Assessment of Practice Patterns Following Publication of the SSO–ASTRO Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Therapy in Stage I and II Invasive Breast Cancer

Sarah M. DeSnyder, Kelly K. Hunt, Benjamin D. Smith, Meena S. Moran, Vicki Klimberg, Anthony Lucci

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The recently published SSO–ASTRO consensus guideline on margins concluded “no ink on tumor” is the standard for an adequate margin. This study was conducted to determine how this guideline is aligned with current clinical practice. Methods: A survey was sent to 3057 members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Questions assessed respondents’ clinical practice type and duration, familiarity with the guideline, and preferences for margin re-excision. Results: Of those surveyed, 777 (25 %) responded. Most (92 %) indicated familiarity with the guideline. Of these respondents, the majority (n = 678, or 94.7 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor extended to the inked margin. Very few (n = 9, or 1.3 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor was within 2 mm of the margin. Over 12 % (n = 90) would re-excise all or most of the time for a triple-negative tumor within 1 mm of the margin, whereas 353 (49.6 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when imaging and pathology were discordant, and tumor was within 1 mm of multiple margins. Finally, 330 (45.8 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when multiple foci of ductal carcinoma in situ extended to within 1 mm of multiple inked margins. Conclusions: Surgeons are in agreement to re-excise margins when tumor touches ink and generally not to perform re-excisions when tumor is close to (but not touching) the inked margin. For more complex scenarios, surgeons are utilizing their individual clinical judgment to determine the need for re-excision.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3250-3256
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
Volume22
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 29 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Publications
Consensus
Breast
Guidelines
Breast Neoplasms
Neoplasms
Ink
Therapeutics
Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating
Touch
Practice (Psychology)
Pathology
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Assessment of Practice Patterns Following Publication of the SSO–ASTRO Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Therapy in Stage I and II Invasive Breast Cancer. / DeSnyder, Sarah M.; Hunt, Kelly K.; Smith, Benjamin D.; Moran, Meena S.; Klimberg, Vicki; Lucci, Anthony.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 22, No. 10, 29.10.2015, p. 3250-3256.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{481e13d11ee14cd0b56596a529e248d0,
title = "Assessment of Practice Patterns Following Publication of the SSO–ASTRO Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Therapy in Stage I and II Invasive Breast Cancer",
abstract = "Background: The recently published SSO–ASTRO consensus guideline on margins concluded “no ink on tumor” is the standard for an adequate margin. This study was conducted to determine how this guideline is aligned with current clinical practice. Methods: A survey was sent to 3057 members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Questions assessed respondents’ clinical practice type and duration, familiarity with the guideline, and preferences for margin re-excision. Results: Of those surveyed, 777 (25 {\%}) responded. Most (92 {\%}) indicated familiarity with the guideline. Of these respondents, the majority (n = 678, or 94.7 {\%}) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor extended to the inked margin. Very few (n = 9, or 1.3 {\%}) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor was within 2 mm of the margin. Over 12 {\%} (n = 90) would re-excise all or most of the time for a triple-negative tumor within 1 mm of the margin, whereas 353 (49.6 {\%}) would re-excise all or most of the time when imaging and pathology were discordant, and tumor was within 1 mm of multiple margins. Finally, 330 (45.8 {\%}) would re-excise all or most of the time when multiple foci of ductal carcinoma in situ extended to within 1 mm of multiple inked margins. Conclusions: Surgeons are in agreement to re-excise margins when tumor touches ink and generally not to perform re-excisions when tumor is close to (but not touching) the inked margin. For more complex scenarios, surgeons are utilizing their individual clinical judgment to determine the need for re-excision.",
author = "DeSnyder, {Sarah M.} and Hunt, {Kelly K.} and Smith, {Benjamin D.} and Moran, {Meena S.} and Vicki Klimberg and Anthony Lucci",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "29",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-015-4666-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "3250--3256",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of Practice Patterns Following Publication of the SSO–ASTRO Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Therapy in Stage I and II Invasive Breast Cancer

AU - DeSnyder, Sarah M.

AU - Hunt, Kelly K.

AU - Smith, Benjamin D.

AU - Moran, Meena S.

AU - Klimberg, Vicki

AU - Lucci, Anthony

PY - 2015/10/29

Y1 - 2015/10/29

N2 - Background: The recently published SSO–ASTRO consensus guideline on margins concluded “no ink on tumor” is the standard for an adequate margin. This study was conducted to determine how this guideline is aligned with current clinical practice. Methods: A survey was sent to 3057 members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Questions assessed respondents’ clinical practice type and duration, familiarity with the guideline, and preferences for margin re-excision. Results: Of those surveyed, 777 (25 %) responded. Most (92 %) indicated familiarity with the guideline. Of these respondents, the majority (n = 678, or 94.7 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor extended to the inked margin. Very few (n = 9, or 1.3 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor was within 2 mm of the margin. Over 12 % (n = 90) would re-excise all or most of the time for a triple-negative tumor within 1 mm of the margin, whereas 353 (49.6 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when imaging and pathology were discordant, and tumor was within 1 mm of multiple margins. Finally, 330 (45.8 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when multiple foci of ductal carcinoma in situ extended to within 1 mm of multiple inked margins. Conclusions: Surgeons are in agreement to re-excise margins when tumor touches ink and generally not to perform re-excisions when tumor is close to (but not touching) the inked margin. For more complex scenarios, surgeons are utilizing their individual clinical judgment to determine the need for re-excision.

AB - Background: The recently published SSO–ASTRO consensus guideline on margins concluded “no ink on tumor” is the standard for an adequate margin. This study was conducted to determine how this guideline is aligned with current clinical practice. Methods: A survey was sent to 3057 members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Questions assessed respondents’ clinical practice type and duration, familiarity with the guideline, and preferences for margin re-excision. Results: Of those surveyed, 777 (25 %) responded. Most (92 %) indicated familiarity with the guideline. Of these respondents, the majority (n = 678, or 94.7 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor extended to the inked margin. Very few (n = 9, or 1.3 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when tumor was within 2 mm of the margin. Over 12 % (n = 90) would re-excise all or most of the time for a triple-negative tumor within 1 mm of the margin, whereas 353 (49.6 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when imaging and pathology were discordant, and tumor was within 1 mm of multiple margins. Finally, 330 (45.8 %) would re-excise all or most of the time when multiple foci of ductal carcinoma in situ extended to within 1 mm of multiple inked margins. Conclusions: Surgeons are in agreement to re-excise margins when tumor touches ink and generally not to perform re-excisions when tumor is close to (but not touching) the inked margin. For more complex scenarios, surgeons are utilizing their individual clinical judgment to determine the need for re-excision.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940449726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940449726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-015-4666-1

DO - 10.1245/s10434-015-4666-1

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 3250

EP - 3256

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

IS - 10

ER -