: 344). At a median follow up of 5.2 years, 4.7% (42/898) developed LRR. The 5-year actuarial LRR rates were 6%, 2% and 2% for the H, I and L risk groups, respectively. 1.6% (14/898) developed isolated LRR (H risk n = 4, I risk group n = 0 and L risk n = 10). The 5-year actuarial overall survival rates were 67%, 77% and 90% for H, I and L risk groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Based on published literature, one would have expected a higher LRR rate in the I risk group without adjuvant RT. We hypothesise that the I risk group LRR rates have been reduced to that of the L risk group by the addition of RT. Apart from LN status and tumour size, other prognostic factors should also be considered in selecting patients for PMRT. This pragmatic tool requires further validation.     

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the technical delivery of postmastectomy radiotherapy

PURPOSE: To quantify the impact of immediate breast reconstruction on postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) planning. METHODS: A total of 110 patients (112 treatment plans) who had mastectomy with immediate reconstruction followed by radiotherapy were compared with contemporaneous stage-matched patients who had undergone mastectomy without intervening reconstruction. A scoring system was used to assess optimal radiotherapy planning using four parameters: breadth of chest wall coverage, treatment of the ipsilateral internal mammary chain, minimization of lung, and avoidance of heart. An "optimal" plan achieved all objectives or a minor 0.5 point deduction; "moderately" compromised treatment plans had 1.0 or 1.5 point deductions; and "major" compromised plans had > or =2.0 point deductions. RESULTS: Of the 112 PMRT plans scored after reconstruction, 52% had compromises compared with 7% of matched controls (p < 0.0001). Of the compromised plans after reconstruction, 33% were considered to be moderately compromised plans and 19% were major compromised treatment plans. Optimal chest wall coverage, treatment of the ipsilateral internal mammary chain, lung minimization, and heart avoidance was achieved in 79%, 45%, 84%, and 84% of the plans in the group undergoing immediate reconstruction, compared respectively with 100%, 93%, 97%, and 92% of the plans in the control group (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p = 0.0015, and p = 0.1435). In patients with reconstructions, 67% of the "major" compromised radiotherapy plans were left-sided (p < 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation treatment planning after immediate breast reconstruction was compromised in more than half of the patients (52%), with the largest compromises observed in those with left-sided cancers. For patients with locally advanced breast cancer, the potential for compromised PMRT planning should be considered when deciding between immediate and delayed reconstruction.     

Comparison of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy and mastectomy alone for breast cancer: A meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare patient outcomes between immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy and mastectomy alone.

乳腺癌术后修复重建的临床经验

目的 探讨国人乳腺癌术后修复重建的经验。方法 回顾性分析2009年11月至2011年1月海南省农垦总医院收治的15例乳腺癌术后自体组织修复重建患者的临床资料。结果 15例手术患者中,即刻修复5例（4例为即刻修复临床Ⅳ期乳癌术后胸壁创面）,延期修复10例。单纯应用背阔肌肌皮瓣带蒂转移3例（2例为即刻修复保乳术后局部缺损）,背阔肌肌皮瓣带蒂转移加乳房假体3例,乳腺瓣修复保乳术后局部缺损1例,内窥镜辅助背阔肌肌瓣带蒂转移修复保乳术后乳腺局部缺损1例,组织扩张术行局部皮瓣转移2例。随访2～15个月,皮瓣全部成活,创面愈合良好,形态满意。结论 自体组织修复保乳术后的局部缺损对于乳房普遍较小的中国患者实用方便,设计灵活,可同时修复腋窝缺损,不影响放疗和化疗的及时进行,具有良好的应用前景。     

应用游离腹部皮瓣行118例乳房重建术的单中心报告

背景与目的：随着诊疗技术的不断革新,乳腺癌的无病生存期和总生存率显著提高。为了改善患者术后的生活质量,越来越多的乳房重建技术被应用于临床。本文拟通过回顾复旦大学附属肿瘤医院乳腺外科118例游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建术的开展情况,介绍该术式的手术方法及结果,并就开展过程中的心得体会加以阐述。方法：收集2006年11月—2013年6月117例(1例接受双侧重建)接受全乳切除并进行即刻或延期游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建的患者进行即刻或延期游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建的临床资料,分析手术情况、围手术期并发症发生率及远期转归。结果：在上述观察期间共完成118例游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建术,平均手术时间7.72 h,平均热缺血时间78.74 min,平均血管吻合时间60.83 min。保留腹壁下深血管穿支平均为3支,胸廓内血管为首选的受区血管。术后发生血管危象10例,其中静脉血栓6例,静脉成角4例;解救成功7例,皮瓣全部坏死3例,成功率为97.46%。术后伤口感染发生率为7.00%,下腹部膨隆发生率为3.50%,无腹壁疝发生。手术距首疗程化疗的中位时间为19 d。中位随访12个月,1例出现远处转移,未发现局部复发。结论：游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建术可获得较佳的重建乳房外观,虽然该术式较为复杂,对术者要求高,存在学习曲线,但术式成功率高,术后并发症较少,不影响肿瘤安全性,值得推广。     

