Validated prediction model for positive resection margins in breast-conserving surgery based exclusively on preoperative data

被引:11
作者
Ellbrant, J. [1 ,2 ]
Gulis, K. [2 ,3 ]
Plasgard, E. [4 ]
Svensjo, T. [3 ]
Bendahl, P. O. [5 ]
Ryden, L. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Surg, Jan Waldenstroms Gata 11A, SE-20502 Malmo, Sweden
[2] Lund Univ, Div Surg, Dept Clin Sci Lund, Lund, Sweden
[3] Kristianstad Cent Hosp, Dept Surg, Kristianstad, Sweden
[4] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Surg, Lund, Sweden
[5] Lund Univ, Div Oncol & Pathol, Dept Clin Sci Lund, Lund, Sweden
关键词
RE-EXCISION RATES; 20-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; CONSERVATION SURGERY; REOPERATION RATES; CANCER PATIENTS; MASTECTOMY; LUMPECTOMY; NOMOGRAM; CARCINOMA; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1093/bjsopen/zrab092
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and subsequent second surgery are associated with increased costs and patient discomfort. The aim of this study was to develop a prediction model for positive margins based on risk factors available before surgery. Methods: Patients undergoing BCS for in situ or invasive cancer between 2015 and 2016 at site A formed a development cohort; those operated during 2017 in site A and B formed two validation cohorts. MRI was not used routinely. Preoperative radiographic and tumour characteristics and method of operation were collected from patient charts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a prediction model for positive margins including variables with discriminatory capacity identified in a univariable model. The discrimination and calibration of the prediction model was assessed in the validation cohorts, and a nomogram developed. Results: There were 432 patients in the development cohort, and 190 and 157 in site A and B validation cohorts respectively. Positive margins were identified in 77 patients (17.8 per cent) in the development cohort. A non-linear transformation of mammographic tumour size and six variables (visible on mammography, ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular invasive cancer, distance from nipple-areola complex, calcification, and type of surgery) were included in the final prediction model, which had an area under the curve of 0.80 (95 per cent c.i. 0.75 to 0.85). The discrimination and calibration of the prediction model was assessed in the validation cohorts, and a nomogram developed. Conclusion: The prediction model showed good ability to predict positive margins after BCS and might, after further validation, be used before surgery in centres without the routine use of preoperative MRI. Presented in part to the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, USA, December 2018 and the Swedish Surgical Society Annual Meeting, Helsingborg, Sweden, August 2018.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Prediction of positive margins following breast conserving surgery [J].
Agostinho, Jeremy L. ;
Zhao, Xiuhua ;
Sun, Weihong ;
Laronga, Christine ;
Kiluk, John V. ;
Chen, Dung-Tsa ;
Lee, M. Catherine .
BREAST, 2015, 24 (01) :46-50
[2]   Positive margins prediction in breast cancer conservative surgery: Assessment of a preoperative web-based nomogram [J].
Alves-Ribeiro, Lidia ;
Osorio, Fernando ;
Amendoeira, Isabel ;
Fougo, Jose Luis .
BREAST, 2016, 28 :167-173
[3]   MRI predictors of tumor-positive margins after breast-conserving surgery [J].
Bahl, Manisha ;
Baker, Jay A. ;
Kinsey, Emily N. ;
Ghate, Sujata, V .
CLINICAL IMAGING, 2019, 57 :45-49
[4]   Prediction of positive resection margins in patients with non-palpable breast cancer [J].
Barentsz, M. W. ;
Postma, E. L. ;
van Dalen, T. ;
van den Bosch, M. A. A. J. ;
Miao, H. ;
Gobardhan, P. D. ;
van den Hout, L. E. ;
Pijnappel, R. M. ;
Witkamp, A. J. ;
van Diest, P. J. ;
van Hillegersberg, R. ;
Verkooijen, H. M. .
EJSO, 2015, 41 (01) :106-112
[5]  
Campbell EJ, 2017, BREAST CANCER-TARGET, V9, P521, DOI 10.2147/BCTT.S113742
[6]   Lumpectomy margins are affected by tumor size and histologic subtype but not by biopsy technique [J].
Chagpar, AB ;
Martin, RCG ;
Hagendoorn, LJ ;
Chao, C ;
McMasters, KM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2004, 188 (04) :399-402
[7]   How safe is oncoplastic breast conservation?: Comparative analysis with standard breast conserving surgery [J].
Chakravorty, A. ;
Shrestha, A. K. ;
Sanmugalingam, N. ;
Rapisarda, F. ;
Roche, N. ;
della Rovere, G. Querci ;
MacNeill, F. A. .
EJSO, 2012, 38 (05) :395-398
[8]   Breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy: overall and relative survival-a population based study by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) [J].
Christiansen, Peer ;
Carstensen, Stina Lyck ;
Ejlertsen, Bent ;
Kroman, Niels ;
Offersen, Birgitte ;
Bodilsen, Anne ;
Jensen, Maj-Britt .
ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2018, 57 (01) :19-25
[9]   Positive Margins After Oncoplastic Surgery for Breast Cancer [J].
Clough, Krishna B. ;
Gouveia, Pedro F. ;
Benyahi, Djazia ;
Massey, Eleanore J. D. ;
Russ, Elisabeth ;
Sarfati, Isabelle ;
Nos, Claude .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 22 (13) :4247-4253
[10]   Outcomes After Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Literature Review [J].
De La Cruz, Lucy ;
Blankenship, Stephanie A. ;
Chatterjee, Abhishek ;
Geha, Rula ;
Nocera, Nadia ;
Czerniecki, Brian J. ;
Tchou, Julia ;
Fisher, Carla S. .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 23 (10) :3247-3258