Margins in breast-conserving therapy: have we lost sight of the big picture?

References

• Morrow M, Hamilton AS, Katz SJ. Why do women get mastectomy? Results from a population based study J. Clin. Oncol.25(18S), 28S (2007) (Abstract 605).
   Google Scholar
• Taghian A, Mohiuddin M, Jagsi R, Goldberg S, Ceilley E, Powell S. Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey. Ann. Surg.241(4), 629–639 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.347(16), 1233–1241 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.347(16), 1227–1232 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarrazin D, Le MG, Arriagada R et al. Ten-year results of a randomized trial comparing a conservative treatment to mastectomy in early breast cancer. Radiother. Oncol.14(3), 177–184 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poggi MM, Danforth DN, Sciuto LC et al. Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial. Cancer98(4), 697–702 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dongen JA, Voogd AC, Fentiman IS et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst.92(14), 1143–1150 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luini A, Rososchansky J, Gatti G et al. The surgical margin status after breast-conserving surgery: discussion of an open issue. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. (2008) (Epub ahead of print).
   Google Scholar
• Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am. J. Surg.184(5), 383–393 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1–2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer56(5), 979–990 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen PP, Menendez-Botet CJ, Nisselbaum JS et al. Pathological review of breast lesions analyzed for estrogen receptor protein. Cancer Res.35(11 Pt 1), 3187–3194 (1975).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter D. Margins of “lumpectomy” for breast cancer. Hum. Pathol.17(4), 330–332 (1986).
   Google Scholar
• Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL. Processing and evaluation of breast excision specimens. A clinically oriented approach. Am. J. Clin. Pathol.98(1), 125–137 (1992).
   Google Scholar
• Graham RA, Homer MJ, Katz J, Rothschild J, Safaii H, Supran S. The pancake phenomenon contributes to the inaccuracy of margin assessment in patients with breast cancer. Am. J. Surg.184(2), 89–93 (2002).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland R, Verbeek AL. Prognostic assessment in node-negative breast cancer patients. J. Clin. Oncol.8(9), 1451–1453 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Neuschatz AC, DiPetrillo T, Steinhoff M et al. The value of breast lumpectomy margin assessment as a predictor of residual tumor burden in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer94(7), 1917–1924 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J et al. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes and estrogen receptor-positive tumors. J. Natl Cancer Inst.88(21), 1529–1542 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Dignam J, Mamounas EP et al. Sequential methotrexate and fluorouracil for the treatment of node-negative breast cancer patients with estrogen receptor-negative tumors: eight-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-13 and first report of findings from NSABP B-19 comparing methotrexate and fluorouracil with conventional cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. J. Clin. Oncol.14(7), 1982–1992 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J. Clin. Oncol.26(14), 2373–2378 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.353(16), 1659–1672 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.353(16), 1673–1684 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet366(9503), 2087–2106 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wapnir I, Anderson S, Mamounas E, Geyer C. Survival after IBTR in NSABP Node Negative Protocols B-13, B-14, B-19, B-20 and B-23. J. Clin. Oncol.23(16S), 8s (2005) (Abstract 517).
   Google Scholar
• Wapnir IL, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project node-positive adjuvant breast cancer trials. J. Clin. Oncol.24(13), 2028–2037 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar