Association of Clinical and Pathologic Variables with Lumpectomy Surgical Margin Status after Preoperative Diagnosis or Excisional Biopsy of Invasive Breast Cancer
- 4 January 2007
- journal article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Annals of Surgical Oncology
- Vol. 14 (3), 1040-1044
- https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9308-1
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of preoperative diagnosis in obtaining negative lumpectomy margins. Five hundred and thirty five patients who underwent breast conserving therapy for stage I/II cancer from 1971 to 1996 were included in this IRB-approved retrospective analysis. Three hundred and ninety five patients had a defined inked margin status after initial excision. The following factors were evaluated for correlation with margins at initial excision: age (< or >45), grade (3/1 or 2), family history (present/absent), histology (lobular/other), estrogen receptor (ER) status, presence of extensive intraductal carcinoma (EIC), presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and biopsy type (excisional/preoperative). Biopsy type (P < 0.0001), EIC (P = 0.002), ER status (P = 0.02), lobular histology (P = 0.02) and age (P = 0.02) were significantly correlated with initial margin status among the entire group. For patients who underwent preoperative diagnostic biopsy, 52% (35/67) had negative initial margins as compared to 29% (94/328) for excisional biopsy. Among patients who underwent preoperative biopsy, only lobular histology (P = 0.04) and LVI (P = 0.04) were related to initial margin status. The rate of re-excision was 34% for patients diagnosed preoperatively versus 61% with excisional biopsy (P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients with negative final margin status was similar with either core/needle or excisional biopsy (79 and 78%, respectively). Preoperative diagnosis is the most significant predictor of initial margin status in patients undergoing breast conservation. Patients with lobular histology may require improved preoperative and/or intraoperative assessment to increase the rate of negative margins at initial excision.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- A comparison of the accuracy of two minimally invasive breast biopsy methods: a systematic literature review and meta-analysisArchiv für Gynäkologie, 2006
- Identifying patients at risk of compromised margins following breast conservation for lobular carcinomaThe American Journal of Surgery, 2006
- A Pathologic Assessment of Adequate Margin Status in Breast-Conserving TherapyAnnals of Surgical Oncology, 2006
- Ductal carcinoma in situ in core biopsies containing invasive breast cancer: correlation with extensive intraductal component and lumpectomy marginsJournal of Surgical Oncology, 2005
- Intraoperative margin assessment and re-excision rate in breast conserving surgeryEuropean Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2004
- Stereotactic Histologic Biopsy with Patients Prone: Technical Feasibility in 98% of Mammographically Detected LesionsAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2003
- Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic large‐core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: Results of a multicenter prospective study with 95% surgical confirmationInternational Journal of Cancer, 2002
- Impact of Core-Needle Breast Biopsy on the Surgical Management of Mammographic AbnormalitiesAnnals of Surgery, 2001
- Impact of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy on diagnosis and surgical treatment of non-palpable breast cancerEuropean Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2001
- Mammographically Detected Breast CancerAnnals of Surgery, 1996