Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predictors of Re-excision among Women Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery for Cancer

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Up to 60% of breast cancer patients who undergo breast-conserving surgery (BCS) require re-excision to obtain clear margins, causing delays in adjuvant treatment and poor aesthetic results. However, patient and treatment-related factors associated with re-excision are not well defined.

Methods

We surveyed all women undergoing breast conserving surgery between January 2002 and May 2006 regarding their breast disease (n = 714, response rate = 79.5%). The medical record was reviewed to determine the receipt of re-excision lumpectomy following BCS, and obtain tumor stage, histology, and biopsy method (surgical versus needle biopsy). Patient age, breast size, tumor location in the breast, and receipt of chemotherapy were self-reported. Logistic regression was used to determine significant predictors of re-excision lumpectomy.

Results

In this sample, 51.4% of women required only one breast excision, 41.9% required two breast excisions, and 6.6% required three breast excisions. Overall, 10.8% of women required a mastectomy following initial attempt at BCS. Factors significantly correlated with re-excision lumpectomy included smaller breast size (A cup: OR = 2.7; 95%CI: 1.32–5.52; B cup: 1.63; 95%CI: 1.02–2.62), lobular histology (OR = 1.93; 95%CI: 1.15–3.25), and receipt of surgical biopsy (OR = 3.35; 95%CI: 2.24–5.02). Women who received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 2.49; 95%CI: 1.19–5.22) were more likely to require re-excision compared with women who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Conclusions

Re-excision lumpectomy is common, and is significantly correlated with smaller breast size, lobular histology, surgical biopsy, and chemotherapy timing. Attention to these risk factors can improve the quality of care delivered to BCS patients by decreasing the cost and morbidity associated with multiple re-excision procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1233–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. NIH consensus conference. Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 1991; 265:391–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Salvadori B, et al. Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: long-term results of a randomized trial.[see comment]. Eur J Cancer 1990;26:668–704

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Obedian E, Haffty BG. Negative margin status improves local control in conservatively managed breast cancer patients. Cancer J Sci Am 2000;6:28–335

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2002;184:383–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Boyages J, Delaney G, Taylor R. Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. Cancer 1999;85:616–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Freedman G, Fowble B, Hanlon A, et al. Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:1005–15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW, Stewart J, et al. The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with breast conservation. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999;25:566–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Tran CL, Langer S, Broderick-Villa G, et al. Does reoperation predispose to postoperative wound infection in women undergoing operation for breast cancer? Am Surg 2003;69:852–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Waljee JF, Hu ES, DeMonner S, et al. Predictors of asymmetry following breast conserving surgery for breast cancer. Under review by the Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 2007

  11. Dillman D: Mail and telephone surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: Wiley-Interscience, Inc., 1978

  12. Cellini C, Hollenbeck ST, Christos P, et al. Factors associated with residual breast cancer after re-excision for close or positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:915–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Keskek M, Kothari M, Ardehali B, et al. Factors predisposing to cavity margin positivity following conservation surgery for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004;30:1058–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 1993;15:2483–93

    Google Scholar 

  15. van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:4224–37

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Singletary SE, McNeese MD, Hortobagyi GN. Feasibility of breast-conservation surgery after induction chemotherapy for locally advanced breast carcinoma. Cancer 1992;69:2849–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al. Accuracy of physical examination, ultrasonography, and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg 2006;243:257–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Munot K, Dall B, Achuthan R, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and single-stage surgical resection of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Br J Surg 2002;89:1296–301

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Morrow M, Keeney K, Scholtens D, et al. Selecting patients for breast-conserving therapy: the importance of lobular histology. Cancer 2006;106:2563–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Staradub VL, Rademaker AW, Morrow M. Factors influencing outcomes for breast conservation therapy of mammographically detected malignancies. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:518–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Newman LA, Sabel M. Advances in breast cancer detection and management. Med Clin North Am 2003;87:997–1028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation through the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program at the University of Michigan. The authors would like to thank Gretchen Miela at the University of Michigan Cancer Center Registry for her assistance in data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer F. Waljee MD, MPH.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Waljee, J.F., Hu, E.S., Newman, L.A. et al. Predictors of Re-excision among Women Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery for Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 15, 1297–1303 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9777-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9777-x

Keywords

Navigation