Purpose: To assess patterns of locoregional failure (LRF) in lymph node–positive (LN+) breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy (± tamoxifen) and without postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials. Patients and Methods: We examined 5,758 patients enrolled onto the B-15, B-16, B-18, B-22, and B-25 trials. Median follow-up time was 11.1 years. Distribution of pathologic tumor size was ≤ 2 cm, 2.1 to 5 cm, and more than 5 cm in 30%, 52%, and 11% of patients, respectively. Distribution of the number of LN+ was one to three, four to nine, and ≥ 10 in 51%, 32%, and 16% of patients, respectively. Ninety percent of patients received doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. Results: The overall 10-year cumulative incidences of isolated LRF, LRF with or without distant failure (DF), and DF alone as first event were 12.2%, 19.8%, and 43.3%, respectively. Cumulative incidences for LRF as first event with or without DF for patients with one to three, four to nine, and ≥ 10 LN+ were 13.0%, 24.4%, and 31.9%, respectively (P < .0001). For patients with a tumor size of ≤ 2 cm, 2.1 to 5.0 cm, and more than 5.0 cm, these incidences were 14.9%, 21.3%, and 24.6%, respectively (P < .0001). Multivariate analysis showed age, tumor size, premenopausal status, number of LN+, and number of dissected LN as significant predictors for LRF as first event. Conclusion: In patients with large tumors and four or more LN+, LRF as first event remains a significant problem. Although PMRT is currently recommended for patients with four or more LN+, it may also have value in selected patients with one to three LN+. However, in the absence of a randomized trial examining the worth of radiotherapy in this group of patients, the value of PMRT remains unknown.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a negative sequela of breast cancer treatment, and well-established risk factors include axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and regional lymph node radiation (RLNR). BCRL affects approximately 1 in 5 patients treated for breast cancer, and it has a significant negative impact on patients’ quality of life after breast cancer treatment, serving as a reminder of previous illness. This paper is a comprehensive review of the current evidence regarding BCRL risk factors, precautionary guidelines, prospective screening, early intervention, and surgical and non-surgical treatment techniques. Through establishing evidence-based BCRL risk factors, researchers and clinicians are better able to prevent, anticipate, and provide early intervention for BCRL. Clinicians can identify patients at high risk and utilize prospective screening programs, which incorporate objective measurements, patient reported outcome measures (PROM), and clinical examination, thereby creating opportunities for early intervention and, accordingly, improving BCRL prognosis. Innovative surgical techniques that minimize and/or prophylactically correct lymphatic disruption, such as axillary reverse mapping (ARM) and lymphatic-venous anastomoses (LVAs), are promising avenues for reducing BCRL incidence. Nonetheless, for those patients with BCRL who remain unresponsive to conservative methods like complete decongestive therapy (CDT), surgical treatment options aiming to reduce limb volume or restore lymphatic flow may prove to be palliative or corrective. It is only through a strong team-based approach that such a continuum of care can exist, and a multidisciplinary approach to BCRL screening, intervention, and research is therefore strongly encouraged.

The surgical margin status after breast-conserving surgery is considered the strongest predictor for local failure. The purpose of this study is to survey how radiation oncologists in North America (NA) and Europe define negative or close surgical margins after lumpectomy and to determine the factors that govern the decision to recommend reexcision based on the margins status. A questionnaire was sent to active members of the European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology who had completed training in radiation oncology. Respondents were asked whether they would characterize margins to be negative or close for a variety of scenarios. A second survey was sent to 500 randomly selected radiation oncologists in the United States to assess when a reexcision would be recommended based on surgical margins. A total of 702 responses were obtained from NA and 431 from Europe to the initial survey. An additional 130 responses were obtained from the United States to the second survey regarding reexcision recommendations. Nearly 46% of the North American respondents required only that there be “no tumor cells on the ink” to deem a margin negative (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project definition). A total of 7.4% and 21.8% required no tumor cells seen at <1 mm and <2 mm, respectively. The corresponding numbers from European respondents were 27.6%, 11.2%, and 8.8%, respectively (P 5 mm) between tumor cells and the inked edges before considering a margin to be negative. This study revealed significant variation in the perception of negative and close margins among radiation oncologists in NA and Europe. Given these findings, a universal definition of negative margins and consistent recommendations for reexcision are needed.

Purpose: The goal of this study was to investigate the association between blood draws, injections, blood pressure readings, trauma, cellulitis in the at-risk arm, and air travel and increases in arm volume in a cohort of patients treated for breast cancer and screened for lymphedema. Patients and Methods: Between 2005 and 2014, patients undergoing treatment of breast cancer at our institution were screened prospectively for lymphedema. Bilateral arm volume measurements were performed preoperatively and postoperatively using a Perometer. At each measurement, patients reported the number of blood draws, injections, blood pressure measurements, trauma to the at-risk arm(s), and number of flights taken since their last measurement. Arm volume was quantified using the relative volume change and weight-adjusted change formulas. Linear random effects models were used to assess the association between relative arm volume (as a continuous variable) and nontreatment risk factors, as well as clinical characteristics. Results: In 3,041 measurements, there was no significant association between relative volume change or weight-adjusted change increase and undergoing one or more blood draws (P = .62), injections (P = .77), number of flights (one or two [P = .77] and three or more [P = .91] v none), or duration of flights (1 to 12 hours [P = .43] and 12 hours or more [P = .54] v none). By multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with increases in arm volume included body mass index ≥ 25 (P = .0236), axillary lymph node dissection (P < .001), regional lymph node irradiation (P = .0364), and cellulitis (P < .001). Conclusion: This study suggests that although cellulitis increases risk of lymphedema, ipsilateral blood draws, injections, blood pressure readings, and air travel may not be associated with arm volume increases. The results may help to educate clinicians and patients on posttreatment risk, prevention, and management of lymphedema.