Cosmetic outcome of breast conservative treatment for early stage breast cancer

Arenas, Meritxell; Sabater, S.; Hernández, Víctor; Henrı́quez, I.; Ameijide, Alberto; Anglada, Lluís; Mur, E.; Artigues, Manel; Lafuerza, A; Borràs, Joan Maria Vernet

doi:10.1007/s12094-006-0179-5

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Generally, the cosmetic results of contemporary interstitial multicatheter APBI trials are very good and well accepted, and comparable to those after external-beam whole-breast irradiation [1,4,8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation with Interstitial Implants

Ott

Lotter²,

Sauer³

et al. 2007

Strahlenther Onkol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation with Interstitial Implants

Ott

Lotter²,

Sauer³

et al. 2007

Strahlenther Onkol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much research has been done to assess the aesthetic outcome after breast cancer surgery [11–14]. However, comparisons between studies are difficult since standardised instruments are lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aesthetic result after breast-conserving therapy is associated with quality of life several years after treatment. Swedish women evaluated with BCCT.core and BREAST-Q™

Dahlbäck

Heiman

Rehn

et al. 2017

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeA gold standard for evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is still lacking. The BCCT.core software has been developed to assess aesthetic result in a standardised way. We aimed to study how the result of BCCT.core after BCT is associated with quality of life, measured with the BREAST-Q™, a validated questionnaire.MethodsWomen eligible for BCT were consecutively recruited between February 1st 2008 and January 31st 2012 (n = 653). Photographs of 310 women, taken one year after BCT, were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. The postoperative BCT module of the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire was administered by mail and 348 questionnaires were returned (median 5.5 years after BCT). In all, 216 women had both BCCT.core results and completed BREAST-Q™ questionnaires available.ResultsThe results from the BCCT.core evaluation were: excellent n = 49 (15.8%); good n = 178 (57.4%); fair n = 73 (23.5%); poor n = 10 (3.2%). The median BREAST-Q™ score for satisfaction with breasts was 66 [interquartile range (IQR) 57–80] and for psychosocial well-being 82 (IQR 61–100). Poor/fair results on BCCT.core were associated with Q-scores below median for both satisfaction with breasts [odds ratio (OR) 3.4 (confidence interval (CI) 1.7–6.8)] as well as for psychosocial well-being [OR 2.2 (CI 1.1–4.2)].ConclusionsA statistically significant association between BCCT.core results one year after BCT and quality of life ratings using BREAST-Q™ several years later is shown in this study. This implies that the BCCT.core may be valuable in BCT follow-up and used as a standardised instrument in the evaluation of aesthetic results.

show abstract

“…1 Subjective possibilities to describe aesthetic results range from single questions of overall assessment to questionnaires that try to differentiate between different aspects of breast aesthetics such as size, color, shape, position, and shape of the nipple-areolar complex and scars. [2][3][4][5] The Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS) is a clearly structured and valid questionnaire addressing aesthetic issues. 5,6 The Aesthetic Status Scale consists of 7 items.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%