Surgical Outcomes for Mastectomy Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Megan E Bowen, Mary C Mone, Saundra S Buys, Xiaoming Sheng, Edward W Nelson, Megan E Bowen, Mary C Mone, Saundra S Buys, Xiaoming Sheng, Edward W Nelson

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the risk of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for surgical morbidity after mastectomy with or without reconstruction using 1:1 matching.

Background: Postoperative surgical complications remain a potentially preventable event for breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is among variables identified as contributory to risk, but it has not been rigorously evaluated as a principal causal influence.

Methods: Data from American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2006-2012) were used to identify females with invasive breast cancer undergoing planned mastectomy. Surgical cases categorized as clean and undergoing no secondary procedures unrelated to mastectomy were included. A 1:1 matched propensity analysis was performed using neoadjuvant chemotherapy within 30 days of surgery as treatment. A total of 12 preoperative variables were used with additional procedure matching: bilateral mastectomy, nodal surgery, tissue, and/or implant. Outcomes examined were 4 wound occurrences, sepsis, and unplanned return to the operating room.

Results: We identified 31,130 patient procedures with 2488 (7.5%) receiving chemotherapy. We matched 2411 cases, with probability of treatment being 0.005 to 0.470 in both cohorts. Superficial wound complication was the most common wound event, 2.24% in neoadjuvant-treated versus 2.45% in those that were not (P = 0.627). The rate of return to the operating room was 5.7% in the neoadjuvant group versus 5.2% in those that were not (P = 0.445). The rate of sepsis was 0.37% in the neoadjuvant group versus 0.46% in those that were not (P = 0.654).

Conclusions: This large, matched cohort study, controlled for preoperative risk factors and most importantly for the surgical procedure performed, demonstrates that breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy have no increased risk for surgical morbidity.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Algorithm for selection of dataset groups by neoadjuvant chemotherapy use.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Illustration of distribution of probability for receiving chemotherapy before (top figure) and after (lower figure) propensity matching.

