MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was designed to assess surgeons' and patients' perceptions toward breast reconstruction. Questionnaires were distributed to general and breast surgeons in East Coast Malaysian hospitals and Hospital Kuala Lumpur and to postmastectomy patients with and without breast reconstruction at the Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia and Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II. The response rates were 82.5% for the surgeons (n = 33), 95.4% for the patients with reconstruction (n = 63), and 95.5% for the patients without reconstruction (n = 278).
RESULTS: The median surgeon age and experience was 42 and 6 years, respectively. Each surgeon saw an average of 20 new breast cancer cases annually. Most surgeons (86.7%) discussed reconstruction options with their patients but had only referred an average of 4 patients for reconstruction during a 3-year period. Surgeons' concerns regarding the qualitative outcome increased the likelihood of a breast reconstruction discussion (β = 4.833; P = .044). The women who underwent breast reconstruction were younger (mean age, 42 vs. 50 years), were more often working (69.4% vs. 42.2%), and more often had previous awareness of the option (90.3% vs. 44.3%). The most common reasons for undergoing breast reconstruction were "to feel more balanced" (92.1%) and "surgeon's strong recommendation" (92.1%). Previous knowledge of breast reconstruction increased the likelihood of reconstruction (odds ratio, 5.805; P = .026). Although 70% of surgeons thought that patients would not be interested in reconstruction, only 37.9% of patients with previous awareness reported having no interest.
CONCLUSION: The low reconstruction rate (20.6%) can be attributed to the low referral rate. Patients' likelihood to undergo reconstruction with their surgeon's recommendation and with previous awareness were reflective of the surgeons' strong influence on their patients. Thus, clarification of surgeons' hypothetical criticisms could conceivably increase the reconstructive surgery rate.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer were recruited. Combined radiotracer and blue dye methods were used for identification of SLNs. The nodes were thinly sliced and embedded. Serial sectioning and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining against AE1/AE3 were performed if initial HandE sections of the blocks were negative.
RESULTS: SLNs were successfully identified in all patients. Ten cases had nodal metastases with 7 detected in SLNs and 3 detected only in axillary nodes (false negative rate, FNR=30%). Some 5 out of 7 metastatic lesions in the SLNs (71.4%) were detected in initial sections of the thinly sliced tissue. Serial sectioning detected the remaining two cases with either micrometastases or isolated tumour cells (ITC).
CONCLUSIONS: Thin slicing of tissue to 3-5mm thickness and serial sectioning improved the detection of micro and macro-metastases but the additional burden of serial sectioning gave low yield of micrometastases or ITC and may not be cost effective. IHC validation did not further increase sensitivity of detection. Therefore its use should only be limited to confirmation of suspicious lesions. False negative cases where SLNs were not involved could be due to skipped metastases to non-sentinel nodes or poor technique during procurement, resulting in missed detection of actual SLNs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All women with breast cancer treated at SJMC between 2008 and 2012 were enrolled for this observational cohort study. Mortality outcome was ascertained through record linkage with national death register, linkage with hospital registration system and finally through direct contact by phone or home visits.
RESULTS: A total of 675 patients treated between 2008 and 2012 were included in the present survival analysis, 65% with early breast cancer, 20% with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) and 4% with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The overall relative survival (RS) at 5 years was 88%. RS for stage I was 100% and for stage II, III and IV disease was 95%, 69% and 36% respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: SJMC is among the first hospitals in Malaysia to embark on routine measurement of the performance of its cancer care services and its results are comparable to any leading centers in developed countries.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with T3-4, N2 M0 breast cancer diagnosed between January 2005 and December 2008 and who received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible for this study. Thirty-four patients were identified from the Chemotherapy Daycare Records and their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen administered was at the discretion of the treating oncologist. Breast tumour size and nodal status was assessed at diagnosis, at each cycle and before surgery.
RESULTS: All 34 patients had invasive ductal cancer. The median age was 52 years (range 27-69). 65% had T4 disease and 76% were clinically lymph node positive at diagnosis. The median size of the breast tumour at presentation was 80 mm (range 42-200 mm). Estrogen and progesterone receptor positivity was seen in less than 40% and HER2 positivity, by immunohistochemistry, in 27%. The majority (85%) of patients had anthracycline based chemotherapy, without taxanes. The overall response rate (clinical CR+PR) was 67.6% and pathological complete responses were apparent in two (5.9%). 17.6% of patients defaulted part of their planned treatment. Recurrent disease was seen in 44.1% and the median time to relapse was 11.3 months. The three year disease free and overall survival rates were 52.5% and 58% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer in a Malaysian setting confers response and pCR rates comparable to published clinical trials. Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy are at risk of defaulting part of their treatment and therefore their concerns need to be identified proactively and addressed in order to improve outcomes.
METHODS: This retrospective study of Stage III breast cancer patients was conducted over a 5 year period from 1998 to 2002. The survival data were obtained from the National Registry of Births and Deaths with the end-point of the study in April 2006. The Kaplan Meier method was applied for survival analysis. Cox regression analysis by stepwise selection was performed to identify important prognostic factors.
RESULTS: Out of a 155 evaluable patients, 74 (47.7%) had primary surgery, 62 (40%) had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 10 patients (6.5%) were given Tamoxifen as the primary treatment, while 9 patients (5.8%) defaulted any form of treatment. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 9 patients defaulted further treatment, leaving 53 evaluable patients. Out of these 53 evaluable patients, 5 patients (9.4%) had complete pathological response, 5 (9.4%) a complete clinical response, and 26 (49.1%) had partial response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The 5-year survival in the primary surgery group was 56.7 % compared to 44.7% in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (p<0.01). The important prognostic factors were race, size of tumour, nodal status, estrogen receptor status and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
CONCLUSION: Patients who had primary surgery had better survival than those who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which may be due to bias in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Out of a total of 155 patients, 25.1% defaulted part of the treatment, or did not receive optimal treatment, emphasizing the importance of psychosocial support and counselling for this group of patients.