User login
Official Newspaper of the American College of Surgeons
VIDEO: How to pick surgical margins with mixed breast lesions
LAS VEGAS – According to recent guidelines, no ink on tumor is the right surgical margin for early stage invasive breast cancer and 2 mm is the right lumpectomy margin for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with whole breast radiation. But, what do you do when invasive carcinoma is associated with DCIS?
It’s a common question for breast surgeons. Monica Morrow, MD, chief of breast surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, explained how to handle the situation in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
She was the senior author on the 2014 invasive breast cancer guidelines and the lead author on the 2016 DCIS guidelines, both of which were consensus statements on surgical margins from the Society of Surgical Oncology and other groups (Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;21[3]:704-16; Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Nov;23[12]:3801-10).
Dr. Morrow explained the thinking behind the guidelines and how to apply them to mixed lesions and other clinical scenarios, as well as their limitations and what remains to be determined. A key point is that a margin less than 2 mm is not by itself an indication for mastectomy in DCIS.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
LAS VEGAS – According to recent guidelines, no ink on tumor is the right surgical margin for early stage invasive breast cancer and 2 mm is the right lumpectomy margin for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with whole breast radiation. But, what do you do when invasive carcinoma is associated with DCIS?
It’s a common question for breast surgeons. Monica Morrow, MD, chief of breast surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, explained how to handle the situation in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
She was the senior author on the 2014 invasive breast cancer guidelines and the lead author on the 2016 DCIS guidelines, both of which were consensus statements on surgical margins from the Society of Surgical Oncology and other groups (Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;21[3]:704-16; Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Nov;23[12]:3801-10).
Dr. Morrow explained the thinking behind the guidelines and how to apply them to mixed lesions and other clinical scenarios, as well as their limitations and what remains to be determined. A key point is that a margin less than 2 mm is not by itself an indication for mastectomy in DCIS.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
LAS VEGAS – According to recent guidelines, no ink on tumor is the right surgical margin for early stage invasive breast cancer and 2 mm is the right lumpectomy margin for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with whole breast radiation. But, what do you do when invasive carcinoma is associated with DCIS?
It’s a common question for breast surgeons. Monica Morrow, MD, chief of breast surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, explained how to handle the situation in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
She was the senior author on the 2014 invasive breast cancer guidelines and the lead author on the 2016 DCIS guidelines, both of which were consensus statements on surgical margins from the Society of Surgical Oncology and other groups (Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;21[3]:704-16; Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Nov;23[12]:3801-10).
Dr. Morrow explained the thinking behind the guidelines and how to apply them to mixed lesions and other clinical scenarios, as well as their limitations and what remains to be determined. A key point is that a margin less than 2 mm is not by itself an indication for mastectomy in DCIS.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
From ASBS 2017
Resection reduces inflammatory breast cancer lesion recurrence
LAS VEGAS – In patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), aggressive surgical resection can reduce local/regional recurrence rates to levels comparable to those seen in patients with noninflammatory breast cancer.
The key to the improved outcome is the presence of a plastic surgeon who can help close a tricky incision. “We have a multidisciplinary team that allows us to call upon the plastic surgeons if we can’t control the incision, and they help us with a flap closure,” said Kelly Rosso, MD, a breast surgical oncology fellow at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, who presented the study results at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
To see if their surgical interventions were producing better outcomes, the team analyzed data from 114 patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer who had received trimodality therapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy) from 2007 to 2015.
The median patient age was 52 years, and the median follow-up period was 3.6 years. In total, 55% of patients had N2 IBC, and 45% had N3 disease.
Nearly all (113 of 114) patients had negative surgical margins. A total of 29 patients died during the follow-up period, and the 5-year survival rate was 69%. The odds of a local/regional recurrence over 2 years was 3% (95% confidence interval, 1%-10%). The 2-year odds of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23% (95% CI, 16%-32%).
Dr. Lucci said that he suspects that many surgeons avoid resection of inflammatory breast cancer lesions under the assumption that the disease is metastatic in nature and fear that an attempt at local control would put the patient through unnecessary surgery with little benefit.
The new study challenges that belief. “I think this is a changing paradigm. We have to consider that those patients need to be thought of as still resectable and think about getting rid of that local disease, at the very least to improve their quality of life and hopefully to improve their overall outcome,” Dr. Lucci said.
The results should be readily achievable in other centers, he added. “If they have a plastic surgeon who’s willing to help them, they can resect to negative margins just as well [as in noninflammatory patients]. And, if they have a radiation therapist who’s dedicated to doing a more aggressive course, they can achieve the same results.”
Dr. Rosso and Dr. Lucci reported having no financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – In patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), aggressive surgical resection can reduce local/regional recurrence rates to levels comparable to those seen in patients with noninflammatory breast cancer.
The key to the improved outcome is the presence of a plastic surgeon who can help close a tricky incision. “We have a multidisciplinary team that allows us to call upon the plastic surgeons if we can’t control the incision, and they help us with a flap closure,” said Kelly Rosso, MD, a breast surgical oncology fellow at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, who presented the study results at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
To see if their surgical interventions were producing better outcomes, the team analyzed data from 114 patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer who had received trimodality therapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy) from 2007 to 2015.
The median patient age was 52 years, and the median follow-up period was 3.6 years. In total, 55% of patients had N2 IBC, and 45% had N3 disease.
Nearly all (113 of 114) patients had negative surgical margins. A total of 29 patients died during the follow-up period, and the 5-year survival rate was 69%. The odds of a local/regional recurrence over 2 years was 3% (95% confidence interval, 1%-10%). The 2-year odds of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23% (95% CI, 16%-32%).
Dr. Lucci said that he suspects that many surgeons avoid resection of inflammatory breast cancer lesions under the assumption that the disease is metastatic in nature and fear that an attempt at local control would put the patient through unnecessary surgery with little benefit.
The new study challenges that belief. “I think this is a changing paradigm. We have to consider that those patients need to be thought of as still resectable and think about getting rid of that local disease, at the very least to improve their quality of life and hopefully to improve their overall outcome,” Dr. Lucci said.
The results should be readily achievable in other centers, he added. “If they have a plastic surgeon who’s willing to help them, they can resect to negative margins just as well [as in noninflammatory patients]. And, if they have a radiation therapist who’s dedicated to doing a more aggressive course, they can achieve the same results.”
Dr. Rosso and Dr. Lucci reported having no financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – In patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), aggressive surgical resection can reduce local/regional recurrence rates to levels comparable to those seen in patients with noninflammatory breast cancer.
The key to the improved outcome is the presence of a plastic surgeon who can help close a tricky incision. “We have a multidisciplinary team that allows us to call upon the plastic surgeons if we can’t control the incision, and they help us with a flap closure,” said Kelly Rosso, MD, a breast surgical oncology fellow at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, who presented the study results at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
To see if their surgical interventions were producing better outcomes, the team analyzed data from 114 patients with nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer who had received trimodality therapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy) from 2007 to 2015.
The median patient age was 52 years, and the median follow-up period was 3.6 years. In total, 55% of patients had N2 IBC, and 45% had N3 disease.
