Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy

• Published in: European journal of cancer (1990) Vol. 46; no. 18; pp. 3219 - 3232
• Main Authors: Houssami, Nehmat, Macaskill, Petra, Marinovich, M. Luke, Dixon, J. Michael, Irwig, Les, Brennan, Meagan E., Solin, Lawrence J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 01.12.2010; Elsevier
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Breast Neoplasms - drug therapy; Breast Neoplasms - pathology; Breast Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Breast Neoplasms - surgery; Breast-conserving therapy; Female; Hematology, Oncology and Palliative Medicine; Humans; Invasive breast cancer; Local recurrence; Lymphatic Metastasis; Mastectomy, Segmental - methods; Medical sciences; Meta-analysis; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - etiology; Pharmacology. Drug treatments; Radiation therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical margins; Surgical oncology; Tumors; Invasive breast cancer; Breast-conserving therapy; Local recurrence; Surgical margins; Radiation therapy; Surgical oncology; Meta-analysis; Relapse; Breast disease; Early stage; Metaanalysis; Cancerology; Surgery; Adult; Female; Surgical margin; Invasive cancer; Mammary gland; Woman; Human; Breast cancer; Malignant tumor; Radiotherapy; Mammary gland diseases; Treatment; Cancer
• ISSN: 0959-8049; 1879-0852; 1879-0852
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.043

There is no consensus on what constitutes adequate negative margins in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We review the evidence on surgical margins in BCT for early-stage invasive breast cancer. Meta-analysis of studies reporting local recurrence (LR) relative to quantified final microscopic margin status and the threshold distance for negative margins. The proportion of LR was modelled using random effects logistic meta-regression. Based on 21 studies (LR in 1,026 of 14,571 subjects) the odds of LR were associated with margin status [model 1: odds ratio (OR) = 2.02 for positive/close versus negative; model 2: OR = 1.80 for close versus negative, 2.42 for positive versus negative ( P < 0.001 both models)] but not with margin distance [1 mm versus 2 mm versus 5 mm ( P > 0.10 both models)], adjusting for median follow-up time. However, there was weak evidence in both models that the odds of LR decreased as the threshold distance for declaring negative margins increased. This bordered significance in model 2 [OR for 1 mm, 2 mm, 5 mm: 1.0, 0.75, 0.51 ( P = 0.097 for trend)], and was not significant in model 1 [OR for 1 mm, 2 mm, 5 mm: 1.0, 0.85, 0.58 ( P = 0.11 for trend)] but was evident when one study (of women ⩽ 40 years) was excluded from this model [OR for 1 mm, 2 mm, 5 mm: 1.0, 0.72, 0.52 ( P = 0.058 for trend)]: this trend was rendered insignificant by adjustment for the proportion of subjects receiving a radiation boost or the proportion of subjects receiving endocrine therapy. Margin status has a prognostic effect in all women treated for invasive breast cancer; increasing the threshold distance for declaring negative margins is weakly associated with reduced odds of LR, however adjustment for covariates (adjuvant therapy) removes the significance of this effect. Adoption of wider margins, relative to narrower widths, for declaring negative margins is unlikely to a have substantial additional benefit for long-term local control in BCT.