Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Anatomic extent of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may be uncertain in spite of clinical, pathologic, and imaging data. Consequently close/positive margins are common with lumpectomy for DCIS and often lead to a challenge in deciding whether to perform a re-excision or mastectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:From a single health system, we identified cases of lumpectomy for DCIS with close/positive margins who underwent re-excision for the purpose of constructing a nomogram. In total, 289 patients were available for analysis. The patients were randomly divided into two sets allocating 70% to the modeling and 30% to the validation set. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate the probability of overall positive margin status using multiple clinicopathologic predictors. Nomogram validation included internal tenfold cross-validation, internal bootstrap validation, and external validation for which a concordance index was calculated to assess the external validity. RESULTS:Significant predictors of persistent positive margins from regression modeling included necrosis at diagnosis (non-comedo or comedo); DCIS not associated with calcifications on core biopsy; high-grade DCIS; progesterone receptor positivity; and number of positive margins at initial surgery. When subjected to internal validation, the nomogram achieved an uncorrected concordance index of 0.7332, a tenfold cross-validation concordance index of 0.6795, and a bootstrap-corrected concordance index of 0.6881. External validation yielded an estimated concordance index of 0.7095. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Using clinical and pathologic variables from initial diagnosis and surgery for DCIS, this nomogram predicts persistent positive margins with margin re-excision, and may be a valuable tool in surgical decision-making.

BACKGROUND:The proportion of patients eligible for breast-conservation therapy (BCT) yet opting for mastectomy is increasing. This decision is often driven by the desire to eliminate future screening and/or biopsy of the remaining breast or breasts. This study investigated the incidence of post-mastectomy imaging and biopsy. METHODS:A retrospective review of all unilateral mastectomy (UM) and bilateral mastectomy (BM) cases managed at a single institution was undertaken. Post-mastectomy imaging and biopsy rates were determined. RESULTS:Between 2009 and 2015, 185 UM and 200 BM cases managed for breast cancer were identified. The mean follow-up period was 30 months (range 3-75 months). For the patients with UM, imaging studies and biopsies done on the contralateral side were excluded given the standard of care for continued surveillance of the contralateral breast. Of the 185 UM patients, 19 (10%) underwent ipsilateral imaging (all ultrasounds) for physical examination findings, 11 (6%) underwent biopsy, and 2 (1%) had malignant findings. Of the 200 BM patients, 31 (15.5%) required imaging (29 ultrasounds and 2 MRIs), with 76% of the ultrasounds performed on the side with previous cancer. Subsequently, 16 (8%) of the BM patients had biopsy, with 11 (69%) of the 16 biopsies performed on the ipsilateral side. Three (1.5%) of the biopsies done on ipsilateral side demonstrated malignancy, whereas all the contralateral biopsies were benign. CONCLUSIONS:For 10-15.5% of patients who undergo mastectomy, either UM or BM, subsequent imaging is required, whereas 6-8% undergo biopsy. The yield of malignancy is low, approximately 1%. Thus, after mastectomy, the need for imaging and biopsy is not eliminated. This information is critical for patient understanding and expectation related to surgical decision making.