Nearly all (113 of 114) patients had negative surgical margins. A total of 29 patients died during the follow-up period, and the 5-year survival rate was 69%. The odds of a local/regional recurrence over 2 years was 3% (95% confidence interval, 1%-10%). The 2-year odds of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23% (95% CI, 16%-32%).
Dr. Lucci said that he suspects that many surgeons avoid resection of inflammatory breast cancer lesions under the assumption that the disease is metastatic in nature and fear that an attempt at local control would put the patient through unnecessary surgery with little benefit.
The new study challenges that belief. “I think this is a changing paradigm. We have to consider that those patients need to be thought of as still resectable and think about getting rid of that local disease, at the very least to improve their quality of life and hopefully to improve their overall outcome,” Dr. Lucci said.
The results should be readily achievable in other centers, he added. “If they have a plastic surgeon who’s willing to help them, they can resect to negative margins just as well [as in noninflammatory patients]. And, if they have a radiation therapist who’s dedicated to doing a more aggressive course, they can achieve the same results.”
Dr. Rosso and Dr. Lucci reported having no financial disclosures.
At ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The odds of a local/regional recurrence over 2 years were 3%.
Data source: A retrospective analysis of 114 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Rosso and Dr. Lucci reported having no financial disclosures.
VIDEO: Surgery use declines for non–small cell lung cancer
BOSTON – The use of surgical therapy for early stage lung cancer in the United States has declined as other nonsurgical treatment options have become available, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
Most notably, the study finds that surgery for early stage non–small cell lung cancer decreased by 12% from 2004 to 2013.
In a video interview, Keith Naunheim, MD, a professor of surgery at Saint Louis University, discusses the study findings and the potential reasons behind declining surgery use for lung cancer. Dr. Naunheim also addresses why physicians should keep an open mind about alternative therapy options for lung cancer, while ensuring that the treatments are safe and effective for patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @legal_med
BOSTON – The use of surgical therapy for early stage lung cancer in the United States has declined as other nonsurgical treatment options have become available, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
Most notably, the study finds that surgery for early stage non–small cell lung cancer decreased by 12% from 2004 to 2013.
In a video interview, Keith Naunheim, MD, a professor of surgery at Saint Louis University, discusses the study findings and the potential reasons behind declining surgery use for lung cancer. Dr. Naunheim also addresses why physicians should keep an open mind about alternative therapy options for lung cancer, while ensuring that the treatments are safe and effective for patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @legal_med
BOSTON – The use of surgical therapy for early stage lung cancer in the United States has declined as other nonsurgical treatment options have become available, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
Most notably, the study finds that surgery for early stage non–small cell lung cancer decreased by 12% from 2004 to 2013.
In a video interview, Keith Naunheim, MD, a professor of surgery at Saint Louis University, discusses the study findings and the potential reasons behind declining surgery use for lung cancer. Dr. Naunheim also addresses why physicians should keep an open mind about alternative therapy options for lung cancer, while ensuring that the treatments are safe and effective for patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
[email protected]
On Twitter @legal_med
AT THE AATS ANNUAL MEETING
Don’t rely on MRI findings after DCIS needle biopsy
LAS VEGAS – MRI results after percutaneous biopsy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are often unreliable, overestimating the extent of disease and leading to over treatment, investigators from the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix concluded after reviewing 54 cases.
Of the 54 women, 7 (13%) had mastectomies driven by postbiopsy MRI findings that were not indicated on final pathology, Barbara Pockaj, MD, senior investigator and surgical oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
Dr. Pockaj and the Mayo radiologists had a hunch that there was a problem and were uncomfortable interpreting MRI findings after needle biopsy, but there was nothing in the literature about it. The goal of the study was to quantify the problem and “bring this issue to light,” she said.
“I feel better, now that we have this data in hand, as I counsel patients,” who are sometimes so alarmed by MRI findings after needle biopsy that they opt for mastectomies. Now, Dr. Pockaj can tell them with certainty that MRI “may overestimate the extent of disease, so we have to take MRI findings with a grain of salt,” she said.
“Surgeons should be aware that, in patients with a postbiopsy MRI, tumor size may be different than anticipated” and may adversely “affect surgical decision-making and potentially cosmetic results. Percutaneous biopsy significantly limits the ability to accurately interpret the extent of DCIS on preoperative breast MRI by overestimating extent of disease,” the investigators concluded.
Postbiopsy MRIs were performed in 38 of the 54 women (70%), and 14 women (26%) had bigger surgeries because of their MRI results.
Three women had larger lumpectomies, and 11 had mastectomies. “Three really needed it, and one maybe half way,” but the remaining seven turned out on pathology to have only needed lumpectomies, Dr. Pockaj said.
Mean lesion size on preoperative MRI was 3.6 cm while mean lesion size on pathologic specimen was 1.6 cm. Postbiopsy MRI did not significantly correlate with the actual size of the tumor specimen (r = 0.028; P = 0.921).
If the core needle biopsy shows DCIS, in many cases, “I think you can go right to surgery,” Dr. Pockaj said. MRI might still be indicted for very large lesions, suspicions of invasive disease, or very dense breasts, but, even so, the results need to be put into context with the postbiopsy changes, she said.
Women in the study were a mean of 59 years old. Most had high- or intermediate-grade DCIS. Women upgraded to invasive disease at surgery were excluded from the analysis.
There was no industry funding for the work, and the investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – MRI results after percutaneous biopsy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are often unreliable, overestimating the extent of disease and leading to over treatment, investigators from the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix concluded after reviewing 54 cases.
Of the 54 women, 7 (13%) had mastectomies driven by postbiopsy MRI findings that were not indicated on final pathology, Barbara Pockaj, MD, senior investigator and surgical oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
Dr. Pockaj and the Mayo radiologists had a hunch that there was a problem and were uncomfortable interpreting MRI findings after needle biopsy, but there was nothing in the literature about it. The goal of the study was to quantify the problem and “bring this issue to light,” she said.
“I feel better, now that we have this data in hand, as I counsel patients,” who are sometimes so alarmed by MRI findings after needle biopsy that they opt for mastectomies. Now, Dr. Pockaj can tell them with certainty that MRI “may overestimate the extent of disease, so we have to take MRI findings with a grain of salt,” she said.
“Surgeons should be aware that, in patients with a postbiopsy MRI, tumor size may be different than anticipated” and may adversely “affect surgical decision-making and potentially cosmetic results. Percutaneous biopsy significantly limits the ability to accurately interpret the extent of DCIS on preoperative breast MRI by overestimating extent of disease,” the investigators concluded.
Postbiopsy MRIs were performed in 38 of the 54 women (70%), and 14 women (26%) had bigger surgeries because of their MRI results.
Three women had larger lumpectomies, and 11 had mastectomies. “Three really needed it, and one maybe half way,” but the remaining seven turned out on pathology to have only needed lumpectomies, Dr. Pockaj said.
Mean lesion size on preoperative MRI was 3.6 cm while mean lesion size on pathologic specimen was 1.6 cm. Postbiopsy MRI did not significantly correlate with the actual size of the tumor specimen (r = 0.028; P = 0.921).
