Trends and predictions to 2020 in breast cancer mortality in Europe

Trends and predictions to 2020 in breast cancer mortality in Europe
Carioli G et al
The Breast, Article in Press

We analyzed trends in mortality from breast cancer in women in 36 European countries and the European Union (EU) over the period 1970–2014, and predicted numbers of deaths and rates to 2020.

Highlights:

• EU breast cancer mortality rates declined by 15% between 2002 and 2012.
• We predict a further 10% decline in breast cancer mortality to 2020.
• The falls were largest in the young.
• Trends were less favourable in central and eastern than in western Europe.
• The key determinant of the falls is management; early diagnosis contributed, too.

Breast Cancer Genetics for Plastic Surgeons

Breast Cancer Genetics for Plastic Surgeons
McInerney, N et al

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: September 2017 - Volume 140 - Issue 3 - p 455–460

Summary: Multidisciplinary genetic clinics offer counseling and testing to those who meet criteria for familial breast cancer, and plastic surgeons become integral to this process when risk-reducing surgery and postmastectomy reconstruction are deemed appropriate. As reconstructive surgeons, it is important that plastic surgeons are aware of the risks and issues associated with the genetic variants that cause patients to present for prophylactic or therapeutic surgery.

Determining the Oncologic Safety of Autologous Fat Grafting as a Reconstructive Modality: An Institutional Review of Breast Cancer Recurrence Rates and Surgical Outcomes

Determining the Oncologic Safety of Autologous Fat Grafting as a Reconstructive Modality: An Institutional Review of Breast Cancer Recurrence Rates and Surgical Outcomes
Cohen, O et al
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, September 2017 - Volume 140 - Issue 3 - p 382e–392e

Background: The increasing use of autologous fat grafting in breast cancer patients has raised concerns regarding its oncologic safety. This study evaluated patient outcomes and tumor recurrence following mastectomy reconstruction and autologous fat grafting. 
Methods: Retrospective chart review identified patients who underwent mastectomy followed by breast reconstruction from 2010 to 2015. Eight hundred twenty-nine breasts met inclusion criteria: 248 (30.0 percent) underwent autologous fat grafting, whereas 581 (70.0 percent) breasts did not. Patient demographics, cancer characteristics, oncologic treatment, surgical treatment, surgical complications, local recurrence, and distant metastases were analyzed. 
Results: Autologous fat grafting patients and control patients were of similar body mass index, smoking status, and BRCA status. Patients who underwent fat grafting were significantly younger than control patients and were less likely to have diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. The two groups represented similar distributions of BRCA status, Oncotype scores, and hormone receptor status. Patients underwent one to four grafting procedures: one procedure in 83.1 percent, two procedures in 13.7 percent, three in 2.8 percent, and four in 0.4 percent. Mean follow-up time from initial surgery was 45.6 months in the fat grafting group and 38.8 months in controls. The overall complication rate following fat grafting was 9.4 percent. Among breasts undergoing surgery for therapeutic indications, there were similar rates of local recurrence (fat grafting group, 2.5 percent; controls, 1.9 percent; p = 0.747). Interestingly, mean time to recurrence was significantly longer in the fat grafting group (52.3 months versus 22.8 months from initial surgery; p = 0.016). 
Conclusions: Autologous fat grafting is a powerful tool in breast reconstruction. This large, single-institution study provides valuable evidence-based support for its oncologic safety. 

Five-Year Safety Data for More than 55,000 Subjects following Breast Implantation: Comparison of Rare Adverse Event Rates with Silicone Implants versus National Norms and Saline Implants

Five-Year Safety Data for More than 55,000 Subjects following Breast Implantation: Comparison of Rare Adverse Event Rates with Silicone Implants versus National Norms and Saline Implants
Singh, N et al
Plastic and  Reconstructive Surgery: October 2017 - Volume 140 - Issue 4 - p 666–679

Background: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has required postapproval studies of silicone breast implants to evaluate the incidence of rare adverse events over 10 years after implantation. Methods: The Breast Implant Follow-Up Study is a large 10-year study (>1000 U.S. sites) evaluating long-term safety following primary augmentation, revision-augmentation, primary reconstruction, or revision-reconstruction with Natrelle round silicone breast implants compared with national norms and outcomes with saline implants. Targeted adverse events in subjects followed for 5 to 8 years included connective tissue diseases, neurologic diseases, cancer, and suicide. 
Results: The safety population comprised 55,279 women (primary augmentation, n = 42,873; revision-augmentation, n = 6837; primary reconstruction, n = 4828; and revision-reconstruction, n = 741). No targeted adverse events occurred at significantly greater rates in silicone implant groups versus national norms across all indications. The standardized incidence rate (observed/national norm) for all indications combined was 1.4 for cervical/vulvar cancer, 0.8 for brain cancer, 0.3 for multiple sclerosis, and 0.1 for lupus/lupus-like syndrome. Silicone implants did not significantly increase the risk for any targeted adverse events compared with saline implants. The risk of death was similar with silicone versus saline implants across all indications. The suicide rate (10.6 events per 100,000 person-years) was not significantly higher than the national norm. No implant-related deaths occurred. 
Conclusions: Results from 5 to 8 years of follow-up for a large number of subjects confirmed the safety of Natrelle round silicone implants, with no increased risk of systemic disease or suicide versus national norms or saline implants.

