CME Continuing Medical Education
ONCOLOGY.
No. 11
Areas of Confusion in Oncology
Managing a Small Recurrence in the Previously Irradiated Breast
Is There a Second Chance for Breast Conservation?
By Manjeet Chadha, MD
Associate Chairman, Department of Radiation Oncology
Beth Israel Medical Center
Associate Professor, Radiation Oncology
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Attending Physician, St. Luke’s–Roosevelt Hospital
Mark Trombetta, MD
Medical Director, Surgical Brachytherapy
Allegheny General Hospital
Department of Radiation Oncology
Assistant Professor, Radiation Oncology
Drexel University College of Medicine
Susan Boolbol, MD
Chief, Appel-Venet Comprehensive Breast Service
Chief, Division of Breast Surgery
Beth Israel Medical Center
Assistant Professor, Radiation Oncology
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Michael P. Osborne, MD, MSurg, FRCS, FACS
Director of Breast Programs
Continuum Cancer Centers of New York
Attending Surgeon, Appel-Venet Comprehensive Breast Service
Beth Israel Medical Center
Professor, Department of Surgery
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
New York, New York |
October 23, 2009
Financial Disclosure: The authors have no significant financial interest or other relationship with the manufacturers of any products or providers of any service mentioned in this article.
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Dr. Doug Arthur for his contribution on the details about the proposed RTOG trial mentioned in this paper.
ABSTRACT:
Over the past 30 years, lumpectomy and radiation therapy (breast-conservation therapy, or BCT) has been the preferred treatment for early-stage breast cancer. With accumulating follow-up, we have an ever-expanding pool of patients with history of an irradiated intact breast. Routine use of every-6-month or annual screening in this population has identified an emerging clinical dilemma with respect to managing a small recurrence or a second primary tumor in the treated breast. Most women diagnosed with a second cancer in a previously irradiated breast are advised to undergo mastectomy. More recently, with an improved understanding of the patterns of in-breast failure, and with advances in the delivery of conformal radiation dose there is an opportunity to reevaluate treatment alternatives for managing a small in-breast recurrence. A limited number of publications have reported on patient outcomes after a second lumpectomy and radiation therapy for this clinical scenario. In this report, we review the controversial subject of a second chance at breast conservation for women with a prior history of breast irradiation.
Breast cancer is the most common newly diagnosed malignancy among American women. In 2008, an estimated 182,460 new cases of invasive breast cancer, and an additional 67,770 cases of in situ cancer were diagnosed. Approximately 40,480 women will die from breast cancer each year. Up to 10%–15% of patients treated with lumpectomy and whole-breast irradiation (breast-conservation therapy, or BCT) will have a subsequent in-breast local recurrence when followed long term. Salvage mastectomy is widely accepted as the standard of care for local recurrence after BCT.[1-4] Few data in the literature have described the clinical outcome from a second conservative surgery with or without additional radiation therapy among women who do not consent to mastectomy.[5-14] Prognostic Factors of a Second Cancer Following BCT Several factors may influence patient outcome after local recurrence following BCT.[15-20] The various prognostic factors include tumor size, histologic subtype of recurrent disease (invasive or noninvasive), involvement of the skin and lymph nodes at the time of recurrence, location of the tumor in the breast in relation to the initially treated breast cancer, and the time interval between the first and second in-breast cancer diagnosis. Patients who have experienced a longer time interval between the two cancers have a better outcome. Kurtz et al[14] reported that when mastectomy was used to treat the recurrence, the 5-year local control rate was 92% for recurrences occurring after 5 years and only 49% for time intervals of less than 5 years. Further, some investigators have studied clinical and pathologic criteria to help distinguish between a true recurrence and a new primary. Haffty et al[21] distinguished new primaries as lesions that were far removed from the original scar, were of a different histology than the original primary tumor or had diploid tumors in the face of an aneuploid primary tumor. They observed statistically significant differences in the 5-year survival—89% for new primary tumors and 36% for lesions classified as a true recurrence. A subsequent update on this work with a mean follow-up of over 10 years confirmed the differences in outcome between a new primary tumor and a recurrent lesion.[20] Another study[22] that used clinical and pathologic criteria to differentiate a new primary from a true recurrence observed similar findings. The mean time to the second cancer event was longer for the new primary compared to true recurrence. Both the 10-year overall and distant disease-free survival was significantly better among patients categorized as having new primaries. Of note, the 77% survival rate reported among patients with tumors classified as a new primary is comparable to what we might expect for similar-stage disease at initial presentation. These observations suggest that the prognosis of all second cancer events is not uniformly associated with poor risk. The ability to recognize biologically favorable second events may have implications for the choice of local therapy when individualizing cancer care. Mastectomy Following Local Recurrence Salvage mastectomy is the accepted standard of care. Studies on salvage mastectomy have, on average, reported local failure rates of less than 10% with expected control rates of greater than 90%.[23-25]
|
|
Understanding and Treating Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
ONCOLOGY, October 1, 2008
Your Patient With Melanoma: Staging Prognosis, and Treatment
ONCOLOGY Nurse Edition, August 5, 2009
Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma: An Overview
ONCOLOGY, May 13, 2009
Current Concepts in Surgical Management of Neck Metastases From Head and Neck Cancer
ONCOLOGY, June 1, 1995
Rising PSA in Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer
ONCOLOGY, November 1, 2007
|
|
 CME LLC's Highlights in Breast Cancer Treatment From the ASCO® 2009 Annual Meeting  Update 1: Concept of Maintenance Chemotherapy in NSCLC Update 2: MSI - To Test or Not To Test Update 3: MSI - The Role of Cetuximab in NSCLC (Lancet-flex Study) Update 4: New Studies in GI Cancer Update 5: Patient Selection for Adjuvant Therapy Tumor Board Events On-Demand In Streaming Video Learn from thought leaders through interactive webcast discussions, designed to help you navigate treatment challenges in oncology. New Perspectives in Metastatic Breast Cancer 2009 An Online Tumor Board Event |  | Hosted by: Program Chair: Andrew D. Seidman, MD, Professor of Medicine, Weill Medical College of Cornell University Attending Physician, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY | Renal Cell Carcinoma An On-Demand Tumor Board Event |  | Hosted by: Program Chair: Ronald M. Bukowski, MD, Emeritus Staff, CCF Taussing Cancer Center Proffessor of Medicine, CCF Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU, Case Western |
| Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia An On-Demand Tumor Board Event |  | Hosted by: Program Chair: Charles A. Schiffer, MD, Director, Multidisciplinary Leukemia Lymphoma Medical Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit |
| Perspectives in Colorectal Cancer 2008 An On-Demand Tumor Board Event |  | Hosted by: Program Chair John L. Marshall, MD Chief, Division of Hematology and Oncology Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center Georgetown University | Explore these critical case reviews: - Frontline Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Unresectable Liver Metastase
- Frontline Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Resectable Liver Metastases
- Adjuvant Treatment for Colorectal Cancer: Stage II and Stage III
- Refractory Colorectal Cancer
|
|