Background The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown.

Background Wire localization is historically the most common method for guiding excision of non-palpable breast lesions, but there are limitations to the technique. Newer technologies such as magnetic seeds may allow some of these challenges to be overcome. The aim was to compare safety and effectiveness of wire and magnetic seed localization techniques. Methods Women undergoing standard wire or magnetic seed localization for non-palpable lesions between August 2018 and August 2020 were recruited prospectively to this IDEAL stage 2a/2b platform cohort study. The primary outcome was effectiveness defined as accurate localization and removal of the index lesion. Secondary endpoints included safety, specimen weight and reoperation rate for positive margins. Results Data were accrued from 2300 patients in 35 units; 2116 having unifocal, unilateral breast lesion localization. Identification of the index lesion in magnetic-seed-guided (946 patients) and wire-guided excisions (1170 patients) was 99.8 versus 99.1 per cent (P = 0.048). There was no difference in overall complication rate. For a subset of patients having a single lumpectomy only for lesions less than 50 mm (1746 patients), there was no difference in median closest margin (2 mm versus 2 mm, P = 0.342), re-excision rate (12 versus 13 per cent, P = 0.574) and specimen weight in relation to lesion size (0.15 g/mm2  versus 0.138 g/mm2, P = 0.453). Conclusion Magnetic seed localization demonstrated similar safety and effectiveness to those of wire localization. This study has established a robust platform for the comparative evaluation of new localization devices.

No abstract

No abstract

Background While surgery remains the mainstay of treatment for limb sarcoma, extreme old age is a relative contraindication to oncological surgery. Methods Patients >80 years referred with primary extremity soft-tissue sarcoma (ESTS) between 2007 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Prognostic variables, including ASA status and Clinical Frailty Scores, were collected. Endpoints were perioperative morbidity, locoregional (LRR) and distant recurrence (DR), disease-specific survival (DSS) adjusted using competing risk modelling, and overall survival (OS). Results A total of 141 primary tumours were identified, with 116 undergoing resections. Main motives for nonoperative management were severe frailty or significant comorbidity (56.0%). The operative group had a median age of 84 (range 80-96) years and median follow-up of 16 months (range 0-95). 45.7% of patients received radiotherapy. Median hospital stay was 7 (range 0-40) days, with frailty (p = 0.25) and ASA (p = 0.28) not associated with prolonged admission. 12.9% developed significant complications, with one perioperative mortality. 24.1% had LRR, occurring at a median of 14.5 months. All patients with reported DR (28.4%), except one, died of their disease. Frailty did not confer a significant difference in adjusted LRFS (p = 0.95) and DMFS (p = 0.84). One- and 5-year adjusted DSS and OS was 87.0% versus 74.9% and 62.3% versus 27.4%, respectively. Frailty (CFS ≥4) was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.51-4.12; p < 0.001), however not with adjusted DSS (p = 0.16). Nonoperative management conferred a 1- and 5-year adjusted DSS was 58.3% and 44.4%, respectively. Conclusions Extremity surgery for sarcoma is well tolerated in the frail very elderly population with low morbidity and comparable oncological outcomes.