单中心乳腺癌术后乳房重建的影响因素

背景与目的：乳腺癌手术方式的选择受到诸多因素影响,本研究旨在分析乳腺癌患者选择乳房重建手术的影响因素,重点探讨居住地距离与乳房重建的关系。方法：回顾性分析了1999年1月—2015年12月复旦大学附属肿瘤医院收治的因单侧或双侧0～Ⅱ期乳腺癌行全乳切除术的女性患者临床资料,分析居住地距离与乳房重建比例的关系。结果：非上海患者选择全乳切除术后乳房重建比例高于上海患者(6.1% vs 4.5%,P<0.001)。居住地距离影响乳房重建比例(P=0.035)。单因素分析显示,居住地距离越远,选择乳房重建手术比例越高,而年龄、体质量指数(body mass index,BMI)、TNM分期与乳房重建的选择呈负相关(P均<0.001)。多因素分析显示,年龄增长、BMI增加、TNM分期较晚是拒绝行乳房重建的独立影响因素(P均<0.001),而居住地距离不是乳房重建的独立影响因素(P>0.05),且与具体乳房重建方式无交互作用。年龄与居住地距离呈负相关(P<0.001)。结论：乳腺癌患者的居住地距离与乳房重建比例呈线性相关;年龄、BMI和疾病分期是影响乳房重建的主要因素。     

乳腺癌术后乳房重建手术与放疗间关系——基于中国110家医院横断面调查研究

目的 调查目前我国乳房重建手术开展现状,以及国内医生对放疗与乳房重建手术之间关系看法。方法 选取全国范围内110家乳腺癌年手术量>200例的医疗机构,以问卷调查形式开展研究,调查内容包括手术医师及其所在科室和医院的基本情况、2017年乳腺癌手术开展情况、各类型重建手术开展情况以及对放疗和重建手术关系的具体看法。结果 110家单位参与调研,96家(87.3%)单位已开展重建手术,植入物重建占总重建手术量的65.7%,自体重建占20.1%。对于可能需要术后放疗的患者,受访医院首选的手术方式为植入物重建,对于明确需要术后放疗和全乳切除术后接受过放疗的患者,首选自体组织重建。术后放疗是即刻乳房重建的阻碍因素,多数医院认为放疗对手术的影响不大。延期-即刻乳房重建的开展比例达到66%,86%的医院首选在放疗结束半年后更换假体。保乳术后复发的患者也可进行即刻重建,首选的手术方式为植入物重建。结论 我国乳房重建的比例开展较低,医生技术掌握仍有欠缺,在面对与放疗的冲突时,国内专科医生的选择与指南和共识尚存在出入,提示需要对医生进行更专业的培训,以进一步推动国内乳房重建事业的发展。     

乳腺癌不同重建方式术后放疗并发症及BREAST-Q评分分析

目的 对比乳腺癌不同重建方式术后放疗的并发症、满意度及生活质量,寻求重建与放疗的最佳结合方式。方法 收集2014-2019年肿瘤医院收治的105例乳腺癌重建术后放疗病例。根据重建类型不同分为A组(自体重建组,54例)及B组(假体重建组,51例),B组根据重建时机不同分为B1组(一步法重建组,30例)及B2组(二步法重建组,21例)。比较A与B组、B1与B2组的并发症发生率及BREAST-Q评分,采用多元线性回归分析BREAST-Q评分的影响因素。结果 A组远期并发症和总并发症发生率低于B组(1.9%∶37.3%,P<0.001和9.3%∶43.1%,P<0.001),A组社会心理健康和乳房满意度评分高于B组[71(15)∶66(22),P=0.027和53(8)∶53(8),P=0.032],B1与B2组并发症发生率和BREAST-Q评分均相近(均P>0.05)。乳房体积、并发症是BREAST-Q评分的预测因素(P<0.001、<0.001)。结论 乳腺癌自体重建术后放疗较假体重建而言并发症少,BREAST-Q评分部分较优;假体一步法与二步法重建术后放疗的并发症及BREAST-Q结果相当;乳房较大或有并发症的患者BREAST-Q评分较低。     

Analysis of complications and BREAST-Q score after radiotherapy in breast cancer patients treated with different reconstruction methods