BACKGROUND:Screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality; however, screening recommendations, ordering, and compliance remain suboptimal and controversies regarding the value of screening persist. We evaluated the influence of screening mammography on the extent of breast cancer treatment. METHODS:Patients ≥ 40 years of age diagnosed with breast cancer from September 2008 to May 2016 at a single institution were divided into two groups: those with screening 1-24 months prior to diagnosis, and those with screening at 25+ months, including patients with no prior mammography. The association between the two groups and various clinical factors were assessed using logistic regression models. Subgroup analysis was performed based on age groups. RESULTS:Analysis included 1125 patients, 819 (73%) with screening at 1-24 months, and 306 (27%) with screening at 25+ months, including 65 (6%) who never had mammography. Overall, patients in the 25+ months group were more likely to receive chemotherapy [odds ratio (OR) 1.51, p = 0.0040], undergo mastectomy (OR 1.32, p = 0.0465), and require axillary dissection (AD; OR 1.66, p = 0.0045) than those in 1-24 months group. On subgroup analysis, patients aged 40-49 years with no prior mammography were more likely to have larger tumors (p = 0.0323) and positive nodes (OR 4.52, p = 0.0058), undergo mastectomy (OR 3.44, p = 0.0068), undergo AD (OR 4.64, p = 0.0002), and require chemotherapy (OR 2.52, p = 0.0287) than the 1-24 months group. CONCLUSIONS:Screening mammography is associated with decreased stage at diagnosis and receipt of less-extensive treatment. This was evident in all groups, including the 40-49 years age group, where controversy exists on whether screening is even necessary.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess whether different breast cancer subspecialty physicians can be trained to distinguish non-suspicious from suspicious areas of post-lumpectomy specimen margin in patients with breast cancer using optical coherence tomography (OCT) images (a near-infrared based imaging technique) with final histology as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:This institutional review board-exempt, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study was performed on 63 surgically excised breast specimens from 35 female patients, creating a 90-case atlas containing both non-suspicious and suspicious areas for cancer. OCT images of the specimens were performed, providing 6.5-15 µm resolution with tissue visualization 1-2 mm subsurface. From the 90-case atlas, 40 cases were chosen for training and 40 were randomly selected for reader assessment. Three breast imaging radiologists, two pathologists, two breast surgeons, and one non-clinical reader were trained and assessed for ability to distinguish non-suspicious from suspicious findings blinded to clinical data and corresponding histology slides. Duration of training and assessment, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and the area under the curve for each reader were calculated as well as averages by subspecialty. RESULTS:The average training time was 3.4 hours (standard deviation, 1.2). The average assessment time was 1.9 hours (standard deviation, 0.7). The overall average reader sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for detecting suspicious findings with histologic confirmation of cancer at the surgical margin for all eight readers were 80%, 87%, and 87%, respectively. Radiologists demonstrated the highest average among the disciplines, 85%, 93%, and 94%, followed by pathologists, 79%, 90%, and 84%, and surgeons, 76%, 84%, and 82% respectively. CONCLUSIONS:With relatively short training (3.4 hours), readers from different medical specialties were able to distinguish suspicious from non-suspicious OCT imaging findings in ex vivo breast tissue as confirmed by histology. These results support the potential of OCT as a real-time intraoperative tool for post-lumpectomy specimen margin assessment.

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.A 46-year-old premenopausal woman with a body mass index of 21 was found on screening mammography to have a new, approximately 1-cm spiculated mass with associated calcifications in the upper outer quadrant of the left breast. Stereotactic core biopsy showed a focus of invasive duct carcinoma, strongly positive for estrogen and progesterone receptors and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, with associated ductal carcinoma in situ. Clinical examination revealed no palpable mass or axillary lymphadenopathy. She underwent a left lumpectomy with seed localization and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Final pathology revealed an 8-mm well-differentiated invasive carcinoma without lymphovascular invasion and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in situ. The margins were clear, and three sentinel lymph nodes were negative for metastasis. The 21-gene recurrence score was 10, suggesting a 7% risk of 10-year distant recurrence with adjuvant endocrine treatment. After the completion of adjuvant radiotherapy (42.50 Gy in 16 fractions to the breast), the patient has returned for a follow-up visit. She is a professional violinist and would like to know what she can do to prevent lymphedema on her upcoming flight to Vienna.

BACKGROUND:Bronchogenic cysts are rare foregut abnormalities that arise from aberrant budding of the tracheobronchial tree early in embryological development. These cysts predominantly appear in the mediastinum, where they may compress nearby structures. Intra-abdominal bronchogenic cysts are rare. We report an intra-abdominal bronchogenic cyst that was excised laparoscopically. METHODS:A 40-year old female with a history of gastritis presented for evaluation of recurrent abdominal pain. A previous ultrasound showed cholelithiasis and a presumed portal cyst. Physical examination and laboratory findings were unremarkable. A CT scan with pancreatic protocol was performed and an intra-abdominal mass adherent to the esophagus was visualized. A laparascopic enucleation of the mass was performed. A 3-cm myotomy was made after circumferential dissection of the cyst and the decision was made intraoperatively to reapproximate the muscularis layer. A PubMed literature search on surgical management of esophageal bronchogenic cysts was subsequently performed. RESULTS:The literature search performed on the subject of esophageal bronchogenic cysts found one review article focusing on intramural esophageal bronchogenic cysts in the mediastinum and five case reports of esophageal bronchogenic cysts. Of these, only one was both intraabdominal and managed laparascopically with simple closure of the resulting myotomy. The majority of the bronchogenic cysts mentioned in the literature were located mediastinally and were managed via open thoracotomy. Our findings confirm the rarity of this particular presentation and the unique means by which this cyst was surgically excised. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This case highlights the management of a rare entity and advocates for enucleation of noncommunicating, extraluminal esophageal bronchogenic cysts and closure of the esophageal muscular layers over intact mucosa as a viable surgical approach to this unusual pathology. Other cases of laparascopic enucleation of bronchogenic cysts have shown similarly uneventful postoperative courses and rapid recovery with no apparent return of symptoms.