Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis
The current gold standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgical resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the increased detection and radical treatment of DCIS did not result in a declined incidence of invasive breast cancers, leading to the debate if DCIS has...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) 2023-04, Vol.35 (4), p.255-261 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 261 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 255 |
container_title | Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) |
container_volume | 35 |
creator | Co, M. Cheng, K.C.K. Yeung, Y.H. Lau, K.C. Qian, Z. Wong, C.M. Wong, B.Y. Sin, E.L.K. Wong, H.Y.S. Ma, C.H. |
description | The current gold standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgical resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the increased detection and radical treatment of DCIS did not result in a declined incidence of invasive breast cancers, leading to the debate if DCIS has been overtreated. While ongoing randomised controlled trials on active surveillance of DCIS are still in progress, this systematic review aims to evaluate the best evidence on conservative treatment for DCIS from the literature.
This systematic review was conducted in line with the PRISMA statement. We included all relevant studies published up to June 2022 for analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of conservative treatment for DCIS.
Three studies, with a total of 34 007 women with low-risk DCIS, were included in the analysis. Active and conservative treatments both resulted in excellent 10-year BCSS, with no statistically insignificant difference (98.6% versus 96.0%, 31 478 women). One study comparing 5-year BCSS of active and conservative treatments only in subjects aged over 80 years also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (98.2% versus 96.0%, 2529 women). One study measuring 5- and 10-year overall survival between the treatment groups also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (5-year: 96.2% versus 92.4%; 10-year: 85.6% versus 86.7%, 31 106 women).
BCSS between active and conservative treatment for women with low-risk DCIS is both excellent and comparable, suggesting that conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival.
•Conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This systematic review of retrospective studies conclude that conservative treatment is a feasible alternative without compromising survival outcomes in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This information may not be generalised any further to other subtypes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.019 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775626317</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0936655523000250</els_id><sourcerecordid>2775626317</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-cb3d4c10bb3c69abca7653b1cebe237ed82e093e7617646b4e4357edaf5636313</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1q3DAYRUVpaSZJX6CLomU3nujHluyQzeA2SWEgJT9rIcufQVNbSiR5wvTpo2GSLAMfCMS5F-5B6DslS0qoONsszejdkhHGl4Tmaz6hBS05L1hT089oQRouClFV1RE6jnFDCGF13XxFR1xIUdayWaD_7WidNXrEN3MyfoKI_YBb7yKErU52C_g-gE4TuIQHH_DaPxe3Nv7Dv2aTcqzVwVjnJ42tw3c2zed4he92McGU4wbfwtbCM9aux3-9H6HHK6fHXbTxFH0Z9Bjh2-t7gh4uf9-318X65upPu1oXhhOZCtPxvjSUdB03otGd0VJUvKMGOmBcQl8zyENBCppHia6Eklf5Ww-V4IJTfoJ-Hnofg3-aISY12WhgHLUDP0fFpKwEy6TMKDugJvgYAwzqMdhJh52iRO2dq43aO1d754rQfE0O_Xjtn7sJ-vfIm-QMXBwAyCuzjaCiseAM9DaASar39qP-F6Sdk-g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2775626317</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Co, M. ; Cheng, K.C.K. ; Yeung, Y.H. ; Lau, K.C. ; Qian, Z. ; Wong, C.M. ; Wong, B.Y. ; Sin, E.L.K. ; Wong, H.Y.S. ; Ma, C.H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Co, M. ; Cheng, K.C.K. ; Yeung, Y.H. ; Lau, K.C. ; Qian, Z. ; Wong, C.M. ; Wong, B.Y. ; Sin, E.L.K. ; Wong, H.Y.S. ; Ma, C.H.</creatorcontrib><description>The current gold standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgical resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the increased detection and radical treatment of DCIS did not result in a declined incidence of invasive breast cancers, leading to the debate if DCIS has been overtreated. While ongoing randomised controlled trials on active surveillance of DCIS are still in progress, this systematic review aims to evaluate the best evidence on conservative treatment for DCIS from the literature.
This systematic review was conducted in line with the PRISMA statement. We included all relevant studies published up to June 2022 for analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of conservative treatment for DCIS.
