GTU Research: 21-Year Series of NSM Cases & Find No Cancers

Options

Comments

  • Lunakin
    Lunakin Member Posts: 120
    edited October 2011

    great. Good news for new pts; sad news for those of us who asked about this procedure and were told "It's just not safe" by our BS. Grrrr. 

    So my reaction is half glad and half sad. 

    Hey!  But maybe I'll get that prophy other side taken care of now!

  • Heidihill
    Heidihill Member Posts: 5,476
    edited October 2011

    There could be a selection bias. Only those deemed safe to to have NSM may be getting it.

  • Lunakin
    Lunakin Member Posts: 120
    edited October 2011

    Heidi, good point.

  • beacon800
    beacon800 Member Posts: 922
    edited October 2011

    When I click the link I don't get the story.

    There must be selection bias though, based on the headline of NO cancers.  Usually in a large sample of traditional mx patients, at least some will have a recurrance, though the number will be very few.  That is why prophy mx is considered a 95% (approx) risk reduction but not 100%.

  • LISAMG
    LISAMG Member Posts: 639
    edited October 2011

    Here is the original Georgetown Study for NSM and 21 years with no cancers!

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21738086

    For those unable to access the news release, dated October 27,2011, here it is:

     WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A new study suggests some women needing a lumpectomy or mastectomy to treat their breast cancer have another potential option that is safe and effective, say researchers at Georgetown. They say the procedure known as a nipple sparing mastectomy is also a viable surgical option for women who choose to have their breasts removed because of their increased risk of developing the disease. For both groups of women, the surgery offers a chance for a more natural looking and normal feeling reconstructed breast as compared to other forms of mastectomy.

    Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) involves the removal of the breast tissue while keeping intact the breast skin and nipple areola complex, which includes the nipple and darker pigmented circle of skin that surrounds it. The breast is usually reconstructed immediately.

    A long standing concern with this type of surgery is that cancer cells might be left under the nipple, posing a threat over time. To examine the effectiveness of NSM, surgeons conducted a review of patient records for all women receiving the surgery at Georgetown University Hospital (GUH) between 1989 and 2010 including surgeries to either prevent or treat breast cancer. The results are published in the November issue of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the official medical journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.

    "Our findings were reassuring. Of the 162 surgeries performed, we found no cancer recurrences and no new cancers in those receiving NSM," says Scott Spear, M.D., professor of plastic surgery at Georgetown University Medical Center and chairman of the department of plastic surgery at GUH. "The nipple-sparing technique is not appropriate for every patient depending upon their anatomy and type of breast pathology. Careful selection of the right patient for NSM is an important element of success."

    Some patients who received NSM at Georgetown had early-stage cancer or DCIS, which can become an invasive cancer if not treated properly. In fact, while the majority of women with early cancers typically have a lumpectomy, many women choose to have a mastectomy.

    Georgetown breast cancer surgeon Shawna C. Willey, M.D., says the first priority always is to treat or prevent the cancer. "We need to be able to offer women options that they know will successfully treat or prevent their cancer while at the same time, preserve their quality of life whether it be in their appearance or psychologically. Nipple sparing mastectomy goes a long way toward reaching that goal." Willey is chief of breast cancer surgery at GUH, and she and Spear are members of the Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center.

    One step credited for why cancers didn't develop later is that biopsies were done on the tissue that remained under the nipple area after the NSM. If abnormal cells in this tissue were identified, as it was in four cases reviewed, either the nipple or entire nipple areola complex later were removed.

    A second concern for this kind of surgery is that the nipple areola complex (NAC) might not receive enough blood after the tissue and blood vessels below it are removed causing necrosis or tissue death. Researchers say the records showed three NACs became necrotic and required removal. Four other NACs had partial necrosis requiring surgery though the nipple and majority of the areola was spared.

    "What we've learned from this review is that our established procedures and patient-selection protocol lead to favorable results," confirms Spear. "As more data become available, I think we'll see nipple sparing mastectomy play a larger role, particularly in the prevention setting."

  • LISAMG
    LISAMG Member Posts: 639
    edited October 2011

    FYI- beacon800, there were no bias selection, since 30% of the NSM's were performed for "therapeutic" cancer related reasons. However, 10% NAC's were removed due to DCIS findings, interestingly.

  • PLJ
    PLJ Member Posts: 373
    edited October 2011

    When deciding to nip or not to nip, BS informed me that they can't remove some of the tissue during NSM and must leave it behind, so it does present an increased risk not associated with simple or skin sparing MX. I never want to do this again, if possible, and chose to remove as much breast tissue as I could to prevent a recurrence. I don't know how much confidence I would place in a study conducted on only 162 people. Undecided 

  • LISAMG
    LISAMG Member Posts: 639
    edited October 2011

    PLJ, understandably everyone must decide for themselves, but for risk reduction purposes there is lots of scientific studies/evidence that NSM out weighs the oncological safety needs. Having an additional risk of approx. 2% is low enough for many women. Yes, this is one supportive study, but its among many others that have surfaced in the past several years. Does your BS perform  complex NSM procedures? If u've had a history of BC, NSM may not be an option for consideration either. Best wishes.

  • beacon800
    beacon800 Member Posts: 922
    edited November 2011

    Clearly there is selection bias, as quoted from the article: "Careful selection of the right patient for NSM is an important element of success."

    Considering that even tradional MX is not 100% effective in reducing risk, there is very little likelihood that NSM is 100% effective. 

    However, this is a good study to help reassure women that the technique is valid and not necessarily a worse choice than tradional mx, as far as prevention goes. 

Categories