Showing papers by "Anthony J. Maxwell published in 2018"

Safety and feasibility of breast lesion localization using magnetic seeds (Magseed): a multi-centre, open-label cohort study

Abstract: Wire localization has several disadvantages, notably wire migration and difficulty scheduling the procedure close to surgery. Radioactive seed localization overcomes these disadvantages, but implementation is limited due to radiation safety requirements. Magnetic seeds potentially offer the logistical benefits and transcutaneous detection equivalence of a radioactive seed, with easier implementation. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of using magnetic seeds for breast lesion localization. A two-centre open-label cohort study to assess the feasibility and safety of magnetic seed (Magseed) localization of breast lesions. Magseeds were placed under radiological guidance into women having total mastectomy surgery. The primary outcome measure was seed migration distance. Secondary outcome measures included accuracy of placement, ease of transcutaneous detection, seed integrity and safety. Twenty-nine Magseeds were placed into the breasts of 28 patients under ultrasound guidance. There was no migration of the seeds between placement and surgery. Twenty-seven seeds were placed directly in the target lesion with the other seeds being 2 and 3 mm away. All seeds were detectable transcutaneously in all breast sizes and at all depths. There were no complications or safety issues. Magnetic seeds are a feasible and safe method of breast lesion localization. They can be accurately placed, demonstrate no migration in this feasibility study and are detectable in all sizes and depths of breast tissue. Now that safety and feasibility have been demonstrated, further clinical studies are required to evaluate the seed’s effectiveness in wide local excision surgery.

Risk factors for the development of invasive cancer in unresected ductal carcinoma in situ.

Abstract: Background The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains uncertain. The risk factors for the development of invasive cancer in unresected DCIS are unclear. Methods Women diagnosed with DCIS on needle biopsy after 1997 who did not undergo surgical resection for ≥1 year after diagnosis were identified by breast centres and the cancer registry and outcomes were reviewed. Results Eighty-nine women with DCIS diagnosed 1998–2010 were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 75 (range 44–94) years with median follow-up (diagnosis to death, invasive disease or last review) of 59 (12–180) months. Twenty-nine women (33%) developed invasive breast cancer after a median interval of 45 (12–144) months. 14/29 (48%) with high grade, 10/31 (32%) with intermediate grade and 3/17 (18%) with low grade DCIS developed invasive cancer after median intervals of 38, 60 and 51 months. The cumulative incidence of invasion was significantly higher in high grade DCIS than other grades (p = .0016, log-rank test). Invasion was more frequent in lesions with calcification as the predominant feature (23/50 v. 5/25; p = .042) and in younger women (p = .0002). Endocrine therapy was associated with a lower rate of invasive breast cancer (p = .048). Conclusions High cytonuclear grade, mammographic microcalcification, young age and lack of endocrine therapy were risk factors for DCIS progression to invasive cancer. Surgical excision of high grade DCIS remains the treatment of choice. Given the uncertain long-term natural history of non-high grade DCIS, the option of active surveillance of women with this condition should be offered within a clinical trial.

Systematic review of the impact of breast-conserving surgery on cancer outcomes of multiple ipsilateral breast cancers

Abstract: Author(s): Winters, ZE; Horsnell, J; Elvers, KT; Maxwell, AJ; Jones, LJ; Shaaban, AM; Schmid, P; Williams, NR; Beswick, A; Greenwood, R; Ingram, JC; Saunders, C; Vaidya, JS; Esserman, L; Jatoi, I; Brunt, AM | Abstract: BackgroundThe clinical effectiveness of treating ipsilateral multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) breast cancers using breast-conserving surgery (BCS) compared with the standard of mastectomy is uncertain. Inconsistencies relate to definitions, incidence, staging and intertumoral heterogeneity. The primary aim of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes after BCS versus mastectomy for MF and MC cancers, collectively defined as multiple ipsilateral breast cancers (MIBC).MethodsComprehensive electronic searches were undertaken to identify complete papers published in English between May 1988 and July 2015, primarily comparing clinical outcomes of BCS and mastectomy for MIBC. All study designs were included, and studies were appraised critically using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The characteristics and results of identified studies were summarized.ResultsTwenty-four retrospective studies were included in the review: 17 comparative studies and seven case series. They included 3537 women with MIBC undergoing BCS; breast cancers were defined as MF in 2677 women, MC in 292, and reported as MIBC in 568. Six studies evaluated MIBC treated by BCS or mastectomy, with locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates of 2-23 per cent after BCS at median follow-up of 59·5 (i.q.r. 56-81) months. BCS and mastectomy showed apparently equivalent rates of LRR (risk ratio 0·94, 95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 1·36). Thirteen studies compared BCS in women with MIBC versus those with unifocal cancers, reporting LRR rates of 2-40 per cent after BCS at a median follow-up of 64 (i.q.r. 57-73) months. One high-quality study reported 10-year actuarial LRR rates of 5·5 per cent for BCS in 300 women versus 6·5 per cent for mastectomy among 887 women.ConclusionThe available studies were mainly of moderate quality, historical and underpowered, with limited follow-up and biased case selection favouring BCS rather than mastectomy for low-risk patients. The evidence was inconclusive, weakening support for the St Gallen consensus and supporting a future randomized trial.