If the core needle biopsy shows DCIS, in many cases, “I think you can go right to surgery,” Dr. Pockaj said. MRI might still be indicted for very large lesions, suspicions of invasive disease, or very dense breasts, but, even so, the results need to be put into context with the postbiopsy changes, she said.
Women in the study were a mean of 59 years old. Most had high- or intermediate-grade DCIS. Women upgraded to invasive disease at surgery were excluded from the analysis.
There was no industry funding for the work, and the investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – MRI results after percutaneous biopsy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are often unreliable, overestimating the extent of disease and leading to over treatment, investigators from the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix concluded after reviewing 54 cases.
Of the 54 women, 7 (13%) had mastectomies driven by postbiopsy MRI findings that were not indicated on final pathology, Barbara Pockaj, MD, senior investigator and surgical oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
Dr. Pockaj and the Mayo radiologists had a hunch that there was a problem and were uncomfortable interpreting MRI findings after needle biopsy, but there was nothing in the literature about it. The goal of the study was to quantify the problem and “bring this issue to light,” she said.
“I feel better, now that we have this data in hand, as I counsel patients,” who are sometimes so alarmed by MRI findings after needle biopsy that they opt for mastectomies. Now, Dr. Pockaj can tell them with certainty that MRI “may overestimate the extent of disease, so we have to take MRI findings with a grain of salt,” she said.
“Surgeons should be aware that, in patients with a postbiopsy MRI, tumor size may be different than anticipated” and may adversely “affect surgical decision-making and potentially cosmetic results. Percutaneous biopsy significantly limits the ability to accurately interpret the extent of DCIS on preoperative breast MRI by overestimating extent of disease,” the investigators concluded.
Postbiopsy MRIs were performed in 38 of the 54 women (70%), and 14 women (26%) had bigger surgeries because of their MRI results.
Three women had larger lumpectomies, and 11 had mastectomies. “Three really needed it, and one maybe half way,” but the remaining seven turned out on pathology to have only needed lumpectomies, Dr. Pockaj said.
Mean lesion size on preoperative MRI was 3.6 cm while mean lesion size on pathologic specimen was 1.6 cm. Postbiopsy MRI did not significantly correlate with the actual size of the tumor specimen (r = 0.028; P = 0.921).
If the core needle biopsy shows DCIS, in many cases, “I think you can go right to surgery,” Dr. Pockaj said. MRI might still be indicted for very large lesions, suspicions of invasive disease, or very dense breasts, but, even so, the results need to be put into context with the postbiopsy changes, she said.
Women in the study were a mean of 59 years old. Most had high- or intermediate-grade DCIS. Women upgraded to invasive disease at surgery were excluded from the analysis.
There was no industry funding for the work, and the investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
At ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Of 54 women, 7 (13%) had mastectomies driven by postbiopsy MRI findings that were not indicated on final pathology.
Data source: Single-center review of 54 DCIS cases.
Disclosures: There was no industry funding for the work, and the investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Lumpectomy plus reconstruction outperforms mastectomy plus reconstruction
LAS VEGAS – Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery has a total cost that is comparable to lumpectomy alone and that is less than mastectomy plus reconstructive surgery, according to an analysis of nearly 40,000 women.
While the complication rate was slightly higher than lumpectomy alone, the difference disappeared in the last year of data, possibly because surgical techniques had improved. The study looked at MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database data from 2000 to 2011 and confirms findings from an earlier study that looked at data from the MD Anderson Cancer Center (Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Oct;23[10]:3190-8).
Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery is increasingly being performed, but it still only represented about 2% of surgeries in women with invasive epithelial breast cancer, although this percentage had grown to 8.4% by 2011 and is likely higher now, according to Dr. Hwang, an associate professor of breast surgical oncology and surgical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Candidates for lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery include those with large volume disease, multifocal/centric disease, poorly located tumors, or macromastia. “If oncoplastic reconstruction was not available, these patients would oftentimes be undergoing total mastectomy with reconstruction,” Dr. Hwang said.
The study included records from 39,518 women who underwent breast surgery with or without reconstruction. It excluded patients who received postmastectomy radiation or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
A total of 40% underwent lumpectomy plus whole breast irradiation (BCT), 2% received BCT plus oncoplastic reconstruction (BCT+R), 30% had total mastectomy (TM), and 29% had total mastectomy plus reconstruction (TM+R).
After adjusting for age, race, comorbidity, chemotherapy, axillary surgery, and nodal positivity, the complication rate was lowest in the TM group (25%; relative risk compared with BCT+R, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.78; P less than .001), followed by BCT (29%; RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; P less than .001), BCT+R (37%), and TM+R (54%; RR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.35-1.64; P less than .001).
The rate of complications in BCT+R fell over time, so that, by 2011, it was only slightly higher than those of BCT alone (31.5% vs 29.4%). That trend is “probably just additional experience with the technique,” Dr. Hwang said.
Total costs for TM+R was $89,187, compared with $48,767 for TM, $66,217 for BCT, and $69,781 for BCT+R. The cost difference between BCT and TM+R was about $23,000.
The findings are encouraging, said Judy Boughey, MD, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., who moderated the session. However, she called for caution in interpreting the results because the population of interest made up just 2% of the overall sample. “I think you’re going to have the widest variability of confidence intervals around that group,” Dr. Boughey said. “It’s eye-opening, but I would just view it with caution.”
Dr. Hwang and Dr. Boughey reported having no financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery has a total cost that is comparable to lumpectomy alone and that is less than mastectomy plus reconstructive surgery, according to an analysis of nearly 40,000 women.
While the complication rate was slightly higher than lumpectomy alone, the difference disappeared in the last year of data, possibly because surgical techniques had improved. The study looked at MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database data from 2000 to 2011 and confirms findings from an earlier study that looked at data from the MD Anderson Cancer Center (Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Oct;23[10]:3190-8).
Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery is increasingly being performed, but it still only represented about 2% of surgeries in women with invasive epithelial breast cancer, although this percentage had grown to 8.4% by 2011 and is likely higher now, according to Dr. Hwang, an associate professor of breast surgical oncology and surgical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Candidates for lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery include those with large volume disease, multifocal/centric disease, poorly located tumors, or macromastia. “If oncoplastic reconstruction was not available, these patients would oftentimes be undergoing total mastectomy with reconstruction,” Dr. Hwang said.
The study included records from 39,518 women who underwent breast surgery with or without reconstruction. It excluded patients who received postmastectomy radiation or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
A total of 40% underwent lumpectomy plus whole breast irradiation (BCT), 2% received BCT plus oncoplastic reconstruction (BCT+R), 30% had total mastectomy (TM), and 29% had total mastectomy plus reconstruction (TM+R).
After adjusting for age, race, comorbidity, chemotherapy, axillary surgery, and nodal positivity, the complication rate was lowest in the TM group (25%; relative risk compared with BCT+R, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.78; P less than .001), followed by BCT (29%; RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; P less than .001), BCT+R (37%), and TM+R (54%; RR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.35-1.64; P less than .001).
The rate of complications in BCT+R fell over time, so that, by 2011, it was only slightly higher than those of BCT alone (31.5% vs 29.4%). That trend is “probably just additional experience with the technique,” Dr. Hwang said.