Three studies, with a total of 34 007 women with low-risk DCIS, were included in the analysis. Active and conservative treatments both resulted in excellent 10-year BCSS, with no statistically insignificant difference (98.6% versus 96.0%, 31 478 women). One study comparing 5-year BCSS of active and conservative treatments only in subjects aged over 80 years also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (98.2% versus 96.0%, 2529 women). One study measuring 5- and 10-year overall survival between the treatment groups also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (5-year: 96.2% versus 92.4%; 10-year: 85.6% versus 86.7%, 31 106 women).
BCSS between active and conservative treatment for women with low-risk DCIS is both excellent and comparable, suggesting that conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival.
•Conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This systematic review of retrospective studies conclude that conservative treatment is a feasible alternative without compromising survival outcomes in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This information may not be generalised any further to other subtypes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0936-6555</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1433-2981</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.019</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36764879</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged, 80 and over ; Breast - pathology ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - pathology ; Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - surgery ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - pathology ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - therapy ; Conservative Treatment ; ductal carcinoma in situ ; Female ; Humans ; overtreatment</subject><ispartof>Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2023-04, Vol.35 (4), p.255-261</ispartof><rights>2023</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-cb3d4c10bb3c69abca7653b1cebe237ed82e093e7617646b4e4357edaf5636313</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.019$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27928,27929,45999</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36764879$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Co, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, K.C.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yeung, Y.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lau, K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Z.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, C.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, B.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sin, E.L.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, H.Y.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, C.H.</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis</title><title>Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))</title><addtitle>Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)</addtitle><description>The current gold standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgical resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the increased detection and radical treatment of DCIS did not result in a declined incidence of invasive breast cancers, leading to the debate if DCIS has been overtreated. While ongoing randomised controlled trials on active surveillance of DCIS are still in progress, this systematic review aims to evaluate the best evidence on conservative treatment for DCIS from the literature.
This systematic review was conducted in line with the PRISMA statement. We included all relevant studies published up to June 2022 for analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of conservative treatment for DCIS.
Three studies, with a total of 34 007 women with low-risk DCIS, were included in the analysis. Active and conservative treatments both resulted in excellent 10-year BCSS, with no statistically insignificant difference (98.6% versus 96.0%, 31 478 women). One study comparing 5-year BCSS of active and conservative treatments only in subjects aged over 80 years also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (98.2% versus 96.0%, 2529 women). One study measuring 5- and 10-year overall survival between the treatment groups also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (5-year: 96.2% versus 92.4%; 10-year: 85.6% versus 86.7%, 31 106 women).
BCSS between active and conservative treatment for women with low-risk DCIS is both excellent and comparable, suggesting that conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival.
•Conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This systematic review of retrospective studies conclude that conservative treatment is a feasible alternative without compromising survival outcomes in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This information may not be generalised any further to other subtypes.</description><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Breast - pathology</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - surgery</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - therapy</subject><subject>Conservative Treatment</subject><subject>ductal carcinoma in situ</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>overtreatment</subject><issn>0936-6555</issn><issn>1433-2981</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1q3DAYRUVpaSZJX6CLomU3nujHluyQzeA2SWEgJT9rIcufQVNbSiR5wvTpo2GSLAMfCMS5F-5B6DslS0qoONsszejdkhHGl4Tmaz6hBS05L1hT089oQRouClFV1RE6jnFDCGF13XxFR1xIUdayWaD_7WidNXrEN3MyfoKI_YBb7yKErU52C_g-gE4TuIQHH_DaPxe3Nv7Dv2aTcqzVwVjnJ42tw3c2zed4he92McGU4wbfwtbCM9aux3-9H6HHK6fHXbTxFH0Z9Bjh2-t7gh4uf9-318X65upPu1oXhhOZCtPxvjSUdB03otGd0VJUvKMGOmBcQl8zyENBCppHia6Eklf5Ww-V4IJTfoJ-Hnofg3-aISY12WhgHLUDP0fFpKwEy6TMKDugJvgYAwzqMdhJh52iRO2dq43aO1d754rQfE0O_Xjtn7sJ-vfIm-QMXBwAyCuzjaCiseAM9DaASar39qP-F6Sdk-g</recordid><startdate>202304</startdate><enddate>202304</enddate><creator>Co, M.