Dataset Information

Magnitude of reduction in risk of second contralateral breast cancer with bilateral mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: Data from California, 1998 through 2015.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Increasingly, patients with breast cancer undergo bilateral mastectomy (BLM). To the authors' knowledge, the magnitude of benefit is unknown.

Methods

The authors used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program regarding all women diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0 to stage III unilateral breast cancer in California from 1998 through 2015 and treated with BLM versus breast-conserving therapy including surgery and radiotherapy (BCT) or unilateral mastectomy (ULM). The authors measured relative risks of second contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and breast cancer death using Fine and Gray multivariable regression modeling adjusted for the competing risk of death and death from another cause, respectively, and potential confounding factors. Absolute excess risk of CBC was measured as the observed minus expected number of breast cancers in the general population divided by 10,000 person-years at risk.

Results

Among 245,418 patients with a median follow-up of 6.7 years, 7784 patients (3.2%) developed CBC. Relative risks were lower after BLM (hazard ratio [HR], 0.10; 95% CI, 0.07-0.14) and higher after ULM (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13) versus BCT. Absolute excess risks were higher after BCT and ULM (5.0 and 13.6 more cases, respectively) compared with BLM (28.6 fewer cases). BLM reduced risk more among older women (38.0 fewer cases for women aged ?50 years vs 17.9 fewer cases among women aged <50 years) but provided similar risk reduction across categories of tumor grade and tumor hormone receptor status. Compared with BCT, the risk of breast cancer death was equivalent after BLM (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.11) and higher after ULM (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25).

Conclusions

BLM may reduce second breast cancer risk by 34 to 43 cases per 10,000 person-years compared with other surgical procedures, but is not associated with a lower risk of death. Second breast cancers are rare, and their reduction should be weighed against the harms associated with BLM.

SUBMITTER: Kurian AW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7021576 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Magnitude of reduction in risk of second contralateral breast cancer with bilateral mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: Data from California, 1998 through 2015.

Kurian Allison W AW Canchola Alison J AJ Ma Cindy S CS Clarke Christina A CA Gomez Scarlett L SL

Cancer 20191121 5

<h4>Background</h4>Increasingly, patients with breast cancer undergo bilateral mastectomy (BLM). To the authors' knowledge, the magnitude of benefit is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>The authors used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program regarding all women diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0 to stage III unilateral breast cancer in California from 1998 through 2015 and treated with BLM versus breast-conserving therapy including surgery and radio ...[more]