Total costs for TM+R was $89,187, compared with $48,767 for TM, $66,217 for BCT, and $69,781 for BCT+R. The cost difference between BCT and TM+R was about $23,000.
The findings are encouraging, said Judy Boughey, MD, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., who moderated the session. However, she called for caution in interpreting the results because the population of interest made up just 2% of the overall sample. “I think you’re going to have the widest variability of confidence intervals around that group,” Dr. Boughey said. “It’s eye-opening, but I would just view it with caution.”
Dr. Hwang and Dr. Boughey reported having no financial disclosures.
LAS VEGAS – Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery has a total cost that is comparable to lumpectomy alone and that is less than mastectomy plus reconstructive surgery, according to an analysis of nearly 40,000 women.
While the complication rate was slightly higher than lumpectomy alone, the difference disappeared in the last year of data, possibly because surgical techniques had improved. The study looked at MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database data from 2000 to 2011 and confirms findings from an earlier study that looked at data from the MD Anderson Cancer Center (Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Oct;23[10]:3190-8).
Lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery is increasingly being performed, but it still only represented about 2% of surgeries in women with invasive epithelial breast cancer, although this percentage had grown to 8.4% by 2011 and is likely higher now, according to Dr. Hwang, an associate professor of breast surgical oncology and surgical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Candidates for lumpectomy plus oncoplastic surgery include those with large volume disease, multifocal/centric disease, poorly located tumors, or macromastia. “If oncoplastic reconstruction was not available, these patients would oftentimes be undergoing total mastectomy with reconstruction,” Dr. Hwang said.
The study included records from 39,518 women who underwent breast surgery with or without reconstruction. It excluded patients who received postmastectomy radiation or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
A total of 40% underwent lumpectomy plus whole breast irradiation (BCT), 2% received BCT plus oncoplastic reconstruction (BCT+R), 30% had total mastectomy (TM), and 29% had total mastectomy plus reconstruction (TM+R).
After adjusting for age, race, comorbidity, chemotherapy, axillary surgery, and nodal positivity, the complication rate was lowest in the TM group (25%; relative risk compared with BCT+R, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.78; P less than .001), followed by BCT (29%; RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; P less than .001), BCT+R (37%), and TM+R (54%; RR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.35-1.64; P less than .001).
The rate of complications in BCT+R fell over time, so that, by 2011, it was only slightly higher than those of BCT alone (31.5% vs 29.4%). That trend is “probably just additional experience with the technique,” Dr. Hwang said.
Total costs for TM+R was $89,187, compared with $48,767 for TM, $66,217 for BCT, and $69,781 for BCT+R. The cost difference between BCT and TM+R was about $23,000.
The findings are encouraging, said Judy Boughey, MD, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., who moderated the session. However, she called for caution in interpreting the results because the population of interest made up just 2% of the overall sample. “I think you’re going to have the widest variability of confidence intervals around that group,” Dr. Boughey said. “It’s eye-opening, but I would just view it with caution.”
Dr. Hwang and Dr. Boughey reported having no financial disclosures.
At ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Mastectomy with reconstruction had a 49% higher complication rate and $20,000 higher cost, compared with lumpectomy plus reconstruction.
Data source: Nationwide retrospective analysis of 39,518 women.
Disclosures: Dr. Hwang and Dr. Boughey reported having no financial disclosures.
Study underscores aggressive approach to inflammatory breast cancer
Aggressive resection to negative margins, combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postsurgical radiation, resulted in a 96% 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival in nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer, Kelly Rosso, MD, reported.
Dr. Rosso of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and her colleagues identified 277 women diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer between 2007 and 2015 from a prospective database; 114 of those had nonmetastatic disease and received aggressive trimodality therapy with curative intent.
Median age at diagnosis was 52 years and all patients were diagnosed at Stage III; 55% presented with N2 disease while 45% presented with N3. Patients were followed for a median 3.6 years.
“Historically, prognosis for patients with inflammatory breast cancer has been very poor,” Dr. Rosso said at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. “Data from our institution has failed to identify any significant improvement in survival from the 1970s to the 2000s.”
In this study, 29 patients died and 4 experienced a locoregional recurrence (3.5%) during follow-up. The 2-year probability of locoregional recurrence was low, at 3.19%, while the 2-year probability of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23.1%. The 5-year disease-free survival was 72.5%, significantly lower than local/regional recurrence-free survival because some patients developed metastatic cancer in other organs, Dr. Rosso reported.
Diminished overall survival and increased risk for recurrence or metastasis were more likely in women over the age of 65 years and those with HER2-negative status, limited clinical response to chemotherapy, and absence of a pathologically complete response. Recurrence or metastasis also were more likely in women with Stage IIIC disease and more lymphovascular involvement.
“It is encouraging to see the high 5-year breast cancer specific survival rates reported in this cohort,” Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said in a statement. “This study supports that the current management of these patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiation is the optimal multimodal approach for inflammatory breast cancer. The improvements in systemic therapy, with increased use of directed therapy, being used in breast cancer, together with appropriate local-regional therapies, is likely responsible for the improvement in survival over historical cohorts.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
Aggressive resection to negative margins, combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postsurgical radiation, resulted in a 96% 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival in nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer, Kelly Rosso, MD, reported.
Dr. Rosso of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and her colleagues identified 277 women diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer between 2007 and 2015 from a prospective database; 114 of those had nonmetastatic disease and received aggressive trimodality therapy with curative intent.
Median age at diagnosis was 52 years and all patients were diagnosed at Stage III; 55% presented with N2 disease while 45% presented with N3. Patients were followed for a median 3.6 years.
“Historically, prognosis for patients with inflammatory breast cancer has been very poor,” Dr. Rosso said at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. “Data from our institution has failed to identify any significant improvement in survival from the 1970s to the 2000s.”
In this study, 29 patients died and 4 experienced a locoregional recurrence (3.5%) during follow-up. The 2-year probability of locoregional recurrence was low, at 3.19%, while the 2-year probability of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23.1%. The 5-year disease-free survival was 72.5%, significantly lower than local/regional recurrence-free survival because some patients developed metastatic cancer in other organs, Dr. Rosso reported.
Diminished overall survival and increased risk for recurrence or metastasis were more likely in women over the age of 65 years and those with HER2-negative status, limited clinical response to chemotherapy, and absence of a pathologically complete response. Recurrence or metastasis also were more likely in women with Stage IIIC disease and more lymphovascular involvement.
“It is encouraging to see the high 5-year breast cancer specific survival rates reported in this cohort,” Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said in a statement. “This study supports that the current management of these patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiation is the optimal multimodal approach for inflammatory breast cancer. The improvements in systemic therapy, with increased use of directed therapy, being used in breast cancer, together with appropriate local-regional therapies, is likely responsible for the improvement in survival over historical cohorts.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
Aggressive resection to negative margins, combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postsurgical radiation, resulted in a 96% 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival in nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer, Kelly Rosso, MD, reported.
Dr. Rosso of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and her colleagues identified 277 women diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer between 2007 and 2015 from a prospective database; 114 of those had nonmetastatic disease and received aggressive trimodality therapy with curative intent.
Median age at diagnosis was 52 years and all patients were diagnosed at Stage III; 55% presented with N2 disease while 45% presented with N3. Patients were followed for a median 3.6 years.