Objective To compare the complications, degree of satisfaction and quality of life among breast cancer patients treated with different reconstruction methods after postoperative radiotherapy, aiming to explore the optimal combination of reconstruction and radiotherapy. Methods 105 breast cancer patients treated with postoperative radiotherapy after reconstruction surgery in Tumor Hospital from 2014 to 2019 were enrolled. According to the type of reconstruction, all patients were divided into group A (autologous reconstruction group, n=54) and group B (implant reconstruction group, n=51). Patients in group B were further divided into group B1(one-stage reconstruction group, n=30) and group B2(two-stage reconstruction group, n=21) according to the timing of reconstruction. The incidence of complications and BREAST-Q score were statistically compared between groups A and B, groups B1 and B2, respectively. The influencing factors of BREAST-Q score were identified by multiple linear regression analysis. Results The incidence of long-term complications and the total incidence of complications in group A were significantly lower than those in group B (1.9% vs. 37.3%, P<0.001 and 9.3% vs.43.1%, P<0.001), and the scores of psychosocial well-being and degree of satisfaction with breasts in group A were significantly higher than those in group B (71(15) vs. 66(22), P=0.027 and 53(8) vs. 53(8), P=0.032)). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications and BREAST-Q scores between groups B1 and B2(both P>0.05). Breast volume and complications were the predictors of BREAST-Q score (both P<0.001). Conclusions Radiotherapy after autologous reconstruction of breast cancer yields fewer complications and better BREAST-Q score than the implantation reconstruction. The incidence of postoperative radiotherapy complications and BREAST-Q scores are equivalent between one-stage and two-stage reconstruction. The BREAST-Q score is lower in patients with large breasts or complications.     

Breast cancer subtype approximations and loco-regional recurrence after immediate breast reconstruction

Background

A small but significant proportion of patients with breast cancer (BC) will develop loco-regional recurrence (LRR) after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The LRR also varies according to breast cancer subtypes and clinicopathological features.

Methods

We studied 1742 consecutive BC patients with IBR between 1997 and 2006. According to St Gallen conference consensus 2011, its BC approximations were applied to classify BC into five subtypes: estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR) positive, HER2 negative, and low Ki67 (<14%) [luminal A]; ER and/or PgR positive, HER2 negative and high Ki67(≥14%) [luminal B/HER2 negative]; ER and/or PgR positive, any Ki67 and HER2 positive [luminal B/HER2 positive]; ER negative, PgR negative and HER2 positive [HER2 positive/nonluminal]; and ER negative, PgR negative and HER2 negative [triple negative]. Cumulative incidences of LRR were compared across different subgroups by means of the Gray test. Multivariable Cox regression models were applied.

Results

Median follow up time was 74 months (range 3–165). The cumulative incidence of LRR was 5.5% (121 events). The 5-year cumulative incidence of LRR was 2.5% for luminal A; 5.0% for luminal B/HER2 negative; 9.8% for luminal B/HER2 positive; 3.8% for HER2 non luminal; and 10.9% for triple negative. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (pT) >2 cm, body mass index (BMI) ≥25, triple negative and luminal B/HER2 positive subtypes were associated with increased risk of LRR.

Conclusion

Luminal B/HER2 positive, triple negative subtypes and BMI ≥25 are independent prognostic factors for risk of LRR after IBR.     

Immediate breast reconstruction with latissimus dorsi flap for patients with local recurrence of breast cancer

BackgroundIpsilateral breast cancer recurrence (IBTR) occurs in about 7% of patients with primary invasive breast tumor. Salvage mastectomy and breast reconstruction are often discussed and latissimus dorsi (LD) flap is frequently proposed.MethodsWe retrospectively investigated 111 consecutive locally relapsing patients who underwent salvage mastectomy and immediate LD reconstruction. All included patients with IBTR previously underwent conserving surgery for BC, and received a postoperative irradiation. Primary endpoints were disease free survival and overall survival. Secondary endpoints were surgical complications and re-interventions.ResultsInvasive ductal cancer was the most frequent histotype (60.4%) of breast cancer reappearance. rpT1, rpT2 and rpT3 were observed respectively in 50.5%, 20,7% and 3,6% of the patients. rpTis occurred in 11,7% of cases. Positive axillary nodes were observed in 9,9% of patients at reappearance. Post-operative complication other than seroma occurred in 17,1% of patients, while seroma at the donor site was observed in 61.3% of cases. At 5-year after surgery overall survival was 92% (95% CI: 85%–96%) and disease free survival was 78% (95% CI: 69%–85%).ConclusionsImmediate latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction in selected patients with isolated breast tumor recurrence, which occurred after breast irradiation, provides an effective treatment with a satisfactory outcome.     

