While
dire statistics about male breast cancer may have sounded like the big story from the American Society of Breast
Surgeons’ (#ASBrS2012) annual conference early in May, there were others with
more far-ranging consequences that didn’t hit the wire.
The
name of the game for any woman facing breast surgery now is still ACOSOG Z11,
the sea-changing clinical trial which showed that extensive lymph node surgery
is no longer needed for women who have microscopic cancer cells in one or two
lymph nodes.
“There’s
still a need to educate surgeons and patients that axillary dissection is
unnecessary in many patients who have positive nodes (1-2) and who are
undergoing lumpectomy and subsequent whole breast irradiation plus chemotherapy
for breast cancer,” says Deanna Attai, MD, FACS, and co-moderator of the weekly
#BCSM chat on Twitter.
With
ACOSOG Z11 one of the pillars of breast cancer treatment, axillary lymph node
dissection (ALND), took a serious hit.
Physicians know now that biology combined with staging predicts
long-term survival in breast cancer patients, not just the stage at
diagnosis. This study will save
thousands of women from painful, disfiguring surgery and its attendant
life-long risk of lymphadema. ACOSOG, a clinical study group of the American College of
Surgeons established by the National Cancer Institute, is also looking at
whether or not the same survival benefit applies to women undergoing mastectomy
instead of lumpectomy as part of their treatment. It seems logical to expect that it will.
But to date no studies have been
done to show whether or not women who receive accelerated partial breast
irradiation, or APBI, could also bypass extensive lymph dissections. Yet.
APBI, a form of brachytherapy, is
one of the newer kids on the block in treatment. In brachytherapy a device is implanted within
the breast next to or within the original tumor site. This is done on an outpatient basis after
pathology reports confirm that surgical margins are clear and the scar from the
lumpectomy incision has healed.
Brachytherapy also has attracted
some controversy. Last December at the
San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium researchers from MD Anderson said that
bracytherapy was associated with higher rate of later
mastectomy, increased radiation-related toxicities and post-operative
complications, compared to traditional whole breast irradiation.
Then on May 2, the same day the ASBS conference opened, I saw this JAMA
article “Association
Between Treatment with Brachytherapy vs. Whole –Breast Irradiation and
Subsequent Mastectomy….” with headlines like this “More Women Need
Breasts Removed” right on its heels.
Coincidence? Probably. Soothsaying has never been one of
my skills. But note that a trial ASBS presented,
“Brachytherapy
as Effective for Local Breast Cancer Control as Whole Breast Irradiation”
wasn’t released until May 4, two days after the JAMA article appeared.
There’s a lot to say.
In both cases, the retrospective data
analyzed by the MD Anderson group or the Mammosite® trial reported by the ASBrS,
survival was NOT adversely affected by the use of brachytherapy or APBI in
women with early stage breast cancer who had been treated with lumpectomy. In other words, a woman does not increase her
risk of death in choosing between the two.
What the JAMA issue
does not analyze (nor could it) is the best candidate for the short-term course
of radiation. The JAMA data was compiled
from an analysis of Medicare claim forms (not medical records) of 92,735 women
– the average patient age was 74 – treated between 2003 and 2007. And while the potential risk of mastectomy in
patients treated with brachytherapy echoed loudly in headlines what were the
actual numbers?
For older women with
early breast cancer, some 3.95, or close to four percent were more likely to
have to undergo a mastectomy vs. 2.18 percent undergoing whole breast
radiation. Granted, if you are the woman
in the differing 1.77 percent having to undergo a mastectomy after prior
lumpectomy and APBI would be difficult yet the inference, that the subsequent
mastectomy was related to brachytherapy cannot be inferred from claims data.
The information isn’t complete.
Another question is
how many women within that 3.95 percent had cancer recur close to the original
tumor? That is the million dollar question and what only trials can determine.
Dr. Len Lichtenfeld,
deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society said here,
“The question has always been whether the use of these newer techniques has the
same benefit of treating those silent areas that we know exist in other parts
of the breast.”
The great majority of
local recurrences actually occur within one centimeter of the original tumor,
Dr. Attai said. In the ASBS study, seed
radiation via MammoSite® (the implanted device that delivers the radiation) is as effective as traditional or whole
breast radiation in preventing local recurrence in a subset of patients with early
breast cancer. These patients have now
been followed for five years.
“Right now offering APBI outside of a clinical trial is only recommended
for women older than age 45-50, with tumors
<3cm, clear margins, and negative lymph nodes,” Dr. Attai said. “It will remain to be seen if factors such as
tumor grade, ER/PR and Her2/neu status, and other factors are important in the
patient selection process.”