“Historically, prognosis for patients with inflammatory breast cancer has been very poor,” Dr. Rosso said at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. “Data from our institution has failed to identify any significant improvement in survival from the 1970s to the 2000s.”
In this study, 29 patients died and 4 experienced a locoregional recurrence (3.5%) during follow-up. The 2-year probability of locoregional recurrence was low, at 3.19%, while the 2-year probability of recurrence or distant metastasis was 23.1%. The 5-year disease-free survival was 72.5%, significantly lower than local/regional recurrence-free survival because some patients developed metastatic cancer in other organs, Dr. Rosso reported.
Diminished overall survival and increased risk for recurrence or metastasis were more likely in women over the age of 65 years and those with HER2-negative status, limited clinical response to chemotherapy, and absence of a pathologically complete response. Recurrence or metastasis also were more likely in women with Stage IIIC disease and more lymphovascular involvement.
“It is encouraging to see the high 5-year breast cancer specific survival rates reported in this cohort,” Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said in a statement. “This study supports that the current management of these patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiation is the optimal multimodal approach for inflammatory breast cancer. The improvements in systemic therapy, with increased use of directed therapy, being used in breast cancer, together with appropriate local-regional therapies, is likely responsible for the improvement in survival over historical cohorts.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
FROM ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Locoregional recurrence occurred in 4 out of 114 women with inflammatory breast cancer treated with trimodality therapy.
Data source: A prospective database of 277 women diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer between 2007 and 2015.
Disclosures: The study was unsponsored. Dr. Rosso disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.
Multimodal breast cancer treatment linked with greater risk of lymphedema
Chemotherapy, radiation, and higher body mass index are strongly associated with increased risk of lymphedema in breast cancer patients who have undergone sentinel node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection, according to analysis of data from the Rochester Epidemiology Project.
Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., and her associates performed a chart review of 1,794 patients diagnosed with a first breast cancer in Olmsted County, Minn., between 1990 and 2010. Patients’ median age at diagnosis was 60 years. About half (48%) were diagnosed at stage I, while 17% were diagnosed at Stage 0, 29% at Stage II, and 6% at Stage III.
At a median of 10 years of follow-up, 209 patients had been diagnosed with breast cancer–related lymphedema, with most diagnoses occurring within 5 years of surgery. No cases of lymphedema were found in patients who did not have axillary surgery.
There was no significant difference in the rate of lymphedema based on type of breast cancer surgery (mastectomy vs. lumpectomy with breast-conserving surgery); however, lymphedema occurred significantly more frequently in patients who received ALND as compared to those who received SLN (15.9% vs. 5.3%). Lymphedema rates did not differ based on type of axillary surgery (3.5% for ALND and 4.1% for SLN) in a subset of 453 patients who did not receive radiation or chemotherapy.
Almost a third (31.3%) of patients who had nodal radiation, with or without breast or chest wall radiation, developed lymphedema by 5 years, as compared with 5.9% of patients who did not receive radiation (P less than .001). Similarly, patients who received chemotherapy were significantly more likely to develop lymphedema. At 5 years, lymphedema was present in 27.2% of patients who received anthracylcline/cyclophosphamide (AC) with a taxane agent, 29.7% of those who received a taxane agent without AC , and 6.0% of those who did not get chemotherapy (P less than .001).
Five-year incidence of lymphedema also increased significantly with body mass index, occurring in 17.1% of patients with a BMI greater than 35 kg/m2, 13% of those with a BMI between 30-34.99, and 14.4% of those with a BMI between 25-29.99, as compared with 8% of those with a BMI below 25.
On univariate analysis, increased stage was associated with risk of lymphedema, Dr. Boughey said. However, on multivariate analysis, stage was no longer associated with risk of lymphedema and “the dominate factors were BMI, type of axillary surgery, use of radiation therapy and particularly nodal radiation, and the use of chemotherapy.”
The highest rate of lymphedema was seen in a patients with the most advanced disease who had ALND with nodal radiation and AC with a taxane agent, she said.
“We think this is primarily due to the modalities of treatment rather that the pure phenomenon of stage,” Dr. Boughey added. “This study can help identify patients at a higher risk of lymphedema so that we can individualize the surveillance of these patients to allow them to have earlier identification and earlier treatment of lymphedema.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
Chemotherapy, radiation, and higher body mass index are strongly associated with increased risk of lymphedema in breast cancer patients who have undergone sentinel node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection, according to analysis of data from the Rochester Epidemiology Project.
Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., and her associates performed a chart review of 1,794 patients diagnosed with a first breast cancer in Olmsted County, Minn., between 1990 and 2010. Patients’ median age at diagnosis was 60 years. About half (48%) were diagnosed at stage I, while 17% were diagnosed at Stage 0, 29% at Stage II, and 6% at Stage III.
At a median of 10 years of follow-up, 209 patients had been diagnosed with breast cancer–related lymphedema, with most diagnoses occurring within 5 years of surgery. No cases of lymphedema were found in patients who did not have axillary surgery.
There was no significant difference in the rate of lymphedema based on type of breast cancer surgery (mastectomy vs. lumpectomy with breast-conserving surgery); however, lymphedema occurred significantly more frequently in patients who received ALND as compared to those who received SLN (15.9% vs. 5.3%). Lymphedema rates did not differ based on type of axillary surgery (3.5% for ALND and 4.1% for SLN) in a subset of 453 patients who did not receive radiation or chemotherapy.
Almost a third (31.3%) of patients who had nodal radiation, with or without breast or chest wall radiation, developed lymphedema by 5 years, as compared with 5.9% of patients who did not receive radiation (P less than .001). Similarly, patients who received chemotherapy were significantly more likely to develop lymphedema. At 5 years, lymphedema was present in 27.2% of patients who received anthracylcline/cyclophosphamide (AC) with a taxane agent, 29.7% of those who received a taxane agent without AC , and 6.0% of those who did not get chemotherapy (P less than .001).
Five-year incidence of lymphedema also increased significantly with body mass index, occurring in 17.1% of patients with a BMI greater than 35 kg/m2, 13% of those with a BMI between 30-34.99, and 14.4% of those with a BMI between 25-29.99, as compared with 8% of those with a BMI below 25.
On univariate analysis, increased stage was associated with risk of lymphedema, Dr. Boughey said. However, on multivariate analysis, stage was no longer associated with risk of lymphedema and “the dominate factors were BMI, type of axillary surgery, use of radiation therapy and particularly nodal radiation, and the use of chemotherapy.”
The highest rate of lymphedema was seen in a patients with the most advanced disease who had ALND with nodal radiation and AC with a taxane agent, she said.
“We think this is primarily due to the modalities of treatment rather that the pure phenomenon of stage,” Dr. Boughey added. “This study can help identify patients at a higher risk of lymphedema so that we can individualize the surveillance of these patients to allow them to have earlier identification and earlier treatment of lymphedema.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
Chemotherapy, radiation, and higher body mass index are strongly associated with increased risk of lymphedema in breast cancer patients who have undergone sentinel node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection, according to analysis of data from the Rochester Epidemiology Project.
