Background The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown.

In order to overcome the cross-cultural semantic barriers related to the literal translation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) in non-English speaking areas, an Italian Pain Questionnaire (IPQ) has been developed, based on the 3 factorial structures proposed by Melzack and Torgerson: sensory, affective and evaluative. A group of 30 normal subjects (15 doctors and 15 university students) was used to define 5 anchor words of the intensity verbal scale by means of a visual analogue scale, and a 5-point Present Pain Intensity (PPI) verbal scale was derived. For the semantic key, a first group of 80 subjects (30 university students and patients, respectively, and 20 doctors) was asked to sort out appropriate pain descriptors from 203 pain-related words with the help of clinical literature and Italian dictionaries. Subsequently, a second group of 80 subjects (of identical structural composition) was asked to allocate the 56 words previously chosen on the basis of word frequencies (at least 45%) to the most appropriate category in the Italianized MPQ. Testees were then asked to assign an intensity value to each word, using a VAS scale. The final pain vocabulary was formed from those words, which reflected a statistically significant intensity change (P less than 0.05) within each group. The IPQ comprises 42 pain descriptors, distributed into 3 major classes (sensory, affective and evaluative) and 16 subclasses. It represents the most parsimonious, meaningful and idiomatic set of Italian pain descriptors, providing quantitative information that can be treated statistically, yet preserving a close structural parallel with the MPQ.

In the UK, guidewires have traditionally been used for localization of non-palpable breast lesions in patients undergoing breast conservation surgery (BCS). Radioactive seed localization (RSL) using Iodine-125 seeds is an alternative localization method and involves inserting a titanium capsule, containing radioactive Iodine-125, into the breast lesion. We aim to demonstrate feasibility of RSL compared with guidewire-localization (GWL) for BCS in the UK. Methods: Data were collected on 100 patients with non-palpable unifocal invasive carcinoma of the breast undergoing GWL WLE prior to the introduction of RSL and the first 100 patients treated with RSL WLE. Statistical comparisons were made using Χ 2-squared analysis or unpaired two-sample t-test. Significance was determined to be at p ≤ 0.05. Results: Mean total tumour size was 19.44 mm (range: 5-55) in the GWL group and 18.61 mm (range: 3.8-59) in the RSL group (p = 0.548), while mean total specimen excision weight was significantly lower in the RSL group; 31.55 g (range: 4.5-112) vs 37.42 g (range: 7.8-157.1) (p = 0.018). Although 15 patients had inadequate surgical resection margins in the GWL group compared the 13 in the RSL group (15 vs 13%, respectively, p = 0.684), 10 of the patients in the GWL group had invasive carcinoma present resulting in at least one positive margin compared with only 3 patients in the RSL group (10 vs 3%, respectively, p = 0.045). Conclusion: In this study, RSL is shown to be noninferior to the use of GWL for non-palpable carcinoma in patients undergoing BCS and we suggest that it could be introduced successfully in other breast units. Advances in knowledge: Here we have demonstrated the use of RSL localization results in significant lower weight resection specimens of breast carcinoma when compared with a matched group using GWL, without any significant differences in oncological outcome between the groups.

The clinical significance of pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) is a subject of controversy. As a consequence, there is a risk of providing inconsistent management to patients presenting with PLCIS. This review aims to establish whether the current guidelines for the management of PLCIS are consistent with current evidence. A systematic electronic search was performed to identify all English language articles regarding PLCIS management. The data was analysed, specifically looking at: incidence of concurrent disease, recurrence rates, long-term prognosis and PLCIS management. A search was also performed for PLCIS management guidelines for the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia, Germany and pan-European. The results of the evidence analyses were compared to the guidelines in order to establish whether the recommended management is consistent with the published evidence. Nine studies (level 3-4 evidence), involving a total of 176 patients and five management guidelines (from United Kingdom, United States, Australia and pan-European) were included in the review. From the evidence, 46 of 93 (49%) patients were found to have PLCIS with concurrent invasive disease on excision specimen analysis. Regarding recurrence rates, 11 of 117 (9.4%) patients developed a recurrence of PLCIS. There were no instances of invasive disease or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on recurrence histology. There were no studies assessing long-term outcomes in PLCIS cases. With regards to the management guidelines, the Association of Breast Surgery (United Kingdom) and the National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Care (Australia) do not mention PLCIS. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (United States) suggest considering excision of PLCIS with negative margins. The NHS Breast Screening Programme (United Kingdom) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (pan-European) recommend PLCIS should be treated as with DCIS. We conclude that high quality evidence to inform guidance is lacking, thus recommendations are relatively vague. However, based on the available evidence, it would seem prudent to treat PLCIS in a similar manner to DCIS. is a breast lesion, the clinical significance of which is a subject of controversy. To date, this systematic review is the largest pooled series of clinical data regarding PLCIS. We aimed to establish whether current guidelines for management are consistent with the evidence. The results demonstrate a lack of high quality data and guidelines for management are variable. Analysis revealed a high incidence of concurrent invasive disease with PLCIS (49%) and following excision, a recurrence rate of 9.4%. We conclude that it would seem prudent