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.

Intraoperative assessment of SLNs in breast cancer using a molecular assay is a safe, acceptable and accurate technique that allows a reduction in the frequency of delayed axillary clearance surgery. Take-up of this method may be hampered by perverse incentives operating within healthcare funding.

No abstract

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) is now the standard of care in assessment of patients with clinically staged T1-2, N0 breast cancers. This study investigates whether there is a maximum number of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) that need to be excised without compromising the false-negative (FN) rate of this procedure. Data were prospectively collected for 319 patients undergoing SNB between February 2001 and December 2006 at our institution. This data were analysed, both in terms of the order of SLN retrieval and relative isotope counts of the SLNs, in order to determine the maximum number of SLNs that need to be retrieved without increasing the FN rate. Furthermore, we investigated the relationship between SLN blue dye concentration and the presence of SLN metastases. The SLN identification rate was 97% with no false-negative cases amongst patients undergoing simultaneous axillary clearance historically during technique validation. In patients with SLN metastases, excision of the first 4 SLNs encountered results in the identification of a metastatic SLN in all cases. Although the majority (86%) of SNB metastases are in the hottest node, the SLN containing the metastasis is in the first 4 hottest nodes in 99% of patients with nodal metastases. The remaining 1% of SLN metastases were identified by blue dye. There was no statistically significant association between the SLN blue dye concentration and the presence of SLN metastases. A policy to remove a maximum of four blue and/or hot SLNs along with any palpably abnormal lymph nodes does not result in an increased false-negative rate of detection of SLN metastases.