Breast cancer risk in a screening cohort of Asian and white British/Irish women from Manchester UK

Abstract: The differences between breast cancer risk factors in white British/Irish and Asian women attending screening in the UK are not well documented. Between 2009-15 ethnicity and traditional breast cancer risk factors were self-identified by a screening cohort from Greater Manchester, with follow up to 2016. Risk factors and incidence rates were compared using age-standardised statistics (European standard population). Eight hundred and seventy-nine Asian women and 51,779 unaffected white British/Irish women aged 46-73 years were recruited. Asian women were at lower predicted breast cancer risk from hormonal and reproductive risk factors than white British/Irish women (mean 10 year risk 2.6% vs 3.1%, difference 0.4%, 95%CI 0.3-0.5%). White British/Irish women were more likely to have had a younger age at menarche, be overweight or obese, taller, used hormone replacement therapy and not to have had children.. However, despite being less overweight Asian women had gained more weight from age 20 years and were less likely to undertake moderate physical activity. Asian women also had a slightly higher mammographic density. Asian age-standardised incidence was 3.2 (95%CI 1.6-5.2, 18 cancers) per thousand women/year vs 4.5 (95%CI 4.2-4.8, 1076 cancers) for white British/Irish women. Asian women attending screening in Greater Manchester are likely to have a lower risk of breast cancer than white British/Irish women, but they undertake less physical activity and have more adult weight gain.

Pre-operative Axillary Ultrasound-Guided Needle Sampling in Breast Cancer: Comparing the Sensitivity of Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology and Core Needle Biopsy.

Abstract: Pre-operative ultrasound-guided needle sampling (UNS) of abnormal axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer can identify patients with axillary metastases and therefore rationalize patient care and inform decision-making. To obtain tissue diagnosis, UNS can be performed by either fine needle aspiration (FNA) or core needle biopsy (CNB). However, few studies have compared the sensitivity of these techniques and the majority show no difference. All node-positive patients (those with micro- and macrometastases but not isolated tumor cells) treated at a tertiary referral center between January 2012 and December 2015 were retrospectively identified from pathology records. The result of the first axillary UNS performed on each patient was compared with postoperative histopathology results. The UNS method used was according to individual radiologist preference. A total of 215 patients underwent FNA (1 patient had bilateral breast cancer and underwent bilateral FNA), and 92 underwent CNB. Sensitivity of CNB was significantly higher than FNA (83.7 vs. 69.0%, P = 0.008). The false-negative rate in the FNA group was therefore higher than in the CNB group by a factor of 2.5. There was no difference in inadequacy rate between the two techniques. There were no complications in the FNA group, and only one hematoma (which did not require operative intervention) in the CNB group. CNB is safe and should be the preferred technique for UNS to improve sensitivity.

Reader performance in visual assessment of breast density using visual analogue scales: are some readers more predictive of breast cancer?

Abstract: Mammographic breast density is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer, and is used in risk prediction and for deciding appropriate imaging strategies. In the Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening (PROCAS) study, percent density estimated by two readers on Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) has shown a strong relationship with breast cancer risk when assessed against automated methods. However, this method suffers from reader variability. This study aimed to assess the performance of PROCAS readers using VAS, and to identify those most predictive of breast cancer. We selected the seven readers who had estimated density on over 6,500 women including at least 100 cancer cases, analysing their performance using multivariable logistic regression and Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis. All seven readers showed statistically significant odds ratios (OR) for cancer risk according to VAS score after adjusting for classical risk factors. The OR was greatest for reader 18 at 1.026 (95% Cl 1.018-1.034). Adjusted Area Under the ROC Curves (AUCs) were statistically significant for all readers, but greatest for reader 14 at 0.639. Further analysis of the VAS scores for these two readers showed reader 14 had higher sensitivity (78.0% versus 42.2%), whereas reader 18 had higher specificity (78.0% versus 46.0%). Our results demonstrate individual differences when assigning VAS scores; one better identified those with increased risk, whereas another better identified low risk individuals. However, despite their different strengths, both readers showed similar predictive abilities overall. Standardised training for VAS may improve reader variability and consistency of VAS scoring.