Prognosis after regional nodal recurrence in patients with stage I-II breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy

10527 Background: Arm lymphedema (ALE) is a serious consequence of the treatment for breast carcinoma. The objective of the current retrospective study was to analyze the time-course of minimal ALE after breast conservation treatment for early stage breast cancer. Methods: The study cohort was drawn from consecutive stage I or II patients who underwent breast conservation therapy including axillary staging followed by radiation. During follow up assessments after treatment, measurements of arm circumference were frequently performed at regular intervals, for clinically evident swelling of the arm or for complaints of swelling of the arm. ALE was documented in 274 of 1861 (15%) patients. 109 patients, 6% of overall group, and 40% of the patients with lymphedema, presented with minimal ALE, defined as a difference of 2 cm or less between the affected and unaffected arms. Results: The median age of patients was 54 years. The median interval to develop ALE was 1 year. The median follow up was 11 years. Among all 109 patients with minimal grade ALE at the time of ALE diagnosis, 21%, 13% and 14% of the patients progressed to more severe grades of lymphedema after 1,3 and 5 years of follow-up, respectively (See table). 40% of the patients with minimal grade ALE received therapy for lymphedema. Despite treatment for minimal grade ALE, 37% of treated patients progressed to more severe grades of lymphedema at 1 year follow up, and 24% progressed at 3 and 5 years follow up. Conclusions: Minimal ALE after breast conservation therapy, including axillary staging, developed in 6% of stage I or II breast cancer patients. Minimal ALE has the potential to progress to more severe grade of ALE. Despite treatment for lymphedema for minimal grade ALE, some patients still progressed to more severe grades of lymphedema. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Download Full-text

The Use of Radiation As a Component of Breast Conservation Therapy in National Comprehensive Cancer Network Centers

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2005.02.3127 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 24 (3) ◽

pp. 361-369 ◽

Cited By ~ 62

Author(s):

Thomas A. Buchholz ◽

Richard L. Theriault ◽

Joyce C. Niland ◽

Melissa E. Hughes ◽

Rebecca Ottesen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

National Comprehensive Cancer Network ◽

Invasive Breast Cancer ◽

Systemic Therapy ◽

Breast Conservation ◽

Breast Conservation Therapy ◽

Stage I ◽

Cancer Management ◽

Cancer Network ◽

Radiation Use

Purpose Benchmark data regarding quality measures of breast cancer management are needed. We investigated rates of radiation use after breast conservation therapy (BCT) for patients treated for ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer at National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) centers. Patients and Methods We studied 3,333 consecutive patients treated between 1997 and 2002 with BCT for DCIS (n = 587) or for stage I or II breast cancer (n = 2,746) in eight NCCN centers. Results The overall rate of radiation therapy use was 91%, with a lower frequency of radiation use in DCIS versus invasive breast cancers (82% v 94%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.31; P < .0001). In a multivariable analysis of the patients with DCIS, the only factor significantly associated with lower rates of radiation use was low/intermediate grade (OR = 0.19; P = .0003). For patients with invasive breast cancer, significant factors were presence of comorbidity (OR = 0.53; P = .0005), tubular histology (OR = 0.39; P = .02), type of health insurance (P = .0072), and the NCCN institution (P = .0005). The model also showed lower rates of radiation use in patients with stage II disease who did not receive systemic therapy (OR = 0.01; P = .0001), younger patients who did not receive systemic therapy (P = .003); and older patients with stage I disease (P < .0001). Conclusion Radiation use as a component of BCT was high for patients seen at NCCN centers; however, there was variability in practice patterns noted across institutions. Radiation was most commonly omitted in patients with favorable disease characteristics, patients with comorbidities, and patients who also did not receive guideline-recommended systemic treatment.

Download Full-text