The PreQ-20 TRIAL: A prospective cohort study of the oncologic safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes of patients undergoing prepectoral breast reconstruction

Benigno Acea-Nebril, Alejandra García-Novoa, Lourdes García Jiménez, Benigno Acea-Nebril, Alejandra García-Novoa, Lourdes García Jiménez

Abstract

Background: Mastectomy currently constitutes a necessary surgical procedure in the oncologic setting and in the context of high risk. Prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) has been proposed as a surgical alternative to retropectoral techniques by providing less postoperative morbidity and a better cosmetic result. However, there is a lack of prospective studies that have evaluated its safety and patient-reported satisfaction.

Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study to assess the safety, quality of life and cosmetic sequelae of PBR in women with breast cancer and high risk. The study's main objective is to assess the safety of PBR in terms of postsurgical complications and the feasibility of reconstruction (loss of implants). The secondary objectives are to evaluate oncologic safety (local relapses, residual glandular tissue) and to identify factors related to quality of life and cosmetic sequelae. The evaluation of residual tissue will be conducted by MRI 12 to 18 months after the surgery, and the quality-of-life assessment will be performed using the Breast-Q questionnaire. An initial patient evaluation will be conducted 12-18 months after the surgery, and a second evaluation will be performed at 5 years. The estimated sample size is 81 patients.

Discussion: The PreQ-20 study will analyze the impact of PBR on 3 separate measures: safety, quality of life and cosmetic sequelae. Unlike other studies that analyzed these three measures jointly for women with breast cancer and high risk, this study will individualize the results for these 2 patient groups. This differentiation is necessary from the methodological point of view, given that the 2 patient groups have separate clinical and emotional implications. The assessment of these groups will focus on the following aspects: postoperative complications, local relapses, evaluation of residual glandular tissue and incidence rate of primary tumors in the same, the cosmetic sequelae and the satisfaction and the quality-of-life assessment by the patients.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04642508.

Conflict of interest statement

the authors have declared that no competing interest exist.

Figures

Fig 1. Methodology algorithm for the PreQ-20…
Fig 1. Methodology algorithm for the PreQ-20 study.

