mobile-logo

Research
Publish Date : 2017-03-07
International Journal of Cancer and Oncology

Local and Locoregional Disease Free Survival in Patients Receiving NSM or SSM Compared with Conventional Mastectomy

Zachary Hopkins
Zachary H. Hopkins1, Jonathan Frandsen2, Katherine E. Poruk3, Jayant Agarwal4, Matthew Poppe2*
Article information 

Affiliation

  • 1University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
  • 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Hospital, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
  • 3Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • 4Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

Corresponding Author

Matthew Poppe, MD, University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, 1950 Circle of Hope Room 1570, Salt Lake City UT 84112, USA, Tel: 801-581-2396/ Fax: 801-585-3502; E-mail: Matthew.poppe@hci.utah.edu

Citation

Hopkins, Z.H., et al. Local and Locoregional Disease Free Survival in Patients Receiving NSM or SSM Compared with Conventional Mastectomy. (2017) Int J Cancer Oncol 4(2): 1-6.

Copy rights

© 2017 Hopkins, Z.H. This is an Open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Keywords

Abstract

 

Introduction: In this study we evaluated local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) for women at our institution who received NSM and SSM as compared to patients receiving traditional non-skin or nipple sparing mastectomies (TM).
Methods: From 2005 to 2014, women with T1-2, N0, M0 disease who did not receive radiation were included in the analysis. Patients were separated into one of three cohorts based on mastectomy type. Kaplan Meier survival estimates were used to estimate LRFS and LRRFS. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to calculate risk factors contributing to these outcomes.
Results: At eight years, LRFS was 95.9% for TM, 100.0% for NSM and 96.8% for SSM. Log-rank analysis showed no significant difference in LRFS between the 3 groups (p = 0.67). At eight years LRRFS was 94.3% for TM, 92.6% for NSM and91.4% for SSM with no significant differences seen among these groups (p = 0.51). In univariate analyses, only T-stage was a significant risk factor for local recurrence (HR 3.84, 95% CI 1.17 - 12.6, p = 0.03).
Conclusions: For this patient population, SSM and NSM appear to be safe and equivalent to TM at 8 years of follow up.