IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0118161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Implant vs. Tissue Reconstruction on Cancer Specific Survival Varies by Axillary Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer Patients

Author

Listed:
  • Qian Ouyang
  • Liling Zhu
  • Kai Chen
  • Fengxi Su

Abstract

Background: To compare the breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between patients who underwent tissue or implant reconstruction after mastectomy. Method: We used the database from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries and compared the BCSS between patients who underwent tissue and implant reconstruction after mastectomy. Cox-regression models were fitted, adjusting for known clinicopathological features. The interaction between the reconstruction types (tissue/implant) and nodal status (N-stage) was investigated. Results: A total of 6,426 patients with a median age of 50 years were included. With a median follow up of 100 months, the 10-year cumulative BCSS and non-BCSS were 85.1% and 95.4%, respectively. Patients who underwent tissue reconstruction had tumors with a higher T-stage, N-stage, and tumor grade and tended to be ER/PR-negative compared to those who received implant reconstruction. In univariate analysis, implant-reconstruction was associated with a 2.4% increase (P = 0.003) in the BCSS compared with tissue-reconstruction. After adjusting for significant risk factors of the BCSS (suggested by univariate analysis) and stratifying based on the N-stage, there was only an association between the reconstruction type and the BCSS for the N2-3 patients (10-year BCSS of implant vs. tissue-reconstruction: 68.7% and 59.0%, P = 0.004). The 10-year BCSS rates of implant vs. tissue-reconstruction were 91.7% and 91.8% in N0 patients (P>0.05) and 84.5% and 84.4% in N1 patients (P>0.05), respectively. Conclusions: The implant (vs. tissue) reconstruction after mastectomy was associated with an improved BCSS in N2-3 breast cancer patients but not in N0-1 patients. A well-designed, prospective study is needed to further confirm these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Qian Ouyang & Liling Zhu & Kai Chen & Fengxi Su, 2015. "Effect of Implant vs. Tissue Reconstruction on Cancer Specific Survival Varies by Axillary Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-10, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0118161
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118161
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118161&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0118161?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0118161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.