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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) 2023-04, Vol.35 (4), p.255-261
Hauptverfasser: 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.
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