T1-2N3M0 期乳腺癌的保乳手术与改良根治性乳房切除术:倾向评分匹配分析。

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Breast Cancer Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-08 DOI:10.1007/s12282-024-01611-4
Yunbo Luo, Xiaomei Chen, Ruibo Lv, Qingyun Li, Shuangqiang Qian, Xia Xu, Lingmi Hou, Wei Deng
{"title":"T1-2N3M0 期乳腺癌的保乳手术与改良根治性乳房切除术:倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Yunbo Luo, Xiaomei Chen, Ruibo Lv, Qingyun Li, Shuangqiang Qian, Xia Xu, Lingmi Hou, Wei Deng","doi":"10.1007/s12282-024-01611-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy and mastectomy exhibit highly comparable prognoses for early-stage breast cancer; however, the safety of BCS for T1-2N3M0 breast cancer remains unclear. This study compared long-term survival for BCS versus (vs.) modified radical mastectomy (MRM) among patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data of patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Eligible patients were divided into 2 groups, BCS and MRM; Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate differences in clinicopathological features. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the effects of surgical methods and other factors on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 2124 patients were included; after PSM, 596 patients were allocated to each group. BCS exhibited the same 5-year BCSS (77.9% vs. 77.7%; P = 0.814) and OS (76.1% vs. 74.6%; P = 0.862) as MRM in the matched cohorts. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that BCS had the same BCSS and OS as MRM (hazard ratios [HR] 0.899 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.697-1.160], P = 0.413 and HR 0.858 [95% CI 0.675-1.089], P = 0.208, respectively); this was also seen in most subgroups. BCS demonstrated better BCSS (HR 0.558 [95% CI 0.335-0.929]; P = 0.025) and OS (HR 0.605 [95% CI 0.377-0.972]; P = 0.038) than MRM in those with the triple-negative subtype.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BCS has the same long-term survival as MRM in T1-2N3M0 breast cancer and may be a better choice for triple-negative breast cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":56083,"journal":{"name":"Breast Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breast-conserving surgery versus modified radical mastectomy in T1-2N3M0 stage breast cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yunbo Luo, Xiaomei Chen, Ruibo Lv, Qingyun Li, Shuangqiang Qian, Xia Xu, Lingmi Hou, Wei Deng\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12282-024-01611-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy and mastectomy exhibit highly comparable prognoses for early-stage breast cancer; however, the safety of BCS for T1-2N3M0 breast cancer remains unclear. This study compared long-term survival for BCS versus (vs.) modified radical mastectomy (MRM) among patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data of patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Eligible patients were divided into 2 groups, BCS and MRM; Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate differences in clinicopathological features. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the effects of surgical methods and other factors on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 2124 patients were included; after PSM, 596 patients were allocated to each group. BCS exhibited the same 5-year BCSS (77.9% vs. 77.7%; P = 0.814) and OS (76.1% vs. 74.6%; P = 0.862) as MRM in the matched cohorts. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that BCS had the same BCSS and OS as MRM (hazard ratios [HR] 0.899 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.697-1.160], P = 0.413 and HR 0.858 [95% CI 0.675-1.089], P = 0.208, respectively); this was also seen in most subgroups. BCS demonstrated better BCSS (HR 0.558 [95% CI 0.335-0.929]; P = 0.025) and OS (HR 0.605 [95% CI 0.377-0.972]; P = 0.038) than MRM in those with the triple-negative subtype.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BCS has the same long-term survival as MRM in T1-2N3M0 breast cancer and may be a better choice for triple-negative breast cancer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56083,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Breast Cancer\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Breast Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-024-01611-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-024-01611-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:保乳手术(BCS)加放疗和乳房切除术对早期乳腺癌的预后非常相似;然而,BCS对T1-2N3M0乳腺癌的安全性仍不清楚。本研究比较了T1-2N3M0乳腺癌患者BCS与改良根治性乳房切除术(MRM)的长期生存率:方法:从监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库中提取 T1-2N3M0 乳腺癌患者的数据。将符合条件的患者分为 BCS 和 MRM 两组;采用皮尔逊卡方检验估计临床病理特征的差异。倾向评分匹配(PSM)用于平衡基线特征。进行单变量和多变量分析,研究手术方法和其他因素对乳腺癌特异性生存率(BCSS)和总生存率(OS)的影响:共纳入2124名患者,经过PSM后,596名患者被分配到各组。在匹配队列中,BCS的5年BCSS(77.9% vs. 77.7%;P = 0.814)和OS(76.1% vs. 74.6%;P = 0.862)与MRM相同。多变量生存分析显示,BCS 的 BCSS 和 OS 与 MRM 相同(危险比 [HR] 分别为 0.899 [95% 置信区间 (CI) 0.697-1.160],P = 0.413 和 HR 0.858 [95% CI 0.675-1.089],P = 0.208);在大多数亚组中也是如此。在三阴性亚型患者中,BCS的BCSS(HR 0.558 [95% CI 0.335-0.929]; P = 0.025)和OS(HR 0.605 [95% CI 0.377-0.972]; P = 0.038)均优于MRM:在T1-2N3M0乳腺癌患者中,BCS的长期生存率与MRM相同,可能是三阴性乳腺癌患者的更好选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Breast-conserving surgery versus modified radical mastectomy in T1-2N3M0 stage breast cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Purpose: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy and mastectomy exhibit highly comparable prognoses for early-stage breast cancer; however, the safety of BCS for T1-2N3M0 breast cancer remains unclear. This study compared long-term survival for BCS versus (vs.) modified radical mastectomy (MRM) among patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer.