Judy C. Boughey, MD, professor of surgery and vice chair of research at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., and her associates performed a chart review of 1,794 patients diagnosed with a first breast cancer in Olmsted County, Minn., between 1990 and 2010. Patients’ median age at diagnosis was 60 years. About half (48%) were diagnosed at stage I, while 17% were diagnosed at Stage 0, 29% at Stage II, and 6% at Stage III.
At a median of 10 years of follow-up, 209 patients had been diagnosed with breast cancer–related lymphedema, with most diagnoses occurring within 5 years of surgery. No cases of lymphedema were found in patients who did not have axillary surgery.
There was no significant difference in the rate of lymphedema based on type of breast cancer surgery (mastectomy vs. lumpectomy with breast-conserving surgery); however, lymphedema occurred significantly more frequently in patients who received ALND as compared to those who received SLN (15.9% vs. 5.3%). Lymphedema rates did not differ based on type of axillary surgery (3.5% for ALND and 4.1% for SLN) in a subset of 453 patients who did not receive radiation or chemotherapy.
Almost a third (31.3%) of patients who had nodal radiation, with or without breast or chest wall radiation, developed lymphedema by 5 years, as compared with 5.9% of patients who did not receive radiation (P less than .001). Similarly, patients who received chemotherapy were significantly more likely to develop lymphedema. At 5 years, lymphedema was present in 27.2% of patients who received anthracylcline/cyclophosphamide (AC) with a taxane agent, 29.7% of those who received a taxane agent without AC , and 6.0% of those who did not get chemotherapy (P less than .001).
Five-year incidence of lymphedema also increased significantly with body mass index, occurring in 17.1% of patients with a BMI greater than 35 kg/m2, 13% of those with a BMI between 30-34.99, and 14.4% of those with a BMI between 25-29.99, as compared with 8% of those with a BMI below 25.
On univariate analysis, increased stage was associated with risk of lymphedema, Dr. Boughey said. However, on multivariate analysis, stage was no longer associated with risk of lymphedema and “the dominate factors were BMI, type of axillary surgery, use of radiation therapy and particularly nodal radiation, and the use of chemotherapy.”
The highest rate of lymphedema was seen in a patients with the most advanced disease who had ALND with nodal radiation and AC with a taxane agent, she said.
“We think this is primarily due to the modalities of treatment rather that the pure phenomenon of stage,” Dr. Boughey added. “This study can help identify patients at a higher risk of lymphedema so that we can individualize the surveillance of these patients to allow them to have earlier identification and earlier treatment of lymphedema.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @denisefulton
FROM ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: More than 30% of patients receiving nodal radiation developed lymphedema vs. 5.9% of those who did not. Similarly, lymphedema developed in just under 30% of patients who received a taxane vs. 6.9% of those who did not.
Data source: Analysis of all 1,794 cases of first breast cancers diagnosed in Olmsted County, Minn., 1990-2010.
Disclosures: The Rochester Epidemiology Project receives federal funding from agencies of the Health & Human Services Department. Dr. Boughey reported no relevant financial conflicts of interest.
Risk of recurrence outweighs risk of contralateral breast cancer for DCIS patients
LAS VEGAS – The risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was greater than the risk of contralateral breast cancer at both 5 and 10 years following diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), investigators report at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
“A rapidly growing number of women are choosing double mastectomies for DCIS, perhaps because they misperceive their risk of future cancer. Our research provides important data for treatment decision-making,” said Megan Miller, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. “It suggests patients and their doctors should focus on risk factors and appropriate therapy for the diseased breast, not the opposite breast, and that ipsilateral DCIS should not prompt a bilateral mastectomy.”
The investigators also found that CBC did not correlate with age, family history, and initial DCIS characteristics, though these factors did correlate with the risk of IBTR.
Dr. Miller and her colleagues found radiation had no impact on risk of CBC (4.9% vs. 6.3%; P = .1), though it significantly reduced the risk for IBTR (10.3% vs. 19.3%; P less than .0001).
More research is needed on risk factors for patients with a preinvasive condition, Dr. Miller said.
“Most studies examining the benefits of bilateral mastectomy focus on invasive cancer,” she said. “This study is unique in providing hard data for women with preinvasive disease. For these patients, examining risk factors for recurrence and the benefits of radiation and endocrine therapy to treat the existing cancer are important.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
LAS VEGAS – The risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was greater than the risk of contralateral breast cancer at both 5 and 10 years following diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), investigators report at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
“A rapidly growing number of women are choosing double mastectomies for DCIS, perhaps because they misperceive their risk of future cancer. Our research provides important data for treatment decision-making,” said Megan Miller, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. “It suggests patients and their doctors should focus on risk factors and appropriate therapy for the diseased breast, not the opposite breast, and that ipsilateral DCIS should not prompt a bilateral mastectomy.”
The investigators also found that CBC did not correlate with age, family history, and initial DCIS characteristics, though these factors did correlate with the risk of IBTR.
Dr. Miller and her colleagues found radiation had no impact on risk of CBC (4.9% vs. 6.3%; P = .1), though it significantly reduced the risk for IBTR (10.3% vs. 19.3%; P less than .0001).
More research is needed on risk factors for patients with a preinvasive condition, Dr. Miller said.
“Most studies examining the benefits of bilateral mastectomy focus on invasive cancer,” she said. “This study is unique in providing hard data for women with preinvasive disease. For these patients, examining risk factors for recurrence and the benefits of radiation and endocrine therapy to treat the existing cancer are important.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
LAS VEGAS – The risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was greater than the risk of contralateral breast cancer at both 5 and 10 years following diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), investigators report at a press conference in advance of the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.
“A rapidly growing number of women are choosing double mastectomies for DCIS, perhaps because they misperceive their risk of future cancer. Our research provides important data for treatment decision-making,” said Megan Miller, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. “It suggests patients and their doctors should focus on risk factors and appropriate therapy for the diseased breast, not the opposite breast, and that ipsilateral DCIS should not prompt a bilateral mastectomy.”
The investigators also found that CBC did not correlate with age, family history, and initial DCIS characteristics, though these factors did correlate with the risk of IBTR.
Dr. Miller and her colleagues found radiation had no impact on risk of CBC (4.9% vs. 6.3%; P = .1), though it significantly reduced the risk for IBTR (10.3% vs. 19.3%; P less than .0001).
More research is needed on risk factors for patients with a preinvasive condition, Dr. Miller said.
“Most studies examining the benefits of bilateral mastectomy focus on invasive cancer,” she said. “This study is unique in providing hard data for women with preinvasive disease. For these patients, examining risk factors for recurrence and the benefits of radiation and endocrine therapy to treat the existing cancer are important.”
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
FROM ASBS 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Among 2,759 patients, incidence rate of contralateral breast cancer was 2.8% and 5.6% over 5 and 10 years, respectively, while risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was 7.8% and 14.3% over 5 and 10 years, respectively.
Data source: Study of 2,759 DCIS patients who underwent breast conserving surgery between 1978-2011, who were followed for a median of 6.8 years.
Disclosures: The investigators reported no relevant disclosures.
Mortality rate was 10-fold higher in opioid use disorder patients
Individuals with opioid use disorder had a 10-fold higher mortality rate than the general population in a general health care setting, according to a study of 2,576 patients.