游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建的应用及研究进展

乳腺癌发病率居女性新发恶性肿瘤的第一位,外科治疗是重要的治疗手段之一。全乳切除术后乳房重建能在不影响肿瘤学安全性的前提下,提高患者的生存质量,其中,自体组织乳房重建因其特有的优势成为乳房重建的重要方式之一,而游离腹部皮瓣是自体组织乳房重建中最理想的材料。该研究将对游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建手术的临床应用、手术时机及并发症进行综述,旨在探讨游离腹部皮瓣乳房重建的应用及研究进展。     

带蒂背阔肌皮瓣在乳房重建手术中的应用

随着乳腺癌治疗模式的发展及患者观念的转变,乳房重建逐渐成为乳腺癌治疗的一部分。背阔肌因面积较大,且蒂部解剖变异较少,同时血供丰富可被改良成不同的皮瓣,因此被认为是良好的供瓣区。在乳房重建中,背阔肌肌皮瓣的应用较广,不仅可以使用全背阔肌或联合假体进行乳房重建,且可以根据不同的缺损范围选择合适的背阔肌皮瓣进行乳房缺损的修补。相比单纯植入物重建,背阔肌皮瓣可获得更为良好的乳房形态且对术后放疗影响较小;相比下腹部皮瓣,背阔肌皮瓣瘢痕较短,术后恢复较快。目前对于术后供区缝合方式的改进及辅助药物的应用,极大地降低了血清肿的发生率;腔镜技术的应用也避免了切取背阔肌皮瓣遗留的供区瘢痕。在临床应用中,背阔肌皮瓣行乳房重建患者满意率高,术后审美效果良好,是乳房重建中一种较为优势的手术方法。该研究总结了背阔肌皮瓣行乳房重建对并发症的控制并对近年来的手术中的问题作进一步探讨。     

锥光束乳腺CT体积测量在乳腺癌保留乳头乳晕乳房切除术后假体乳房重建手术中的应用

目的 探讨锥光束乳腺CT(cone-bean breast computed tomography,CBBCT)在保留乳头乳晕乳房切除(nipplesparing mastectomy,NSM)术后假体乳房重建手术中的应用价值。方法 选择2020年7月1日至2022年1月31日于广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院乳腺外科接受NSM术后假体乳房重建的52例乳腺癌患者为研究对象,采用Spearman秩相关分析患侧乳腺和对侧乳房CBBCT测量的体积与临床手工线性测量法测量的置入假体体积之间的相关性,建立简单线性回归方程预测CBBCT推算的假体体积,并比较其与置入假体体积的差异。采用Harris美容评分标准评价术后3个月的美容效果。结果 所有患者均完成假体乳房重建术,未出现假体破裂、假体移位等并发症。患侧乳腺CBBCT测量体积、对侧乳房CBBCT测量体积均与置入假体体积相关(r_s=0.73,0.81)。基于对侧乳房CBBCT测量体积构建线性预测模型y=0.001x+4.897(R²=0.7,P<0.001),临床验证显示,模型预测的假体体积与放置假体体积...     

浸润性乳腺癌乳房切除术联合Ⅰ期重建后放疗相关问题研究现状

随着对外形美观的要求越来越高,越来越多患者在乳房切除术后会选择不同类型重建手术。对于这部分患者,怎样的综合治疗时序可以让患者在外形美观和抗肿瘤治疗疗效间取得平衡、得到最大获益,是目前多学科治疗关注的重要问题。本文从术后放疗对乳房重建的美容影响、组织扩张器和永久性假体置换与术后放疗的时序关系以及乳房重建手术和放疗技术的最新进展做一综述。笔者综合现有文献报道以及临床实践总结了重建手术与辅助治疗的整体决策推荐流程图,为临床实践提供参考。     

Comparison of prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomies: A systematic review and meta analysis

BackgroundThe safety of prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) after mastectomies as compared to subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) were unclear, so we conducted a systematic review to analyze their differences.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to retrieve studies that compared PBR with SBR after mastectomies. The outcomes were complications, oncological safety, patient-reported outcomes and postoperative pain. Revman software version 5.30 and stata vesion 12 was used to conduct meta-analysis where possible.Results16 comparative studies (12 articles and four abstracts) were included. The meta analysis showed no statistical differences in overall complications, implant loss, seroma, nipple or skin flap necrosis, hematoma, reoperation, wound dehiscence, and wound-skin infection, rippling between PBR and SBR. PBR might be associated with fewer nipple or skin flap necrosis for those who received tissue expander placement, and fewer capsular contracture rates for those who received implant. PBR might be associated with better Breast Q scores and less postoperative pain without increasing the risk of local recurrence and metastatic disease.ConclusionAlthough available evidence is limited, PBR might be as safe as subpectoral approach. Future well designed multicenter randomized controlled trial that compare postmastectomy PBR with SBR is needed.