BACKGROUND Preoperative needle localization (NL) is the gold standard for lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer. Hematoma ultrasound-guided (HUG) lumpectomy can offer several advantages. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of HUG with NL lumpectomy in a single surgical practice. STUDY DESIGN Patients with nonpalpable lesions who underwent NL or HUG lumpectomy from January 2007 to December 2009 by a single surgeon were identified from a breast surgery database. Ease of scheduling, volume excised, re-excision rates, operating room time, and health care charges were the main outcomes variables. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare the 2 groups. RESULTS Lumpectomy was performed in 110 patients, 55 underwent HUG and 55 underwent NL. Hematoma ultrasound-guided lumpectomy was associated with a nearly 3-fold increase in the odds ratio of additional tissue being submitted to pathology (p = 0.039), but neither the total amount of breast tissue removed, nor the need for second procedure were statistically different between the 2 groups. Duration of the surgical procedure did not vary between the 2 groups; however, the time from biopsy to surgery was shorter for HUG by an expected 9.7 days (p = 0.019), implying greater ease of scheduling. Mean charges averaged $250 less for HUG than for NL, but this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Hematoma ultrasound-guided is equivalent to NL with regard to volume of tissue excised, need for operative re-excision, and operating room time. Adoption of HUG in our practice allowed for more timely surgical care.
136 Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and aggressive form of breast cancer associated with poor prognosis, characterized by rapidly growing mass, skin changes, and regional adenopathy. The objective of this study was to determine if delay in treatment influenced survival in IBC patients. Methods: A prospective IBC database identified 93 women with stage III IBC who received care at MD Anderson from 2007 - 2012 and were retrospectively reviewed. All patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery, unless progression of disease was noted, and postmastectomy radiation. Impact of time from onset of symptoms to chemotherapy or to surgery on overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were evaluated after adjusting for the baseline covariates in the Cox model. Results: A majority of patients were white (77.4%) with an average age of 54 years. Average days from onset of symptoms to first chemo is 95 (range 16 – 387) and to surgery is 283 (range 184 – 585). Four patients had progression while on chemo. There were 14 deaths with median follow up of 2.6 years from diagnosis. In univariate analysis, delay in treatment, > 90 days from onset of symptoms to chemo, did not affect OS or PFS. Obtaining negative margins was statistically significant for OS and PFS measured from first chemo (p=0.005 and p=0.007). Positive HER-2 status was associated with longer PFS time from chemo (p=0.02, log-rank test) and from surgery (p=0.009). Positive progesterone receptor (PR) was found to be statistically significantly associated with longer OS time from chemo (p=0.01) and from surgery (p=0.03). Clinical and imaging response to chemo were associated with better OS (p=0.007 and p=0.005) and pathologic response was marginally associated with improved OS and PFS (p=0.07 and p=0.06), both measured from surgery. In multivariate Cox model, adjusting for PR or HER2, days from onset of symptoms to chemo or surgery did not have significant impact on OS or PFS. Conclusions: While traditionally delay diagnosis and treatment is considered one of the factors associated with poor prognosis, our study suggests otherwise. However, due to such rapid progression of disease, early diagnosis is still important in the overall management of patients diagnosed with IBC.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.