When researchers examined the electronic health records of opioid use disorder patients in a large university health system and linked those with mortality data, they found those patients had a standardized mortality ratio of 10.3, compared with the general population and adjusted for sex and age (J Addict Med. 2017 Apr 20. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000312).
Hepatitis C infection and alcohol use disorder were the two mostly clinically important indicators of overall mortality risk; however, none of the factors examined was a predictor of drug-related deaths.
Patients who died were also more likely to have been diagnosed with other substance use disorders, such as tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, or cocaine, and to have comorbidities such as heart disease, respiratory disease, hepatitis C infection, liver disease, cancer, or diabetes. The most common cause of death was drug-related – including poisoning, overdose, and alcohol and drug disorder – followed by cardiovascular disease, cancer, and infectious diseases such as hepatitis C.
Yih-Ing Hser, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and her coauthors called the elevated mortality rates in that group “alarming,” and suggested the rates may be the result of issues that health care systems have in identifying and addressing opioid use disorder problems.
“First, SUDs [substance use disorders] are not routinely screened for in primary care, and most primary care physicians have not received adequate training to diagnose and treat OUD [opioid use disorder],” the authors wrote. “It is likely that patients seen in this health system became progressively sicker, as their OUD problem was not identified until very late in its course and after physical health complications had already ensued.”
Second, patients with opioid use disorder may not be getting referrals for treatment. Finally, those who have problems with prescription opioids may be harder to identify than patients with heroin addiction.
“The alarmingly high morbidity and mortality among OUD patients revealed in the present study challenge health care systems to find new and innovative ways to expand evidence-based strategies for OUD in a variety of settings,” the investigators concluded.
The study was partly supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science. One author declared royalties as a section editor for UpToDate. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
Everyone is trying to respond to the opioid abuse and overdose crisis with the tools available. However, while medication-assisted therapies have been used successfully by addiction medicine and addiction psychiatry experts and programs as part of an overall program of recovery, their use as stand-alone substitution treatments has expanded.
These new data, like other recent data on emergency department interventions, strongly suggest that these treatments are limited in efficacy, and longer-term outcome studies, typical in medical oncology and physician addiction, are needed.
Dr. Mark Gold is adjunct professor of psychiatry at Washington University in St. Louis, and former Donald R. Dizney Eminent Scholar and chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Florida, Gainesville.
Everyone is trying to respond to the opioid abuse and overdose crisis with the tools available. However, while medication-assisted therapies have been used successfully by addiction medicine and addiction psychiatry experts and programs as part of an overall program of recovery, their use as stand-alone substitution treatments has expanded.
These new data, like other recent data on emergency department interventions, strongly suggest that these treatments are limited in efficacy, and longer-term outcome studies, typical in medical oncology and physician addiction, are needed.
Dr. Mark Gold is adjunct professor of psychiatry at Washington University in St. Louis, and former Donald R. Dizney Eminent Scholar and chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Florida, Gainesville.
Everyone is trying to respond to the opioid abuse and overdose crisis with the tools available. However, while medication-assisted therapies have been used successfully by addiction medicine and addiction psychiatry experts and programs as part of an overall program of recovery, their use as stand-alone substitution treatments has expanded.
These new data, like other recent data on emergency department interventions, strongly suggest that these treatments are limited in efficacy, and longer-term outcome studies, typical in medical oncology and physician addiction, are needed.
Dr. Mark Gold is adjunct professor of psychiatry at Washington University in St. Louis, and former Donald R. Dizney Eminent Scholar and chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Florida, Gainesville.
Individuals with opioid use disorder had a 10-fold higher mortality rate than the general population in a general health care setting, according to a study of 2,576 patients.
When researchers examined the electronic health records of opioid use disorder patients in a large university health system and linked those with mortality data, they found those patients had a standardized mortality ratio of 10.3, compared with the general population and adjusted for sex and age (J Addict Med. 2017 Apr 20. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000312).
Hepatitis C infection and alcohol use disorder were the two mostly clinically important indicators of overall mortality risk; however, none of the factors examined was a predictor of drug-related deaths.
Patients who died were also more likely to have been diagnosed with other substance use disorders, such as tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, or cocaine, and to have comorbidities such as heart disease, respiratory disease, hepatitis C infection, liver disease, cancer, or diabetes. The most common cause of death was drug-related – including poisoning, overdose, and alcohol and drug disorder – followed by cardiovascular disease, cancer, and infectious diseases such as hepatitis C.
Yih-Ing Hser, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and her coauthors called the elevated mortality rates in that group “alarming,” and suggested the rates may be the result of issues that health care systems have in identifying and addressing opioid use disorder problems.
“First, SUDs [substance use disorders] are not routinely screened for in primary care, and most primary care physicians have not received adequate training to diagnose and treat OUD [opioid use disorder],” the authors wrote. “It is likely that patients seen in this health system became progressively sicker, as their OUD problem was not identified until very late in its course and after physical health complications had already ensued.”
Second, patients with opioid use disorder may not be getting referrals for treatment. Finally, those who have problems with prescription opioids may be harder to identify than patients with heroin addiction.
“The alarmingly high morbidity and mortality among OUD patients revealed in the present study challenge health care systems to find new and innovative ways to expand evidence-based strategies for OUD in a variety of settings,” the investigators concluded.
The study was partly supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science. One author declared royalties as a section editor for UpToDate. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
Individuals with opioid use disorder had a 10-fold higher mortality rate than the general population in a general health care setting, according to a study of 2,576 patients.
When researchers examined the electronic health records of opioid use disorder patients in a large university health system and linked those with mortality data, they found those patients had a standardized mortality ratio of 10.3, compared with the general population and adjusted for sex and age (J Addict Med. 2017 Apr 20. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000312).
Hepatitis C infection and alcohol use disorder were the two mostly clinically important indicators of overall mortality risk; however, none of the factors examined was a predictor of drug-related deaths.
Patients who died were also more likely to have been diagnosed with other substance use disorders, such as tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, or cocaine, and to have comorbidities such as heart disease, respiratory disease, hepatitis C infection, liver disease, cancer, or diabetes. The most common cause of death was drug-related – including poisoning, overdose, and alcohol and drug disorder – followed by cardiovascular disease, cancer, and infectious diseases such as hepatitis C.
Yih-Ing Hser, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and her coauthors called the elevated mortality rates in that group “alarming,” and suggested the rates may be the result of issues that health care systems have in identifying and addressing opioid use disorder problems.
“First, SUDs [substance use disorders] are not routinely screened for in primary care, and most primary care physicians have not received adequate training to diagnose and treat OUD [opioid use disorder],” the authors wrote. “It is likely that patients seen in this health system became progressively sicker, as their OUD problem was not identified until very late in its course and after physical health complications had already ensued.”
Second, patients with opioid use disorder may not be getting referrals for treatment. Finally, those who have problems with prescription opioids may be harder to identify than patients with heroin addiction.
“The alarmingly high morbidity and mortality among OUD patients revealed in the present study challenge health care systems to find new and innovative ways to expand evidence-based strategies for OUD in a variety of settings,” the investigators concluded.