References

    1. Killelea BK, Yang VQ, Mougalian S, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer increases the rate of breast conservation: results from the national cancer database. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 220:1063–1069.
    1. Mougalian SS, Soulos PR, Killelea BK, et al. Use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage I to III breast cancer in the United States. Cancer 2015; 121:2544–2552.
    1. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16:2672–2685.
    1. van der Hage JA, van de Velde JH, Julien JP, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European organization for research and treatment of cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol 2001; 22:4224–4237.
    1. Rouzier R, Mathieu MC, Sideris L, et al. Breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy for large breast tumors. Cancer 2004; 101:918–925.
    1. Newman LA, Buzdar AU, Singletary E, et al. A prospective trial of preoperative chemotherapy in resectable breast cancer: predictors of breast-conservation therapy feasibility. Ann Sur 2002; 9:228–234.
    1. Mauriac L, MacGrogan G, Avril A, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast carcinoma larger than 3 cm: a unicentre randomized trial with a 124-month median follow-up. Ann Oncol 1999; 10:47–52.
    1. Loible S, von Minckwitz G, Raab G, et al. Surgical procedures after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: results of the GEPARDUO trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13:1434–1442.
    1. Chen AM, Meric-Bernstam F, Hunt KK, et al. Breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:2303–2312.
    1. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al. Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:814–819.
    1. Fisher CS, Ma CX, Gillanders WE, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved survival compared with adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer only after complete pathologic response. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19:253–258.
    1. Wolmark N, Wang J, Mamounas E, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Breast Bowel Project B-18. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2001; 30:96–102.
    1. Kuerer HM, Singletary E, Buzdar AU, et al. Surgical conservation planning after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and operable stage II breast carcinoma. Am J Surg 2001; 182:601–608.
    1. Rouzier R, Extra J-M, Klijanienko J, et al. Incidence and prognostic significance of complete axillary downstaging after primary chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with T1 to T3 tumors and cytologically proven axillary metastatic lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 2002; 1:1304–1310.
    1. Xue DQ, Qian C, Yang L, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infections after breast surgery: a systemic review and meta-analysis. EJSO 2012; 38:375–381.
    1. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The first national, validated, outcome- based, risk adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. Ann Surg 1998; 4:491–507.
    1. American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program. Available at: Accessed December 8, 2015.
    1. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, et al. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999; 20:250–278.
    1. Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res 2011; 46:399–424.
    1. Heinze G, Juni P. An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses. Eur Heart J 2011; 32:1704–1708.
    1. Kratz A, Pesce M, Basner RC. Longo DL, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, et al. Appendix: laboratory values of clinical importance. Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine 18th ed.San Francisco: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc; 2012. 3585–3610.
    1. El-Tamer MB, Ward M, Schifftner T, et al. Morbidity and mortality following breast cancer surgery in women. Ann Surg 2007; 245:665–671.
    1. De Blacam C, Ogunleye AA, Monoh AO, et al. High body mass index and smoking predict morbidity in breast cancer surgery. Ann Surg 2012; 255:551–555.
    1. Fisher JP, Wes AM, Tuggle CT, et al. Risk analysis and stratification of surgical morbidity after immediate breast reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217:780–787.
    1. Olsen MA, Lefta M, Dietz JR, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infection after major breast operation. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 207:326–335.
    1. Nguyen TJ, Costa MA, Vidar EN, et al. Effect of immediate reconstruction in postmastectomy surgical site infection. Ann Surg 2012; 256:326–333.
    1. Abt NB, Flores JM, Baltodano PA, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and short-term morbidity in patients undergoing mastectomy with and without breast reconstruction. JAMA Surg 2014; 149:1068–1076.
    1. Mehrara BJ, Santoro TD, Arcilla E, et al. Complications after microvascular breast reconstruction: experience with 1195 flaps. Breast 2005; 118:1100–1109.
    1. Decker MR, Greenblatt DY, Havlena J, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on wound complication after breast surgery. Surg 2012; 152:382–388.
    1. Davis GB, Peric M, Chan LS, et al. Identifying risk factors for surgical site infections in mastectomy patients using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Am J Surg 2013; 205:194–199.
    1. Broadwater JR, Edwards MJ, Kuglen C, et al. Mastectomy following preoperative chemotherapy: strict operative criteria control operative morbidity. Ann Surg 1991; 213:126–129.
    1. Ragaz J, Baird R, Rebbeck P, et al. Neoadjuvant (preoperative) chemotherapy for breast cancer. Cancer 1985; 56:719–724.
    1. Al-Hilli Z, Boughey JC, Hoskin TL, et al. Increasing use of neoadjuvant treatment for T1 and T2 HER2-positive tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22:3369–3375.
    1. Buchholz TA, Lehman CD, Harris JR, et al. Statement of the science concerning locoregional treatments after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer: A National Cancer Institute Conference. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:791–797.
    1. Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP, et al. Recommendations from an international consensus conference on the current status and future of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19:1508–1516.
    1. Holmes D, Colfry A, Czerniecki B, et al. Performance and practice guideline for the use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in the management of breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22:3184–3190.
    1. von Minckwitz G, Eidtmann H, Rezai M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and bevacizumab for HER2-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:299–309.
    1. Bear HD, Tang G, Rastogi P, et al. Bevacizumab added to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:310–320.
    1. Golshan M, Cirrincione MS, Sikov WM, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in Stage II-III triple negative breast cancer on eligibility for breast- conserving surgery and breast conservation rates. Ann Surg 2015; 262:434–439.
    1. Narui K, Ishikawa T, Satake T, et al. Outcomes of immediate perforator flap reconstruction after skin-sparing mastectomy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. EJSO 2015; 41:94–99.
    1. Golshan M, Garber JE, Gelman R, et al. Does neoadjuvant bevacizumab increase surgical complications in breast surgery? Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18:733–737.
    1. Chow I, Hanwright PJ, Hansen NM, et al. Predictors of 30-day readmission after mastectomy: a multi-institutional analysis of 21,271 patients. Breast Dis 2015; 35:221–231.
    1. Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, et al. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy: an analysis of the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20:3212–3217.
    1. Jeevan R, Browne JP, Pereira J, et al. Socioeconomic deprivation and inpatient complication rates following mastectomy and breast reconstruction. BJS 2015; 102:1064–1070.
    1. Al-Hilli Z, Thomsen KM, Habermann EB, et al. Reoperation for complications after lumpectomy and mastectomy for breast cancer from the 2012 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22:S459–S469.
    1. Merchant SJ, Goldstein L, Kruper LL. Patterns and trends in immediate postmastectomy reconstruction in California: complications and unscheduled readmissions. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136:10e–19e.
    1. Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momah AO, et al. Complications after mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for breast cancer. Ann Surg 2016; 263:219–227.
    1. Azzawi K, Ismail A, Earl H, et al. Influence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstruct Surg 2010; 126:1–11.
    1. Mitchem J, Hermann D, Margenthaler JA, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the rate of tissue expander/implant loss and progression to successful breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Am J Surg 2008; 196:519–522.
    1. Hu W, Weeks CM, In H, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast reconstruction. Cancer 2011; 117:2833–2841.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi