Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS

Carla S. Fisher, Vicki Klimberg, Seema Khan, Feng Gao, Julie A. Margenthaler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: We previously introduced the concept of margin index as a method for prediction of residual disease after attempted breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We sought to apply the margin index to patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to determine its reliability in predicting residual disease. Methods: We identified all patients with DCIS who were treated with BCT from 2004 to 2010. Margin index was calculated as follows: margin index = closest margin (mm)/tumor size (mm) ×100. A receiver operating curve was created using the derived margin index and the presence or absence of residual disease in the re-excision specimen. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various margin indices to identify the optimum margin index. Results: Of 380 patients undergoing attempted BCT, 109 (29%) underwent re-excision. Of 109 patients undergoing re-excision, 46 (42%) had positive margins and were excluded from the study, 15 (14%) were excluded due to inability to determine the size of DCIS on pathology reports, and 48 (44%) met study criteria and were included in the analysis. Of 48 patients undergoing re-excision, 19 (40%) had residual disease. The receiver operating curve c index was 0.65. However, there was no optimum margin index that reliably predicted the presence or absence of residual disease. Conclusions: Margin index is not a reliable method for prediction of residual disease after attempted BCT with close margins in patients with DCIS only. This may be a reflection of the complexities in accurately determining DCIS size and margin status in pathologic specimens.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3155-3159
Number of pages5
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
Volume18
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating
Segmental Mastectomy
Breast
Therapeutics
Pathology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS. / Fisher, Carla S.; Klimberg, Vicki; Khan, Seema; Gao, Feng; Margenthaler, Julie A.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 18, No. 11, 10.2011, p. 3155-3159.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fisher, Carla S. ; Klimberg, Vicki ; Khan, Seema ; Gao, Feng ; Margenthaler, Julie A. / Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS. In: Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2011 ; Vol. 18, No. 11. pp. 3155-3159.
@article{5a09942e35dd479da04ebd9c56b6b5f9,
title = "Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS",
abstract = "Objective: We previously introduced the concept of margin index as a method for prediction of residual disease after attempted breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We sought to apply the margin index to patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to determine its reliability in predicting residual disease. Methods: We identified all patients with DCIS who were treated with BCT from 2004 to 2010. Margin index was calculated as follows: margin index = closest margin (mm)/tumor size (mm) ×100. A receiver operating curve was created using the derived margin index and the presence or absence of residual disease in the re-excision specimen. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various margin indices to identify the optimum margin index. Results: Of 380 patients undergoing attempted BCT, 109 (29{\%}) underwent re-excision. Of 109 patients undergoing re-excision, 46 (42{\%}) had positive margins and were excluded from the study, 15 (14{\%}) were excluded due to inability to determine the size of DCIS on pathology reports, and 48 (44{\%}) met study criteria and were included in the analysis. Of 48 patients undergoing re-excision, 19 (40{\%}) had residual disease. The receiver operating curve c index was 0.65. However, there was no optimum margin index that reliably predicted the presence or absence of residual disease. Conclusions: Margin index is not a reliable method for prediction of residual disease after attempted BCT with close margins in patients with DCIS only. This may be a reflection of the complexities in accurately determining DCIS size and margin status in pathologic specimens.",
author = "Fisher, {Carla S.} and Vicki Klimberg and Seema Khan and Feng Gao and Margenthaler, {Julie A.}",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-011-1918-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "3155--3159",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS

AU - Fisher, Carla S.

AU - Klimberg, Vicki

AU - Khan, Seema

AU - Gao, Feng

AU - Margenthaler, Julie A.

PY - 2011/10

Y1 - 2011/10

N2 - Objective: We previously introduced the concept of margin index as a method for prediction of residual disease after attempted breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We sought to apply the margin index to patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to determine its reliability in predicting residual disease. Methods: We identified all patients with DCIS who were treated with BCT from 2004 to 2010. Margin index was calculated as follows: margin index = closest margin (mm)/tumor size (mm) ×100. A receiver operating curve was created using the derived margin index and the presence or absence of residual disease in the re-excision specimen. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various margin indices to identify the optimum margin index. Results: Of 380 patients undergoing attempted BCT, 109 (29%) underwent re-excision. Of 109 patients undergoing re-excision, 46 (42%) had positive margins and were excluded from the study, 15 (14%) were excluded due to inability to determine the size of DCIS on pathology reports, and 48 (44%) met study criteria and were included in the analysis. Of 48 patients undergoing re-excision, 19 (40%) had residual disease. The receiver operating curve c index was 0.65. However, there was no optimum margin index that reliably predicted the presence or absence of residual disease. Conclusions: Margin index is not a reliable method for prediction of residual disease after attempted BCT with close margins in patients with DCIS only. This may be a reflection of the complexities in accurately determining DCIS size and margin status in pathologic specimens.

AB - Objective: We previously introduced the concept of margin index as a method for prediction of residual disease after attempted breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We sought to apply the margin index to patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to determine its reliability in predicting residual disease. Methods: We identified all patients with DCIS who were treated with BCT from 2004 to 2010. Margin index was calculated as follows: margin index = closest margin (mm)/tumor size (mm) ×100. A receiver operating curve was created using the derived margin index and the presence or absence of residual disease in the re-excision specimen. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various margin indices to identify the optimum margin index. Results: Of 380 patients undergoing attempted BCT, 109 (29%) underwent re-excision. Of 109 patients undergoing re-excision, 46 (42%) had positive margins and were excluded from the study, 15 (14%) were excluded due to inability to determine the size of DCIS on pathology reports, and 48 (44%) met study criteria and were included in the analysis. Of 48 patients undergoing re-excision, 19 (40%) had residual disease. The receiver operating curve c index was 0.65. However, there was no optimum margin index that reliably predicted the presence or absence of residual disease. Conclusions: Margin index is not a reliable method for prediction of residual disease after attempted BCT with close margins in patients with DCIS only. This may be a reflection of the complexities in accurately determining DCIS size and margin status in pathologic specimens.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053637798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053637798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-011-1918-6

DO - 10.1245/s10434-011-1918-6

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 3155

EP - 3159

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

IS - 11

ER -