</creator><creator>Cheng, K.C.K.</creator><creator>Yeung, Y.H.</creator><creator>Lau, K.C.</creator><creator>Qian, Z.</creator><creator>Wong, C.M.</creator><creator>Wong, B.Y.</creator><creator>Sin, E.L.K.</creator><creator>Wong, H.Y.S.</creator><creator>Ma, C.H.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202304</creationdate><title>Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis</title><author>Co, M. ; Cheng, K.C.K. ; Yeung, Y.H. ; Lau, K.C. ; Qian, Z. ; Wong, C.M. ; Wong, B.Y. ; Sin, E.L.K. ; Wong, H.Y.S. ; Ma, C.H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-cb3d4c10bb3c69abca7653b1cebe237ed82e093e7617646b4e4357edaf5636313</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Breast - pathology</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - surgery</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - therapy</topic><topic>Conservative Treatment</topic><topic>ductal carcinoma in situ</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>overtreatment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Co, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, K.C.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yeung, Y.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lau, K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Z.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, C.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, B.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sin, E.L.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, H.Y.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, C.H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Co, M.</au><au>Cheng, K.C.K.</au><au>Yeung, Y.H.</au><au>Lau, K.C.</au><au>Qian, Z.</au><au>Wong, C.M.</au><au>Wong, B.Y.</au><au>Sin, E.L.K.</au><au>Wong, H.Y.S.</au><au>Ma, C.H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)</addtitle><date>2023-04</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>255</spage><epage>261</epage><pages>255-261</pages><issn>0936-6555</issn><eissn>1433-2981</eissn><abstract>The current gold standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgical resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the increased detection and radical treatment of DCIS did not result in a declined incidence of invasive breast cancers, leading to the debate if DCIS has been overtreated. While ongoing randomised controlled trials on active surveillance of DCIS are still in progress, this systematic review aims to evaluate the best evidence on conservative treatment for DCIS from the literature.
This systematic review was conducted in line with the PRISMA statement. We included all relevant studies published up to June 2022 for analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of conservative treatment for DCIS.
Three studies, with a total of 34 007 women with low-risk DCIS, were included in the analysis. Active and conservative treatments both resulted in excellent 10-year BCSS, with no statistically insignificant difference (98.6% versus 96.0%, 31 478 women). One study comparing 5-year BCSS of active and conservative treatments only in subjects aged over 80 years also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (98.2% versus 96.0%, 2529 women). One study measuring 5- and 10-year overall survival between the treatment groups also reported [AQ1]an insignificant difference (5-year: 96.2% versus 92.4%; 10-year: 85.6% versus 86.7%, 31 106 women).
BCSS between active and conservative treatment for women with low-risk DCIS is both excellent and comparable, suggesting that conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival.
•Conservative treatment is a possible alternative without compromising survival in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This systematic review of retrospective studies conclude that conservative treatment is a feasible alternative without compromising survival outcomes in selected patients with low-risk DCIS.•This information may not be generalised any further to other subtypes.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>36764879</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.019</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0936-6555 |
ispartof | Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2023-04, Vol.35 (4), p.255-261 |
issn | 0936-6555 1433-2981 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775626317 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | Aged, 80 and over Breast - pathology Breast Neoplasms - pathology Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - pathology Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - surgery Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - pathology Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating - therapy Conservative Treatment ductal carcinoma in situ Female Humans overtreatment |
title | Clinical Outcomes of Conservative Treatment for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T21%3A49%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20Outcomes%20of%20Conservative%20Treatment%20for%20Low-Risk%20Ductal%20Carcinoma%20in%20Situ:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Pooled%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oncology%20(Royal%20College%20of%20Radiologists%20(Great%20Britain))&rft.au=Co,%20M.&rft.date=2023-04&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=255&rft.epage=261&rft.pages=255-261&rft.issn=0936-6555&rft.eissn=1433-2981&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2775626317%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2775626317&rft_id=info:pmid/36764879&rft_els_id=S0936655523000250&rfr_iscdi=true |