Suppr超能文献

重新审视接受保乳治疗的浸润性乳腺癌患者的手术切缘-采用 1 毫米阴性切缘的依据。

Revisiting surgical margins for invasive breast cancer patients treated with breast conservation therapy - Evidence for adopting a 1 mm negative width.

机构信息

Academic Unit for Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Pathology Department, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Department of Pathology, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar.

Irish National Breast Screening Programme and Department of Histopathology, St. Vincent's University Hospital, and School of Medicine, University College, Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

Eur J Surg Oncol. 2024 Oct;50(10):108573. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108573. Epub 2024 Aug 3.

Abstract

Clinical trials have demonstrated conclusively the non-inferiority of breast-conserving surgery followed by breast radiation therapy (BCT) compared with mastectomy for the treatment of early-stage invasive breast cancer (BC). The definition of the required surgical margin to ensure adequate removal of the cancer by BCT to obtain an acceptable low local recurrence (LR) rate remains controversial. Meta-analyses published by Houssami et al. in 2010 and 2014 demonstrated significantly lower LR rates for patients with a negative margin compared with those with positive (ink on tumour) or close (defined as ≤1 mm or ≤2 mm) margins. Neither meta-analysis addressed whether 'no ink on tumour' was adequate to define a negative margin because of a lack of data. Nevertheless, in 2014, the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) with advice from pathologists reviewed these data together and published guidelines recommending that a margin of 'no ink on tumour' was sufficient to define a clear margin in BCT. Subsequently, clinical practice has varied with some national and international bodies endorsing 'no ink on tumour', whilst others have recommended a ≥1 mm margin as acceptable margins for BCT. A more recent meta-analysis conducted by Bundred and colleagues in 2022 did have sufficient data to compare 'no ink on tumour' and 1 mm and concluded that 1 mm rather than 'no ink on tumour', should be used as a minimum negative margin, and recommended that international guidelines be revised. The current review presents a balanced assessment of the evidence relating margin width and local recurrence after BCT. This review concludes that guidelines should consider re-defining a negative margin as ≥1 mm rather than 'no ink on tumour' in the context of BCT, recognising there will be variation to tailor therapy for any individual patient situation to ensure optimal patient care.

摘要

临床试验明确证实,对于早期浸润性乳腺癌(BC)的治疗,保乳手术联合乳房放疗(BCT)与乳房切除术相比非劣效。为了获得可接受的低局部复发(LR)率,确保 BCT 充分切除癌症所需的手术切缘定义仍然存在争议。Houssami 等人于 2010 年和 2014 年发表的荟萃分析表明,与阳性(肿瘤上有墨水)或接近(定义为≤1 毫米或≤2 毫米)切缘相比,阴性切缘患者的 LR 率显著降低。这两项荟萃分析都没有解决“肿瘤上无墨水”是否足以定义阴性切缘,因为缺乏数据。尽管如此,2014 年,外科肿瘤学会(SSO)和美国放射肿瘤学会(ASTRO)在病理学家的建议下共同审查了这些数据,并发布了指南,建议“肿瘤上无墨水”的切缘足以定义 BCT 中的清晰切缘。随后,临床实践有所不同,一些国家和国际机构认可“肿瘤上无墨水”,而其他机构则建议 BCT 的可接受切缘为≥1 毫米。Bundred 及其同事在 2022 年进行的一项更近期的荟萃分析确实有足够的数据来比较“肿瘤上无墨水”和 1 毫米,并得出结论,1 毫米而不是“肿瘤上无墨水”,应作为最小的阴性切缘,建议修订国际指南。本综述对 BCT 后切缘宽度与局部复发的证据进行了平衡评估。本综述得出结论,指南应考虑在 BCT 中将阴性切缘重新定义为≥1 毫米,而不是“肿瘤上无墨水”,同时认识到,为确保为每个患者提供最佳的护理,必须根据具体情况为每个患者调整治疗方案。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验