Methods: Data of patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Eligible patients were divided into 2 groups, BCS and MRM; Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate differences in clinicopathological features. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the effects of surgical methods and other factors on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: In total, 2124 patients were included; after PSM, 596 patients were allocated to each group. BCS exhibited the same 5-year BCSS (77.9% vs. 77.7%; P = 0.814) and OS (76.1% vs. 74.6%; P = 0.862) as MRM in the matched cohorts. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that BCS had the same BCSS and OS as MRM (hazard ratios [HR] 0.899 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.697-1.160], P = 0.413 and HR 0.858 [95% CI 0.675-1.089], P = 0.208, respectively); this was also seen in most subgroups. BCS demonstrated better BCSS (HR 0.558 [95% CI 0.335-0.929]; P = 0.025) and OS (HR 0.605 [95% CI 0.377-0.972]; P = 0.038) than MRM in those with the triple-negative subtype.

Conclusions: BCS has the same long-term survival as MRM in T1-2N3M0 breast cancer and may be a better choice for triple-negative breast cancer.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer ONCOLOGY-OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.50%
发文量
105
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Breast Cancer, the official journal of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society, publishes articles that contribute to progress in the field, in basic or translational research and also in clinical research, seeking to develop a new focus and new perspectives for all who are concerned with breast cancer. The journal welcomes all original articles describing clinical and epidemiological studies and laboratory investigations regarding breast cancer and related diseases. The journal will consider five types of articles: editorials, review articles, original articles, case reports, and rapid communications. Although editorials and review articles will principally be solicited by the editors, they can also be submitted for peer review, as in the case of original articles. The journal provides the best of up-to-date information on breast cancer, presenting readers with high-impact, original work focusing on pivotal issues.
期刊最新文献
Comparative assessment of breast volume using a smartphone device versus MRI. Correction: Trastuzumab deruxtecan for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with brain and/or leptomeningeal metastases: an updated overall survival analysis using data from a multicenter retrospective study (ROSET-BM). High-risk pathogenic germline variants in blood relatives of BRCA1/2 negative probands. Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center study. Development of a nomogram to predict recurrence scores obtained using Oncotype DX in Japanese patients with breast cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1