The reconstruction rate in this study (42%) is markedly higher than those previously reported. The type of insurance, education level, and employment status of a patient, but not her race or ethnicity, appear to influence the use of breast reconstruction. Because all patients were treated at an NCCN institution, these socioeconomic differences cannot be explained by access to care.

IntroductionIn gene expression experiments, hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER2)-positive tumors generally cluster within the luminal B subset; whereas HR-negative/HER2-positive tumors reside in the HER2-enriched subset. We investigated whether the clinical behavior of HER2-positive tumors differs by HR status.MethodsWe evaluated 3,394 patients who presented to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) centers with stage I to III HER2-positive breast cancer between 2000 and 2007. Tumors were grouped as HR-positive/HER2-positive (HR+/HER2+) or HR-negative/HER2-positive (HR-/HER2+). Chi-square, logistic regression and Cox hazard proportional regression were used to compare groups.ResultsMedian follow-up was four years. Patients with HR-/HER2+ tumors (n = 1,379, 41% of total) were more likely than those with HR+/HER-2+ disease (n = 2,015, 59% of total) to present with high histologic grade and higher stages (P <0.001). Recurrences were recorded for 458 patients. HR-/HER2+ patients were less likely to experience first recurrence in bone (univariate Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.53, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.34 to 0.82, P = 0.005) and more likely to recur in brain (univariate OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.93, P = 0.033). A lower risk of recurrence in bone persisted after adjusting for age, stage and adjuvant trastuzumab therapy (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.83, P = 0.005) and when first and subsequent sites of recurrence were both considered (multivariable OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.80, P = 0.002).As compared with patients with HR+/HER2+ disease, those with HR-/HER2+ disease had significantly increased hazard of early, but not late, death (hazard ratio of death zero to two years after diagnosis = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.28 to 2.86, P = 0.002, hazard ratio of death two to five years after diagnosis = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.00, P = 0.001; hazard ratio of death more than five years after diagnosis = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.55 to 1.19, P = 0.285, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, stage at diagnosis, grade and year of diagnosis).ConclusionsPresenting features, patterns of recurrence and survival of HER2-positive breast cancer differed by HR status. These differences should be further explored and integrated in the design of clinical trials.

Our experience parallels the national trend of increasing use of CPM in women diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer. Women who chose to have CPM were younger, more highly educated, and more likely to have a family history of cancer.

Objective To investigate the relationship between supply of subspecialty care and type of procedure preferentially performed for early stage breast cancer. Background Three surgical options exist for early stage breast cancer: (1) breast conserving surgery (BCS), (2) mastectomy with reconstruction (RECON), and (3) mastectomy alone. Current guidelines recommend that surgical treatment decisions should be based on patient preference if a patient is eligible for all 3. However, studies demonstrate persistent variation in the use of BCS and RECON. Methods Patients undergoing an operation for DCIS or stage I or II breast cancer at NCCN institutions between 2000 and 2006 were identified. Institutional procedure rates were determined. Spearman correlations measured the association between procedure types. Patient-level logistic regression models investigated predictors of procedure type and association with institutional supply of subspecialty care. Results Among 10,607 patients, 19% had mastectomy alone, 60% BCS, and 21% RECON. The institutional rate of BCS and RECON were strongly correlated (r = −0.80, P = 0.02). Institution was more important than all patient factors except age in predicting receipt of RECON or BCS. RECON was more likely for patients treated at an institution with a greater supply of reconstructive surgeons or where patients live further from radiation facilities. RECON was less likely at institutions with longer waiting times for surgery with reconstruction. Conclusions Even within the NCCN, a consortium of multidisciplinary cancer centers, the use of BCS and mastectomy with reconstruction substantially varies by institution and correlates with the supply of subspecialty care.