The study was partly supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science. One author declared royalties as a section editor for UpToDate. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
Key clinical point: Individuals with opioid use disorder have a significantly higher mortality rate than the general population, particularly those with hepatitis C infection or alcohol use disorder.
Major finding: Patients with opioid use disorder had a standardized mortality ratio of 10.3, compared with the general population.
Data source: A cohort study in 2,576 opioid use disorder patients.
Disclosures: The study was partly supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science. One author declared royalties as a section editor for UpToDate. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
HHS Secretary Price promises reduced health IT burden for physicians
WASHINGTON – Reducing IT burden for doctors and fostering interoperability are two top tech priorities for Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, MD.
“We simply have to do a better job of reducing the burden of health IT on physicians and all health care providers,” Dr. Price said April 27 at Health Datapalooza, an annual conference on health data transparency. “The promise of big data and health information technology is so great and absolutely remarkable but we must not, we cannot continue to get this wrong.”
“Now we are seeing physicians leaving the practice of medicine when they are 60 or 55,” he said. “Many of my colleagues, my personal friends who have been practicing, right now they are looking for the exit doors. They are trying to figure out how to get out of practicing medicine and I think it is incredibly important for us as a society to step back and ask, why?”
A significant factor is the shift to electronic health records, which has caused doctors to spend much more time looking at screens and feeling more like data entry clerks than health care providers, he said.
“I know that we have lost more than one physician to retirement because of the kinds of burdens that have been placed on a lot of them and that simply ought to be unacceptable to us,” he said. “You think of the intellectual capital that has been lost by this nation because of the kinds of burdens that clinicians have seen.”
That said, “data is absolutely crucial,” Dr. Price said. “Don’t misunderstand me. It is absolutely critical that we have all the data that we can and that we use it in an evidence-based manner so that we can provide better care and better quality of care to patients.”
He challenged the health IT professionals at the meeting to make their products more user friendly.
“We will work on reducing the burdens at the federal level, but we also need clinicians and IT folks on the ground to help make certain that technology implementation is done in a way that it enhances usability and increases efficiency,” Dr. Price said.
He also called for true interoperability, a common goal that has persisted since electronic health records were mandated under the HITECH Act but remains an elusive target.
“This has always been the goal and it just seems so simple,” he said. “Somehow something has happened between the idea of interoperability and now that has made it so much more challenging.”
He placed that fault on current federal regulation around interoperability and pledged to create an environment that reduces regulatory roadblocks and allows the technology sector to innovate and foster the free flow of data.
“From my perspective it seems that what we ought to be doing is deciding the rules of the road,” Dr. Price said. “We are going to drive on the right side. We are going to stop at the red light. This is the language we are going to do. This is what a triangular sign looks like, as opposed to stipulating every single dot... all the way down the line.”
WASHINGTON – Reducing IT burden for doctors and fostering interoperability are two top tech priorities for Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, MD.
“We simply have to do a better job of reducing the burden of health IT on physicians and all health care providers,” Dr. Price said April 27 at Health Datapalooza, an annual conference on health data transparency. “The promise of big data and health information technology is so great and absolutely remarkable but we must not, we cannot continue to get this wrong.”
“Now we are seeing physicians leaving the practice of medicine when they are 60 or 55,” he said. “Many of my colleagues, my personal friends who have been practicing, right now they are looking for the exit doors. They are trying to figure out how to get out of practicing medicine and I think it is incredibly important for us as a society to step back and ask, why?”
A significant factor is the shift to electronic health records, which has caused doctors to spend much more time looking at screens and feeling more like data entry clerks than health care providers, he said.
“I know that we have lost more than one physician to retirement because of the kinds of burdens that have been placed on a lot of them and that simply ought to be unacceptable to us,” he said. “You think of the intellectual capital that has been lost by this nation because of the kinds of burdens that clinicians have seen.”
That said, “data is absolutely crucial,” Dr. Price said. “Don’t misunderstand me. It is absolutely critical that we have all the data that we can and that we use it in an evidence-based manner so that we can provide better care and better quality of care to patients.”
He challenged the health IT professionals at the meeting to make their products more user friendly.
“We will work on reducing the burdens at the federal level, but we also need clinicians and IT folks on the ground to help make certain that technology implementation is done in a way that it enhances usability and increases efficiency,” Dr. Price said.
He also called for true interoperability, a common goal that has persisted since electronic health records were mandated under the HITECH Act but remains an elusive target.
“This has always been the goal and it just seems so simple,” he said. “Somehow something has happened between the idea of interoperability and now that has made it so much more challenging.”
He placed that fault on current federal regulation around interoperability and pledged to create an environment that reduces regulatory roadblocks and allows the technology sector to innovate and foster the free flow of data.
“From my perspective it seems that what we ought to be doing is deciding the rules of the road,” Dr. Price said. “We are going to drive on the right side. We are going to stop at the red light. This is the language we are going to do. This is what a triangular sign looks like, as opposed to stipulating every single dot... all the way down the line.”
WASHINGTON – Reducing IT burden for doctors and fostering interoperability are two top tech priorities for Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, MD.
“We simply have to do a better job of reducing the burden of health IT on physicians and all health care providers,” Dr. Price said April 27 at Health Datapalooza, an annual conference on health data transparency. “The promise of big data and health information technology is so great and absolutely remarkable but we must not, we cannot continue to get this wrong.”
“Now we are seeing physicians leaving the practice of medicine when they are 60 or 55,” he said. “Many of my colleagues, my personal friends who have been practicing, right now they are looking for the exit doors. They are trying to figure out how to get out of practicing medicine and I think it is incredibly important for us as a society to step back and ask, why?”
A significant factor is the shift to electronic health records, which has caused doctors to spend much more time looking at screens and feeling more like data entry clerks than health care providers, he said.
“I know that we have lost more than one physician to retirement because of the kinds of burdens that have been placed on a lot of them and that simply ought to be unacceptable to us,” he said. “You think of the intellectual capital that has been lost by this nation because of the kinds of burdens that clinicians have seen.”
That said, “data is absolutely crucial,” Dr. Price said. “Don’t misunderstand me. It is absolutely critical that we have all the data that we can and that we use it in an evidence-based manner so that we can provide better care and better quality of care to patients.”
He challenged the health IT professionals at the meeting to make their products more user friendly.
“We will work on reducing the burdens at the federal level, but we also need clinicians and IT folks on the ground to help make certain that technology implementation is done in a way that it enhances usability and increases efficiency,” Dr. Price said.
He also called for true interoperability, a common goal that has persisted since electronic health records were mandated under the HITECH Act but remains an elusive target.
“This has always been the goal and it just seems so simple,” he said. “Somehow something has happened between the idea of interoperability and now that has made it so much more challenging.”
He placed that fault on current federal regulation around interoperability and pledged to create an environment that reduces regulatory roadblocks and allows the technology sector to innovate and foster the free flow of data.
“From my perspective it seems that what we ought to be doing is deciding the rules of the road,” Dr. Price said. “We are going to drive on the right side. We are going to stop at the red light. This is the language we are going to do. This is what a triangular sign looks like, as opposed to stipulating every single dot... all the way down the line.”
AT HEALTH DATAPALOOZA 2017