McLaughlin, Sarah A.

BACKGROUND: Paget’s disease of the breast is rare. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) is one of the largest tumor databases in the United States. METHODS: We queried the NCDB to identify male and female patients with Paget’s disease of the breast who were treated from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2015. No age limitations were applied. Descriptive statistical analysis and survival analysis were performed. RESULTS: We analyzed the demographic, disease, and treatment characteristics of 7,191 patients with Paget’s disease of the breast. The median (range) age was 64 (20–90) years. Only 2.1% of patients were men, and 85.4% were white. The most common treatment was complete mastectomy (65.3%), followed by partial mastectomy (30.3%). Tumor destruction was performed in 0.1% of patients, and 4.3% of patients did not undergo any surgery. We examined survival in the subset of 6,864 patients who were treated surgically with complete mastectomy or partial mastectomy. The 5-year survival rate after surgery was 82.5% (95% CI, 81.1%–83.9%). Factors associated with shorter survival were older age, black race/ethnicity, higher tumor grade, regional lymph node metastasis, higher cancer stage, metastatic cancer, and larger tumor size. CONCLUSIONS: Paget’s disease of the breast usually affects patients older than 60 years, and the most common treatment is complete mastectomy. The 5-year overall survival rate of patients with Paget’s disease of the breast is greater than 80% but is lower among older and black people.

Lymphedema is a feared complication of cancer treatments that negatively affects survivors’ quality of life. The true incidence of lymphedema is difficult to determine given its long latency period. As the number of survivors of cancer is increasing in the United States, lymphedema is poised to be a major health concern. The most noteworthy risk factor for lymphedema is comprehensive lymph node dissection. The last 2 decades have witnessed a dramatic shift in cancer treatment in an attempt to systematically de-escalate therapeutic interventions, specifically seeking to shift treatment away from routine lymph node dissection in favor of sentinel node biopsy or radiation strategies, thereby reducing the risk for lymphedema while maintaining survival outcomes. A growing body of robust evidence supports prospective screening and thereby a prospective surveillance model (PSM) for early diagnosis and intervention for the prevention and treatment of lymphedema. Finally, investigators are actively evaluating the effectiveness of contemporary surgical procedures in ameliorating the symptoms and disability of patients with lymphedema and reducing the risk of future episodes of cellulitis, with outcomes of surgery significantly better than with conservative therapy alone. In this article, we review the current data surrounding these initiatives.

Abstract Background Lymphedema is an accumulation of protein-rich fluid in the interstitial spaces resulting from impairment in the lymphatic circulation that can impair quality of life and cause considerable morbidity. Lower extremity lymphedema (LEL) has an overall incidence rate of 20%. Conservative therapies are the first step in treatment of LEL; however, they do not provide a cure because they fail to address the underlying physiologic dysfunction of the lymphatic system. Among several surgical alternatives, lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) has gained popularity due to its improved outcomes and less invasive approach. This study aims to review the published literature on LVA for LEL treatment and to analyze the surgical outcomes. Methods PubMed database was used to perform a comprehensive literature review of all articles describing LVA for treatment of LEL from Novemeber 1985 to June 2019. Search terms included “lymphovenous” OR “lymphaticovenous” AND “bypass” OR “anastomosis” OR “shunt” AND “lower extremity lymphedema.” Results A total of 95 articles were identified in the initial query, out of which 58 individual articles were deemed eligible. The studies included in this review describe notable variations in surgical techniques, number of anastomoses, and supplementary interventions. All, except one study, reported positive outcomes based on limb circumference and volume changes or subjective clinical improvement. The largest reduction rate in limb circumference and volume was 63.8%. Conclusion LVA demonstrated a considerable reduction in limb volume and improvement in subjective findings of lymphedema in the majority of patients. The maintained effectiveness of this treatment modality in long-term follow-up suggests great efficacy of LVA in LEL treatment.

AbstractBackgroundWith the opioid epidemic in the United States, evaluating opioid prescribing patterns is essential. We evaluated opioids prescribed at discharge following breast surgery and their association with patient factors and pain scores.MethodsWe retrospectively identified adult patients who underwent a mastectomy for cancer at Mayo Clinic sites from January 2010 to December 2016. Pain scores and prescription data were compared across operations and patient factors by univariate and multivariable analyses.ResultsOf 4021 patients, 3782 (94.1%) received an opioid prescription. Median oral milligram morphine equivalents (MME) were similar across all site‐specific procedure groups (medians ranging from 225 to 375) while pain scores ranged from 1 to 4. Patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy (BM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) reported the greatest pain scores. Pain scores did not vary with age or diagnosis for patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy or BM with lymph node surgery and IBR procedures.On multivariable analysis, variables associated with a MME discharge prescription >Q4 values included age, body mass index, site, year, inpatient status, and pain before discharge >3.ConclusionPatient‐reported pain following breast surgery varied by procedure, while MMEs prescribed remained similar. This suggests current opioid prescribing does not reflect intensity of pain and requires further research to optimize discharge opioid prescribing practices.

Background: In those undergoing treatment for breast cancer, evidence has demonstrated a significant improvement in survival, and a reduction in the risk of local recurrence in patients who undergo postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). There is uncertainty about the optimal timing of PMRT, whether it should be before or after tissue expander or permanent implant placement. This study aimed to summarize the data reported in the literature on the effect of the timing of PMRT, both preceding and following 2-stage expander-implant breast reconstruction (IBR), and to statistically analyze the impact of timing on infection rates and the need for explantation. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of the literature was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Ovid, and Cochrane databases without timeframe limitations. Articles included in the analysis were those reporting outcomes data of PMRT in IBR published from 2009 to 2017. Chi-square statistical analysis was performed to compare infection and explantation rates between the two subgroups at p < 0.05. Results: A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria for this study. These studies reported outcomes data for 1565 total 2-stage expander-IBR procedures, where PMRT was used (1145 before, and 420 after, implant placement). There was a statistically significant higher likelihood of infection following pre-implant placement PMRT (21.03%, p = 0.000079), compared to PMRT after implant placement (9.69%). There was no difference in the rate of explantation between pre-implant placement PMRT (12.93%) and postimplant placement PMRT (11.43%). Conclusion: This study suggests that patients receiving PMRT before implant placement in 2-stage expander–implant based reconstruction may have a higher risk of developing an infection.

Abstract Lymphedema (LE) is a common but underreported complication of breast cancer treatment since most studies lack baseline and follow-up measurements or follow-up that is long enough to adequately record true incidence. Contemporary prospective randomized trials continue to document the occurrence of lymphedema after any axillary treatment and note that combination therapy with axillary surgery and radiation nearly doubles LE risk. Over the last 5 years clinicians have witnessed a paradigm shift in the diagnostic practices of LE with concerted efforts focusing on early detection as opposed to reactionary interventions. Controversy however has existed over how to define and diagnose LE and as such the literature surrounding diagnosis is heterogeneous with respect to incidence and recommendations. Existing guidelines emphasize the need for routine monitoring for LE and the critical importance of baseline, bilateral, and longitudinal limb assessments but do not embrace one measurement technique. A growing body of prospective observational data is systematically challenging the value of precautionary behaviors. Further, prospective randomized data demonstrates exercise does not promote the development of LE. Complex decongestive therapy remains the cornerstone of non-surgical LE treatment. With the NCI predicting over 4 million breast cancer survivors in the US by 2024, lymphedema is potentially a significant public health burden. Citation Format: McLaughlin S. Current status of diagnosis, monitoring, and non-surgical management of lymphedema [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr ES11-2.