References

    1. Wagner RD, Braun TL, Zhu H, Winocour S. A Systematic Review of Complications in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2019. Jul;72(7):1051–1059. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.04.005
    1. Sigalove Steven. Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy-A Closer Look. Gland Surg 2019. Feb;8(1):67–74. doi: 10.21037/gs.2019.01.01
    1. de Vita R, Buccheri EM, Villanucci A, Pozzi M. Breast Reconstruction Actualized in Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Direct-to-implant, Prepectoral Polyurethane Positioning: Early Experience and Preliminary Results. Clin Breast Cancer 2019. Apr;19(2):e358–e363. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2018.12.015
    1. Li Lun, Su Yonghui, Xiu Bingqiu, Huang Xiaoyan, Chi Weiru. Comparison of prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomies: A systematic review and meta analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2019. Sep;45(9):1542–1550. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.05.015
    1. Mota Bruna S, Rachel Riera, Marcos Desidério Ricci, Jessica Barrett, de Castria Tiago B, Atallah Álvaro N, et al.. Nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016. Nov 29;11(11):CD008932. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008932.pub3
    1. Papassotiropoulos B, Guth U, Chiesa F. Prospective evaluation of residual breast tissue after skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy: results of the SKINI-Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2019;26:1254–62. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07259-1
    1. Griepsma M, Zuidewijn DB, Grond AJ. Residual breast tissue after mastectomy: how often and where is it located?. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:1260–6. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3383-x
    1. Dreadin J, Sarode V, Saint-Cyr M. Risk of residual breast tissue after skin-sparing mastectomy. Breast J. 2012; 18: 248–252. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2012.01234.x
    1. van Verschuer VM, van Deurzen CH, Westenend PJ. Prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy leaves more terminal duct lobular units in situ as compared with skin-sparing mastectomy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:706–12. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000180
    1. Stolier AJ, Wang J. Terminal duct lobular units are scarce in the nipple: implications for prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy: terminal duct lobular units in the nipple. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:438–42. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9568-4
    1. Kryvenko ON, Yoon JY, Chitale DA, Lee MW. Prevalence of terminal duct lobular units and frequency of neoplastic involvement of the nipple in mastectomy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:955–60. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0137-OA
    1. Zippel D, Tsehmaister-Abitbol V, Rundstein A. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation of residual breast tissue following mastectomy and reconstruction with silicone implants. Clin Imaging 2015;39:408–11. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2014.12.014
    1. Grinstein Olga, Krug Barbara, Hellmic Martin, Siedek Florian, Malter Wolfram, Burke Christina, et al.. Residual glandular tissue (RGT) in BRCA1/2 germline mutation carriers with unilateral and bilateral prophylactic mastectomies. Surg Oncol 2019. Jun;29:126–133. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2019.04.009
    1. Orit Kaidar-Person, Boersma Liesbeth J, Philip Poortmans, Miri Sklair-Levy, Birgitte Vrou Offersen, Maria-Joao Cardoso, et al.. Residual Glandular Breast Tissue After Mastectomy: A Systematic Review. Ann Surg Oncol 2020. Jul;27(7):2288–2296. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08516-4
    1. Giannotti Daniela, Samir Abdallah Hanna Giovanni Guido Cerri, Jose Luiz Barbosa Bevilacqua. Analysis of Skin Flap Thickness and Residual Breast Tissue After Mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018. Sep 1;102(1):82–91. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.023
    1. Heemskerk-Gerritsen Bernadette A M, Agnes Jager, Koppert Linetta B, Obdeijn A Inge-Marie, Collée Margriet, Meijers-Heijboer Hanne E J. Survival after bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy in healthy BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019. Oct;177(3):723–733. doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05345-2
    1. Casella D, Di Taranto G, Marcasciano M, Lo Torto F, Barellini L, Sordi S. Subcutaneous expanders and synthetic mesh for breast reconstruction: Long-term and patient-reported BREAST-Q outcomes of a single-center prospective study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2019. May;72(5):805–812. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2018.12.018
    1. Casella D, Di Taranto G, Marcasciano M, Sordi S, Kothari A, Calabrese C. Nipple-sparing bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with TiLoop® Bra mesh in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: A prospective study of long-term and patient reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q. Breast 2018. Jun;39:8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.02.001
    1. Benjamin G Baker Renu Irri, Vivienne MacCallum Rahul Chattopadhyay, Murphy John, James R Harvey. A Prospective Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes of Subpectoral and Prepectoral Strattice-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018. May;141(5):1077–1084. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004270
    1. Ho Alice, Cordeiro Peter, Disa Joseph, Mehrara Babak, Wright Jean, Van Zee Kimberly J, et al.. Long-term outcomes in breast cancer patients undergoing immediate 2-stage expander/implant reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation. Cancer 2012. May 1;118(9):2552–9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26521
    1. Masià J, iBAG Working Group. The largest multicentre data collection on prepectoral breast reconstruction: The iBAG study. J Surg Oncol 2020. doi: 10.1002/jso.26073
    1. Carlson GW, Bostwick J, Styblo TM, Moore B, Bried JT, Murray DR, et al.. Skin-sparing Mastectomy. Oncologic and Reconstructive Considerations. Ann Surg 1997;225(5):570–5. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199705000-00013
    1. Vega A, Campos B, Bressac-De-Paillerets B, Bond P M, Janin N, Douglas F S. The R71G BRCA1 is a founder Spanish mutation and leads to aberrant splicing of the transcript. Hum Mutat 2001;17(6):520–1. doi: 10.1002/humu.1136
    1. Acea-Nebril Benigno, Carmen Cereijo-Garea, Alejandra García-Novoa, Alberto Bouzon-Alejandro, Joaquin Mosquera-Oses. Breast-Q 15 prospective study: oncoplastic breast reduction improve quality of live for women with macromastia. Breast J 2020. doi: 10.1111/tbj.13836

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit