Objective:
To evaluate the association between margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
Approach:
- Study Design: Ancillary analysis of prospectively collected margin data from the phase 3 NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-35 trial.
- Patient Population: 3,104 postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive DCIS and tumor-free margins enrolled from January 2003 to June 2006.
- Margin Analysis: Evaluated IBTR using protocol-defined margin groups of <1 mm vs ≥1 mm and guideline-based groups of <2 mm vs ≥2 mm.
- Statistical Methods: Calculated 10-year cumulative incidence while accounting for competing risks and adjusted for age, endocrine therapy assignment, and tumor size.
Key Findings:
- 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was 5.6% for margins <1 mm and 4.0% for margins ≥1 mm (unadjusted difference significant).
- In the 2-mm analysis, IBTR was 5.3% for margins <2 mm and 3.8% for margins ≥2 mm (unadjusted difference significant).
- After adjustment, margin width was not statistically significantly associated with IBTR at either threshold.
- Tumor size was associated with recurrence; tumors ≥1 cm had approximately twice the adjusted hazard of IBTR compared to smaller tumors.
- 65% of patients completed 5 years of endocrine therapy, with no difference in adherence by margin group.
Interpretation:
Limitations:
- Margin width was not randomized and no intervention based on margin width was included.
- Margin status assessed by local pathologists without real-time central review.
- Excluded patients included those with positive margins and missing pathology forms.
- Tumor size was estimated in a significant portion of patients.
- Analysis did not address premenopausal patients or hormone receptor-negative DCIS.
Conclusion:
Sources:
This content is an AI-generated, fully rewritten summary based on a published scholarly article. It does not reproduce the original text and is not a substitute for the original publication. Readers are encouraged to consult the source for full context, data, and methodology.