Breast Implant–Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: High-Surface-Area Textured Implants Are Associated with Increased Risk

Breast Implant–Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: High-Surface-Area Textured Implants Are Associated with Increased Risk
Loch-Wilkinson, A et al
Plastic and  Reconstructive Surgery: October 2017 - Volume 140 - Issue 4 - p 645–654

Background: The association between breast implants and breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) has been confirmed. Implant-related risk has been difficult to estimate to date due to incomplete datasets. 
Methods: All cases in Australia and New Zealand were identified and analyzed. Textured implants reported in this group were subjected to surface area analysis. Sales data from three leading breast implant manufacturers (i.e., Mentor, Allergan, and Silimed) dating back to 1999 were secured to estimate implant-specific risk. 
Results: Fifty-five cases of breast implant–associated ALCL were diagnosed in Australia and New Zealand between 2007 and 2016. The mean age of patients was 47.1 years and the mean time of implant exposure was 7.46 years. There were four deaths in the series related to mass and/or metastatic presentation. All patients were exposed to textured implants. Surface area analysis confirmed that higher surface area was associated with 64 of the 75 implants used (85.3 percent). Biocell salt loss textured (Allergan, Inamed, and McGhan) implants accounted for 58.7 percent of the implants used in this series. Comparative analysis showed the risk of developing breast implant–associated ALCL to be 14.11 times higher with Biocell textured implants and 10.84 higher with polyurethane (Silimed) textured implants compared with Siltex textured implants. 
Conclusions: This study has calculated implant-specific risk of breast implant–associated ALCL. Higher-surface-area textured implants have been shown to significantly increase the risk of breast implant–associated ALCL in Australia and New Zealand. The authors present a unifying hypothesis to explain these observations.

Treating Breast Conservation Therapy Defects with Brava and Fat Grafting: Technique, Outcomes, and Safety Profile

Treating Breast Conservation Therapy Defects with Brava and Fat Grafting: Technique, Outcomes, and Safety Profile

Mirzabeigi, M N et al
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: September 2017 - Volume 140 - Issue 3 - p 372e–381e

Background: Fat grafting has been demonstrated as a means of reconstructing breast conservation therapy defects. However, there is continued uncertainty regarding its clinical efficacy and oncologic safety. Furthermore, the role of external preexpansion (i.e., with the Brava device) remains unclear in this setting. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and clinical outcomes of Brava/fat grafting following breast conservation therapy. 
Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients undergoing fat grafting following breast conservation therapy. Complications were defined as either a clinically palpable oil cyst/area of fat necrosis or infection. The mean time of follow-up was 2.3 years. 
Results: A total of 27 fat grafting sessions were performed on 20 patients, with an overall complication rate of 25 percent. The mean interval from completion of radiation therapy to fat grafting was 7 years and was not a significant predictor for complications (p = 0.46). Among those who underwent repeated grafting, there was no difference in the complication rates between their first and second encounters (p = 0.56). There was no difference in complication rates between patients with Brava preexpansion and those without preexpansion. Patients undergoing Brava preexpansion had a significantly higher initial fill volume in comparison with those who did not (219 cc versus 51 cc; p = 0.0017). There were no cases of locoregional cancer recurrence following fat grafting. Conclusion: Brava preexpansion was associated with higher initial fill volume in the setting of breast conservation therapy defects.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

Ramaswami R
New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 377, Issue 13, Page 1288-1291, September 2017.

CASE VIGNETTE
A Woman Considering Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

A 51-year-old woman who has recently received a diagnosis of breast cancer, and she comes to you to seek your opinion about her surgical options. Three weeks earlier, she had undergone mammography and magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate a mass in the left breast. She has been told that she has a 3-cm triple-negative (i.e., negative for estrogen and progesterone receptors and for overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 [HER2]) invasive ductal carcinoma of the left breast. The breast cancer is at clinical stage IIA or T2N0M0 .......