Bottom line: if you are currently considering
brachytherapy carefully research both your surgeon and radiation oncologist.
You need to ask pointed questions. Accelerated radiation, delivered twice a day
for five days as opposed to 30 – 33, is a great deal more convenient for
working women. It also delivers less ionizing radiation to the surrounding
tissue -- remaining breast tissue as well as ribs, lung and heart -- than whole
breast radiation.
It’s important that
you know what device the surgeon uses
(whether MammoSite® or SAVI or Contura) and her/his experience with it. One of the coolest things I ever encountered
in my own ‘ask the doctor journey’ was when I was considering reconstructive
surgery and asked the plastic surgeon how many (free) flaps he’d lost. Without missing a beat and not minding the
question at all he simply said, “none.”
But you have to ask.
You also need between the headlines for the information you need to make
critical decisions about radiation. Shorter-term
has its own set of side effects (physician skill is key) and benefits – better
cosmetic outcome and skin damage in most cases. As with any newer procedure a
surgeon’s training and experience are the best predictors for the best possible
outcome. In essence, APBI with
MammoSite® is shown as effective as conventional radiation for women with some
early stage breast cancer.
“MammoSite was the first device
approved and has the largest amount of associated data. Newer devices allow us
to better sculpt the radiation dose and minimize excessive exposure to the
skin, ribs and lungs, and potentially making this treatment available to a
larger number of women,” Dr. Attai said.
Keep asking your questions. Talk back to the headlines until you’re
comfortable that you’ve gathered all the information you’ve needed for the best
possible cancer treatment. I think that
with the right surgeon, APBI is an excellent option. But you have to know it’s available, to even
choose.
# # #
2) American Society of Breast
Surgeons: APBI
Selection Criteria
Disclosure: I am a patient liaison for the American
Society of Breast Surgeons, a voluntary advocacy role. I was not asked to nor did I accept any
payment for this article. But I did ask
questions because hearing both sides of the story, especially in regard to
breast cancer therapies, is always important to me.
12 comments:
Nice post, Jody - thanks for summarising this - I learned a lot!
Thanks for posting this, Jody. It's so important to take some time to really read through the studies and understand the science, not just react based on headlines. Thanks for providing some needed clarification. And women should ALWAYS feel that they can ask questions - it's their care.
You are one heck of a journalist. THANK YOU for putting your formidable intelligence to work on this.
Great post - great info and really informative. Fascinating stuff!
Great post, Jody. Looking behind the headline hype is crucial to advancing real understanding. Thanks for another stellar analysis.
Sigh! I so wish I had known then what I am learning now Jody about treatment options. I feel so angry when I realize all the wrong choices I made (not knowing any better) at the time of my treatment from full axillary clearance (no lymph nodes involved - not necessary) to fertility implications and now brachytherapy options. I am living with the longer term consequences of these decisions but at least I know that by spreading more information like this, we can help those who come after us, to make more informed decisions for themselves.
Oh, Marie, I truly feel badly for the array of consequences you're still dealing with from treatment. It's one thing when you understand that you may have some side effects down the road. But life-altering consequences puts that on an entirely different scale. It certainly reinforces the need for all of us to keep advocating in the way we do.
I'm increasingly convinced that we need to find a way to find more women at the point of diagnosis -- when some of the decisions with the life-long consequences are made.
Thanks for reading, Amazon:)
Marie, your comment certainly resonates with me and with many. Still living with long-term, lasting consequences of treatment myself, and I get tired of talking aboout them and putting up with them. But one long-term, lasting consequence of all this is that we are all blogging about it, hopefully making it better for others. Hugs to you.
Jody, this information is critical to the breast cancer community. How many patients even know about the axial dissection study, let alone the new radiation options? Without knowledge from Dr. Google, bloggers or their doctors or nurses, they forge ahead with blinders on. I'm going to share this post with my facebook readers. It's must reading, even for those who are at risk for, or have, lymphedema. xx
Jody, thank you for this very informative post! You are an awesome reporter, and giving us this information is so useful. I had the full axillary node dissection, and I've had lymphedema. It all could've been avoided, but at the same time, science is ever-changing, hopefully for the better,
Exciting things are on the horizon.
Thank you both - Beth and Jan. I agree; unless we keep getting the information our to our readers only those whose surgeons are up-to-date on current practice will benefit. That is alarming to me...since medicine, like many multi-layered systems are slow to change. In some ways patients are moving faster. We need to make sure that newly diagnosed women are aware of information like this.
And Beth - yes, I had the full axillary node dissection as well and that caused a string of problems, including lymphadema. It's wonderful that a woman's mortality won't be affected by bypassing a full dissection...under the right circumstances, of course. Amazing, indeed.
Post a Comment