PMID: 31750934

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceBilateral mastectomy is increasingly used to treat unilateral breast cancer. Because it may have medical and psychosocial complications, a better understanding of its use and outcomes is essential to optimizing cancer care.ObjectiveTo compare use of and mortality after bilateral mastectomy, breast-conserving therapy with radiation, and unilateral mastectomy.Design, setting, and participantsObservational cohort study within the population-based California Cancer Registry; participants were women diagnosed with stages 0-III unilateral breast cancer in California from 1998 through 2011, with median follow-up of 89.1 months.Main outcomes and measuresFactors associated with surgery use (from polytomous logistic regression); overall and breast cancer-specific mortality (from propensity score weighting and Cox proportional hazards analysis).ResultsAmong 189,734 patients, the rate of bilateral mastectomy increased from 2.0% (95% CI, 1.7%-2.2%) in 1998 to 12.3% (95% CI, 11.8%-12.9%) in 2011, an annual increase of 14.3% (95% CI, 13.1%-15.5%); among women younger than 40 years, the rate increased from 3.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-5.0%) in 1998 to 33% (95% CI, 29.8%-36.5%) in 2011. Bilateral mastectomy was more often used by non-Hispanic white women, those with private insurance, and those who received care at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center (8.6% [95% CI, 8.1%-9.2%] among NCI cancer center patients vs 6.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-6.1%] among non-NCI cancer center patients; odds ratio [OR], 1.13 [95% CI, 1.04-1.22]); in contrast, unilateral mastectomy was more often used by racial/ethnic minorities (Filipina, 52.8% [95% CI, 51.6%-54.0%]; OR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.90-2.11] and Hispanic, 45.6% [95% CI, 45.0%-46.2%]; OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.13-1.20] vs non-Hispanic white, 35.2% [95% CI, 34.9%-35.5%]) and those with public/Medicaid insurance (48.4% [95% CI, 47.8%-48.9%]; OR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.05-1.11] vs private insurance, 36.6% [95% CI, 36.3%-36.8%]). Compared with breast-conserving surgery with radiation (10-year mortality, 16.8% [95% CI, 16.6%-17.1%]), unilateral mastectomy was associated with higher all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35 [95% CI, 1.32-1.39]; 10-year mortality, 20.1% [95% CI, 19.9%-20.4%]). There was no significant mortality difference compared with bilateral mastectomy (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.94-1.11]; 10-year mortality, 18.8% [95% CI, 18.6%-19.0%]). Propensity analysis showed similar results.Conclusions and relevanceUse of bilateral mastectomy increased significantly throughout California from 1998 through 2011 and was not associated with lower mortality than that achieved with breast-conserving surgery plus radiation. Unilateral mastectomy was associated with higher mortality than were the other 2 surgical options.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy may be unnecessary from an oncologic perspective; therefore, the debate persists about the value of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer. Given finite health care resources, this study aims to evaluate the cost of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction. METHODS:Women with unilateral breast cancer undergoing either unilateral mastectomy or unilateral mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction were selected from the Truven MarketScan databases between 2009 and 2013. Demographic and treatment data were recorded, and over an 18-month follow-up period, the treatment cost was tallied. A log-transformed linear model was used to compare cost between the groups. RESULTS:A total of 2343 women were identified who met our inclusion criteria, with 1295 undergoing unilateral mastectomy and 1048 undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Complication rates within 18 months were similar for women undergoing unilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (39 percent versus 42 percent; p = 0.17). Management with unilateral mastectomy with reconstruction required an adjusted cumulative mean cost of $33,557. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with reconstruction was an additional $11,872 in expenditure (p < 0.001). The cost of initial procedures (mean difference, $6467) and secondary procedures (mean difference, $2455) were the greatest contributors to cost. CONCLUSIONS:In women with unilateral breast cancer, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with reconstruction is more costly. The increased monetary cost of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy may be offset by improved quality of life. However, this financial reality is an important consideration when ongoing efforts toward reimbursement reform may not pay for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy if outcomes data are not presented to justify this procedure.

Project description:BackgroundRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM)-removal of the healthy breast following breast cancer diagnosis-have increased, particularly among women for whom CPM provides no survival benefit. Affective (i.e., emotional) decision making is often blamed for this increase. We studied whether greater negative breast cancer affect could motivate uptake of CPM through increased cancer risk perceptions and biased treatment evaluations.MethodsWe randomly assigned healthy women with average breast-cancer risk (N = 1030; Mage = 44.14, SD = 9.23 y) to 1 of 3 affect conditions (negative v. neutral v. positive narrative manipulation) in a hypothetical online experiment in which they were asked to imagine being diagnosed with cancer in one breast. We assessed 1) treatment choice, 2) affect toward CPM, and 3) perceived risk of future breast cancer in each breast (cancer affected and healthy) following lumpectomy, single mastectomy, and CPM.ResultsThe manipulation caused women in the negative and neutral narrative conditions (26.9% and 26.4%, respectively) to choose CPM more compared with the positive narrative condition (19.1%). Across conditions, women's CPM affect did not differ. However, exploratory analyses addressing a possible association of affect toward cancer-related targets suggested that women in the negative narrative condition may have felt more positively toward CPM than women in the positive narrative condition. The manipulation did not have significant effects on breast cancer risk perceptions.LimitationsThe manipulation of affect had a small effect size, possibly due to the hypothetical nature of this study and/or strong a priori knowledge and attitudes about breast cancer and its treatment options.ConclusionIncreased negative affect toward breast cancer increased choice of CPM over other surgical options and might have motivated more positive affective evaluations of CPM.HighlightsThis study used narratives to elicit different levels of negative integral affect toward breast cancer to investigate the effects of affect on breast cancer treatment choices.Increased negative affect toward breast cancer increased the choice of double mastectomy over lumpectomy and single mastectomy to treat a hypothetical, early-stage cancer.The narrative manipulation of negative affect toward breast cancer did not change the perceived risks of future cancer following any of the surgical interventions.Negative affect toward breast cancer may have biased affective evaluations of double mastectomy.

Dataset Information

Magnitude of reduction in risk of second contralateral breast cancer with bilateral mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: Data from California, 1998 through 2015.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Magnitude of reduction in risk of second contralateral breast cancer with bilateral mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: Data from California, 1998 through 2015.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets