4.7 Article

A Prospective, Multi-Institutional Study of Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Resection of Malignant Phyllodes Tumors

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 16, 期 8, 页码 2288-2294

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0489-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA023108] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Malignant phyllodes tumors of the breast are unusual neoplasms, with an incidence of approximately 500 cases annually in the United States. Published local recurrence rates after margin-negative breast-conserving resections of borderline malignant and malignant phyllodes tumors are unacceptably high, at 24 and 20%, respectively. It is uncertain whether radiotherapy after resection of phyllodes tumors is beneficial. We prospectively enrolled patients who were treated with a margin-negative breast-conserving resection of borderline malignant or malignant phyllodes tumors to adjuvant radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was local recurrence. Forty-six women were treated at 30 different institutions. The mean patient age was 49 years (range, 18-76 years). Thirty patients (65%) had malignant phyllodes tumors; the rest were borderline malignant. The mean tumor diameter was 3.7 cm (range, .8-11 cm). Eighteen patients had a negative margin on the first excision. The median size of the negative margin was .35 cm (range, <.1-2 cm). Twenty-eight patients underwent a re-excision because of positive margins in the initial resection. Two patients died of metastatic phyllodes tumor. During a median follow-up of 56 months (range, 12-129 months), none of the 46 patients developed a local recurrence (local recurrence rate, 0%; 95% confidence interval, 0-8). Margin-negative resection combined with adjuvant radiotherapy is very effective therapy for local control of borderline and malignant phyllodes tumors. The local recurrence rate with adjuvant radiotherapy was significantly less than that observed in reported patients treated with margin-negative resection alone.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据