Breast Conservation Surgery for Breast Cancer in Men.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Jennifer Den, Nicole Nelson, Kamil Khanipov, V Suzanne Klimberg
{"title":"Breast Conservation Surgery for Breast Cancer in Men.","authors":"Jennifer Den, Nicole Nelson, Kamil Khanipov, V Suzanne Klimberg","doi":"10.1097/XCS.0000000000001285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease, accounting for 1% of all breast cancer diagnosed in the US. The rarity of MBC has limited the development of treatment algorithms specific to men. Therefore, the standard of care has been mastectomy. The safety and feasibility of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in MBC are unclear. This study assessed whether overall survival (OS) outcomes, local recurrence (LR), and postoperative complications differed between patients with MBC who underwent conservative surgery or mastectomy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A retrospective search for men aged 18 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer was conducted using the TriNetX network. Cohort 1 included patients who underwent BCS. Cohort 2 included patients who underwent mastectomy. Propensity score matching was conducted using age, BMI, tobacco use, cancer stage and tumor size (T1 to T4), radiation, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, genetics, and comorbidities. Outcomes of interest were 5-year OS, LR, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 423 patients underwent BCS, and 1,101 patients underwent mastectomy. After matching, 401 patients per cohort were identified. No difference was observed in 5-year OS with the Kaplan-Meier analysis (Cohort 1: 84% vs Cohort 2: 86%, log-rank test p = 0.412) or with LR (11% vs 13%, p = 0.384). The mastectomy cohort was more likely to have postoperative complications, with a risk of 24% compared with 17% in the BCS cohort (p = 0.011).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No difference was observed in the 5-year OS and LR rate between patients with MBC who undergo BCS or mastectomy. The postoperative complication rate was higher with mastectomies. We conclude that BCS for unicentric MBC is feasible and preferred for T1 and T2 cancers.</p>","PeriodicalId":17140,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Surgeons","volume":" ","pages":"627-635"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XCS.0000000000001285","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease, accounting for 1% of all breast cancer diagnosed in the US. The rarity of MBC has limited the development of treatment algorithms specific to men. Therefore, the standard of care has been mastectomy. The safety and feasibility of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in MBC are unclear. This study assessed whether overall survival (OS) outcomes, local recurrence (LR), and postoperative complications differed between patients with MBC who underwent conservative surgery or mastectomy.

Study design: A retrospective search for men aged 18 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer was conducted using the TriNetX network. Cohort 1 included patients who underwent BCS. Cohort 2 included patients who underwent mastectomy. Propensity score matching was conducted using age, BMI, tobacco use, cancer stage and tumor size (T1 to T4), radiation, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, genetics, and comorbidities. Outcomes of interest were 5-year OS, LR, and postoperative complications.

Results: A total of 423 patients underwent BCS, and 1,101 patients underwent mastectomy. After matching, 401 patients per cohort were identified. No difference was observed in 5-year OS with the Kaplan-Meier analysis (Cohort 1: 84% vs Cohort 2: 86%, log-rank test p = 0.412) or with LR (11% vs 13%, p = 0.384). The mastectomy cohort was more likely to have postoperative complications, with a risk of 24% compared with 17% in the BCS cohort (p = 0.011).

Conclusions: No difference was observed in the 5-year OS and LR rate between patients with MBC who undergo BCS or mastectomy. The postoperative complication rate was higher with mastectomies. We conclude that BCS for unicentric MBC is feasible and preferred for T1 and T2 cancers.

男性乳腺癌的保乳手术。
背景:男性乳腺癌(MBC)是一种罕见的疾病,占美国所有乳腺癌诊断的1%。MBC的罕见性限制了针对男性的治疗算法的发展。因此,治疗的标准是乳房切除术。保乳手术(BCS)的安全性和可行性尚不清楚。这项研究评估了接受保守手术或乳房切除术的MBC患者的总体生存结果、局部复发和术后并发症是否存在差异。研究设计:使用TriNetX网络对年龄≥18岁诊断为乳腺癌的男性进行回顾性研究。队列1包括接受BCS的患者。队列2包括接受乳房切除术的患者。根据年龄、BMI、吸烟、癌症分期和肿瘤大小(T1-T4)、放疗、化疗、激素治疗、遗传学和合并症进行倾向评分匹配。研究的结果是5年总生存期(OS)、局部复发率(LR)和术后并发症。结果:423例患者行BCS, 1101例患者行乳房切除术。匹配后,每个队列确定了401例患者。Kaplan-Meier分析的5年OS(队列1:84% vs队列2:86%,log-rank检验p=0.412)和LR (11% vs 13%, p=0.384)无差异。乳房切除术组更容易出现术后并发症,风险为24%,而BCS组为17% (p=0.011)。结论:接受BCS或乳房切除术的MBC患者的5年OS和LR率无差异。乳房切除术后并发症发生率较高。我们得出结论,单中心性男性乳腺癌的BCS治疗是可行的,对于T1和T2癌症是首选的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.80%
发文量
1515
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American College of Surgeons (JACS) is a monthly journal publishing peer-reviewed original contributions on all aspects of surgery. These contributions include, but are not limited to, original clinical studies, review articles, and experimental investigations with clear clinical relevance. In general, case reports are not considered for publication. As the official scientific journal of the American College of Surgeons, JACS has the goal of providing its readership the highest quality rapid retrieval of information relevant to surgeons.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信