Cargando…

Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Salvage mastectomy (SM) is the standard surgery for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). However, whether repeat breast-conserving surgery (RBCS) is an alternative method remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of RBCS and SM after IBTR for breast-con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mo, Caiqin, Ruan, Weihong, Lin, Junyu, Chen, Huaying, Chen, Xiangjin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8650120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34888233
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.734719
_version_ 1784611141690851328
author Mo, Caiqin
Ruan, Weihong
Lin, Junyu
Chen, Huaying
Chen, Xiangjin
author_facet Mo, Caiqin
Ruan, Weihong
Lin, Junyu
Chen, Huaying
Chen, Xiangjin
author_sort Mo, Caiqin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Salvage mastectomy (SM) is the standard surgery for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). However, whether repeat breast-conserving surgery (RBCS) is an alternative method remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of RBCS and SM after IBTR for breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Wiley Online and Embase for controlled studies comparing RBCS and SM after IBTR for BCS (published between 1993 and 2019, published in English). Our main endpoints were the secondary local recurrence rate (SLRR), distant metastasis rate (DMR) and overall survival (OS). We used a random-effects model or fixed-effects model for data pooling. RESULTS: Fifteen of the 424 eligible studies were ultimately included, and all studies were retrospective cohort studies (n=2532 participants). 1) SLRR: The SLRR of RBCS was higher than SM (pooled relative rate (pRR) = 1.87, 95% CI 1.22 - 2.86, P=0.004). Stratified analysis was performed according to whether radiotherapy was performed after salvage surgery (radiotherapy group: 2ndRT, no radiotherapy group: no-2ndRT), and the following results were revealed: pRR=0.43 (95% CI 0.20-0.95, P=0.04) for group 2ndRT; and pRR=2.30 (95% CI 1.72-3.06, P<0.00001) for group no-2ndRT. These results showed that the main cause of heterogeneity was salvage radiotherapy. 2) DMR: No significant difference in the DMR was observed between RBCS and SM (pRR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 - 1.01, P=0.05). 3) OS: No significant difference in OS was observed between RBCS and SM (pRR=0.65, 95% CI 0.39 - 1.08, P=0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The SLRR of RBCS was higher than SM for ITBR after BCS, but survival was not affected. RBCS may be used as an alternative for IBTR patients after BCS with strict control for several indications, such as tumor size, recurrence interval and biological behavior, and attaching importance to subsequent salvage radiotherapy and systematic therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8650120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86501202021-12-08 Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis Mo, Caiqin Ruan, Weihong Lin, Junyu Chen, Huaying Chen, Xiangjin Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: Salvage mastectomy (SM) is the standard surgery for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). However, whether repeat breast-conserving surgery (RBCS) is an alternative method remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of RBCS and SM after IBTR for breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Wiley Online and Embase for controlled studies comparing RBCS and SM after IBTR for BCS (published between 1993 and 2019, published in English). Our main endpoints were the secondary local recurrence rate (SLRR), distant metastasis rate (DMR) and overall survival (OS). We used a random-effects model or fixed-effects model for data pooling. RESULTS: Fifteen of the 424 eligible studies were ultimately included, and all studies were retrospective cohort studies (n=2532 participants). 1) SLRR: The SLRR of RBCS was higher than SM (pooled relative rate (pRR) = 1.87, 95% CI 1.22 - 2.86, P=0.004). Stratified analysis was performed according to whether radiotherapy was performed after salvage surgery (radiotherapy group: 2ndRT, no radiotherapy group: no-2ndRT), and the following results were revealed: pRR=0.43 (95% CI 0.20-0.95, P=0.04) for group 2ndRT; and pRR=2.30 (95% CI 1.72-3.06, P<0.00001) for group no-2ndRT. These results showed that the main cause of heterogeneity was salvage radiotherapy. 2) DMR: No significant difference in the DMR was observed between RBCS and SM (pRR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 - 1.01, P=0.05). 3) OS: No significant difference in OS was observed between RBCS and SM (pRR=0.65, 95% CI 0.39 - 1.08, P=0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The SLRR of RBCS was higher than SM for ITBR after BCS, but survival was not affected. RBCS may be used as an alternative for IBTR patients after BCS with strict control for several indications, such as tumor size, recurrence interval and biological behavior, and attaching importance to subsequent salvage radiotherapy and systematic therapy. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8650120/ /pubmed/34888233 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.734719 Text en Copyright © 2021 Mo, Ruan, Lin, Chen and Chen https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Mo, Caiqin
Ruan, Weihong
Lin, Junyu
Chen, Huaying
Chen, Xiangjin
Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title_full Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title_short Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery Versus Salvage Mastectomy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumour Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
title_sort repeat breast-conserving surgery versus salvage mastectomy for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence after breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8650120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34888233
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.734719
work_keys_str_mv AT mocaiqin repeatbreastconservingsurgeryversussalvagemastectomyforipsilateralbreasttumourrecurrenceafterbreastconservingsurgeryinbreastcancerpatientsametaanalysis
AT ruanweihong repeatbreastconservingsurgeryversussalvagemastectomyforipsilateralbreasttumourrecurrenceafterbreastconservingsurgeryinbreastcancerpatientsametaanalysis
AT linjunyu repeatbreastconservingsurgeryversussalvagemastectomyforipsilateralbreasttumourrecurrenceafterbreastconservingsurgeryinbreastcancerpatientsametaanalysis
AT chenhuaying repeatbreastconservingsurgeryversussalvagemastectomyforipsilateralbreasttumourrecurrenceafterbreastconservingsurgeryinbreastcancerpatientsametaanalysis
AT chenxiangjin repeatbreastconservingsurgeryversussalvagemastectomyforipsilateralbreasttumourrecurrenceafterbreastconservingsurgeryinbreastcancerpatientsametaanalysis