Determinants of breast conservation rates: reasons for mastectomy at a comprehensive cancer center.

M Catherine Lee, Kendra Rogers, Kent Griffith, Kathleen A Diehl, Tara M Breslin, Vincent M Cimmino, Alfred E Chang, Lisa A Newman, Michael S Sabel
{"title":"Determinants of breast conservation rates: reasons for mastectomy at a comprehensive cancer center.","authors":"M Catherine Lee,&nbsp;Kendra Rogers,&nbsp;Kent Griffith,&nbsp;Kathleen A Diehl,&nbsp;Tara M Breslin,&nbsp;Vincent M Cimmino,&nbsp;Alfred E Chang,&nbsp;Lisa A Newman,&nbsp;Michael S Sabel","doi":"10.1111/j.1524-4741.2008.00668.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bias in referral patterns and variations in multi-disciplinary management may impact breast conservation therapy (BCT) rates between hospitals. Retrospective studies of BCT rates are limited by their inability to differentiate indicated mastectomies versus those chosen by the patient. Our prospective breast cancer data base was queried for patients with invasive breast cancer who underwent surgical therapy at the University of Michigan over a 3-year period. Demographics, stage and histology were recorded along with the reason mastectomy was performed, categorized as \"by need\" (contraindication to BCT) or \"by choice.\" Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors significantly associated with mastectomy by choice. BCT was associated with tumor size, histology and nodal status, but not older age, either by choice or by need. Of the 34% of patients initially felt to be poor candidates for BCT, it was absolutely contraindicated in 44%, while 56% were thought to have a tumor-to-breast size ratio too large for successful BCT. Of this latter group, 80% underwent neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in an attempt to downstage the primary tumor and perform BCT, which was successful in over half the patients. For the patients initially thought to be good candidates for BCT, only 15% chose to undergo mastectomy, while 5% eventually required mastectomy due to failed attempts to achieve negative margins. Overall, the BCT rate was 63%, however without the use of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, the BCT rate would have been only 53%. At a tertiary referral center, BCT rates are driven more by contraindications than patient choice, and may be heavily skewed towards mastectomy due to referral patterns. In addition to tumor factors such as stage and histology, BCT rate can be dramatically impacted by neo-adjuvant chemotherapy or genetic counseling. Examining BCT rates alone as a measure of quality, therefore, is not an appropriate standard across institutions serving diverse populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":501151,"journal":{"name":"The Breast Journal","volume":" ","pages":"34-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2008.00668.x","citationCount":"68","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Breast Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2008.00668.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 68

Abstract

Bias in referral patterns and variations in multi-disciplinary management may impact breast conservation therapy (BCT) rates between hospitals. Retrospective studies of BCT rates are limited by their inability to differentiate indicated mastectomies versus those chosen by the patient. Our prospective breast cancer data base was queried for patients with invasive breast cancer who underwent surgical therapy at the University of Michigan over a 3-year period. Demographics, stage and histology were recorded along with the reason mastectomy was performed, categorized as "by need" (contraindication to BCT) or "by choice." Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors significantly associated with mastectomy by choice. BCT was associated with tumor size, histology and nodal status, but not older age, either by choice or by need. Of the 34% of patients initially felt to be poor candidates for BCT, it was absolutely contraindicated in 44%, while 56% were thought to have a tumor-to-breast size ratio too large for successful BCT. Of this latter group, 80% underwent neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in an attempt to downstage the primary tumor and perform BCT, which was successful in over half the patients. For the patients initially thought to be good candidates for BCT, only 15% chose to undergo mastectomy, while 5% eventually required mastectomy due to failed attempts to achieve negative margins. Overall, the BCT rate was 63%, however without the use of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, the BCT rate would have been only 53%. At a tertiary referral center, BCT rates are driven more by contraindications than patient choice, and may be heavily skewed towards mastectomy due to referral patterns. In addition to tumor factors such as stage and histology, BCT rate can be dramatically impacted by neo-adjuvant chemotherapy or genetic counseling. Examining BCT rates alone as a measure of quality, therefore, is not an appropriate standard across institutions serving diverse populations.

乳房保存率的决定因素:综合性癌症中心乳房切除术的原因。
转诊模式的偏差和多学科管理的差异可能会影响医院之间的乳房保护治疗(BCT)率。BCT率的回顾性研究受到限制,因为它们无法区分指示性乳房切除术与患者选择的乳房切除术。我们对在密歇根大学接受手术治疗的浸润性乳腺癌患者的前瞻性乳腺癌数据库进行了3年的查询。人口统计学、分期和组织学记录以及进行乳房切除术的原因,分类为“根据需要”(BCT禁忌症)或“根据选择”。多变量分析用于确定与选择乳房切除术显著相关的因素。BCT与肿瘤大小、组织学和淋巴结状态相关,但与年龄无关,无论是出于选择还是出于需要。在34%最初认为不适合BCT的患者中,44%的患者被认为是绝对禁忌的,而56%的患者被认为肿瘤与乳房的比例太大,无法成功进行BCT。在后一组中,80%的患者接受了新辅助化疗,试图降低原发肿瘤的分期并进行BCT,超过一半的患者成功了。对于最初被认为适合进行BCT的患者,只有15%的患者选择了乳房切除术,而5%的患者由于未能达到阴性边缘而最终需要进行乳房切除术。总体而言,BCT率为63%,但如果不使用新辅助化疗,BCT率仅为53%。在三级转诊中心,BCT率更多地取决于禁忌症而不是患者的选择,并且由于转诊模式可能严重倾向于乳房切除术。除了分期和组织学等肿瘤因素外,新辅助化疗或遗传咨询也会显著影响BCT率。因此,单独检查BCT率作为衡量质量的标准并不是适用于为不同人群服务的机构的适当标准。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信