Surveillance for Distant Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients Who Underwent Contemporary Management: A Report from the Korean Breast Cancer Society Survivor Research Group
Background Current guidelines recommend against the use of routine imaging tests to detect distant metastasis in asymptomatic breast cancer patients. However, recent advancements in effective therapeutics and diagnostic accuracy have raised the need to reassess the clinical efficacy of intensive met...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of surgical oncology 2024-10, Vol.31 (10), p.6774-6785 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Current guidelines recommend against the use of routine imaging tests to detect distant metastasis in asymptomatic breast cancer patients. However, recent advancements in effective therapeutics and diagnostic accuracy have raised the need to reassess the clinical efficacy of intensive metastasis surveillance. We report the results of a multicenter retrospective study to investigate the association between intensive imaging studies and survival outcomes.
Patients and Methods
We retrospectively reviewed the data of 4130 patients who underwent surgery from 11 hospitals in Korea between January 2010 and December 2011. Patients were divided into two groups on the basis of the intensity of metastasis imaging studies during their disease-free period. The types and intervals of the imaging studies were based on each physician’s decisions.
Results
High-intensive screening showed a shorter distant metastasis-free survival [
p
< 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) 1.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29–2.04], especially for patients in whom bone or lung was the first site of metastasis. With a median follow-up period of 110.0 months, the 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rate was 96.5%. The high-intensity screening group showed significantly poorer BCSS compared with the low-intensity screening group (
p
< 0.001, HR 3.13; 95% CI 2.32–4.21). However, both multivariable analysis and propensity score matching analysis showed no significant association between the screening intensity and BCSS.
Conclusions
Frequent imaging studies to detect distant metastasis were associated with earlier detection of distant metastasis, especially for lung and bone metastasis. However, intensive surveillance showed no apparent association with BCSS despite the use of currently available treatments. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1068-9265 1534-4681 1534-4681 |
DOI: | 10.1245/s10434-024-15665-3 |