Breast Surgical Oncology Research Articles

Electronic Health Record–Based Nudge Intervention and Axillary Surgery in Older Women With Breast Cancer

Choosing Wisely recommendations advocate against routine use of axillary staging in older women with early-stage, clinically node-negative (cN0), hormone receptor-positive (HR+), and HER2-negative breast cancer. However, rates of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in this population remain persistently high. To evaluate whether an electronic health record (EHR)-based nudge intervention targeting surgeons in their first outpatient visit with patients meeting Choosing Wisely criteria decreases rates of SLNB. This nonrandomized controlled trial was a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study with subsequent postintervention semistructured interviews and lasted from October 2021 to October 2023. Data came from EHRs at 8 outpatient clinics within an integrated health care system; participants included 7 breast surgical oncologists. Data were collected for female patients meeting Choosing Wisely criteria for omission of SLNB (aged ≥70 years with cT1 and cT2, cN0, HR+/HER2- breast cancer). The study included a 12-month preintervention control period; baseline surveys assessing perceived acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the designed intervention; and a 12-month intervention period. A column nudge was embedded into the surgeon's schedule in the EHR identifying patients meeting Choosing Wisely criteria for potential SLNB omission. The primary outcome was rate of SLNB following nudge deployment into the EHR. Similar baseline demographic and tumor characteristics were observed before (control period, n = 194) and after (intervention period, n = 193) nudge deployment. Patients in both the control and intervention period had a median (IQR) age of 75 (72-79) years. Compared with the control period, unadjusted rates of SLNB decreased by 23.1 percentage points (46.9% SLNB rate prenudge to 23.8% after; 95% CI, -32.9 to -13.8) in the intervention period. An interrupted time series model showed a reduction in the rate of SLNB following nudge deployment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.90; P = .03). The participating surgeons scored the intervention highly on acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Dominant themes from semistructured interviews indicated that the intervention helped remind the surgeons of potential Choosing Wisely applicability without the need for additional clicks or actions on the day of the patient visit, which facilitated use. This study showed that a nudge intervention in the EHR significantly decreased low-value axillary surgery in older women with early-stage, cN0, HR+/HER2- breast cancer. This user-friendly and easily implementable EHR-based intervention could be a beneficial approach for decreasing low-value care in other practice settings or patient populations. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06006910.

Lymphedema Rates Following Axillary Lymph Node Dissection With and Without Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction: A Prospective Trial.

Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has been proposed to decrease lymphedema rates. The primary aim of our study was to determine whether ILR decreased the incidence of lymphedema in patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). We conducted a two-site pragmatic study of ALND with or without ILR, employing surgeon-level cohort assignment, based on breast surgeons' preferred standard practice. Lymphedema was assessed by limb volume measurements, patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. Overall, 230 patients with breast cancer were enrolled; on an intention-to-treat basis, 99 underwent ALND and 131 underwent ALND with ILR. Of the 131 patients preoperatively planned for ILR, 115 (87.8%) underwent ILR; 72 (62.6%) were performed by one breast surgical oncologist and 43 (37.4%) by fellowship-trained microvascular plastic surgeons. ILR was associated with an increased risk of lymphedema when defined as ≥10% limb volume change on univariable analysis, but not on multivariable analysis, after propensity score adjustment. We did not find a statistically significant difference in limb volume measurements between the two cohorts when including subclinical lymphedema (≥5% inter-limb volume change), nor did we see a difference in grade between the two cohorts on an intent-to-treat or treatment received basis. For all patients, considering ascertainment strategies of patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and ICD-10 codes, as a single binary outcome measure, there was no significant difference in lymphedema rates between those undergoing ILR or not. We found no significant difference in lymphedema rates between patients undergoing ALND with or without ILR.

Reliability of artificial intelligence chatbot responses to frequently asked questions in breast surgical oncology.

Artificial intelligence (AI)-driven chatbots, capable of simulating human-like conversations, are becoming more prevalent in healthcare. While this technology offers potential benefits in patient engagement and information accessibility, it raises concerns about potential misuse, misinformation, inaccuracies, and ethical challenges. This study evaluated a publicly available AI chatbot, ChatGPT, in its responses to nine questions related to breast cancer surgery selected from the American Society of Breast Surgeons' frequently asked questions (FAQ) patient education website. Four breast surgical oncologists assessed the responses for accuracy and reliability using a five-point Likert scale and the Patient Education Materials Assessment (PEMAT) Tool. The average reliability score for ChatGPT in answering breast cancer surgery questions was 3.98 out of 5.00. Surgeons unanimously found the responses understandable and actionable per the PEMAT criteria. The consensus found ChatGPT's overall performance was appropriate, with minor or no inaccuracies. ChatGPT demonstrates good reliability in responding to breast cancer surgery queries, with minor, nonharmful inaccuracies. Its answers are accurate, clear, and easy to comprehend. Notably, ChatGPT acknowledged its informational role and did not attempt to replace medical advice or discourage users from seeking input from a healthcare professional.

Interactive multidisciplinary pilot workshop to improve medical student perception of and interest in breast surgical oncology

BackgroundExposure to breast surgical oncology (BSO) and the multidisciplinary management of patients with breast cancer is limited in medical school. The purpose of this study was to assess changes in student perceptions of BSO as a career following an interactive multidisciplinary workshop. MethodsPre-clinical medical students participated in a multidisciplinary, hands-on workshop, composed of breast radiology (BR), breast surgical oncology (BSO) and breast plastic reconstructive surgery (B-PRS). BR presented students screening and diagnostic breast imaging followed by hands-on ultrasound-guided biopsy on phantom simulators. BSO demonstrated lumpectomy, mastectomy, sentinel lymph node biopsy, and axillary lymph node dissections while B-PRS demonstrated oncoplastic techniques and autologous flap reconstruction with cadavers. Pre-and post-workshop surveys assessed student opinions on surgery and BSO. Results were compared using Wilcoxon Signed Rank, Wilcoxon Rank Sum, and Fisher's Exact. ResultsThe workshop was attended by twenty-four students. There was a statistically significant increase in interest in BSO from 52% to 86% after the workshop (p = 0.003). The event improved understanding of the work and lifestyle in BSO for 79% (19/24). All students (100%) expressed interest to further explore BSO. The most common attractors to a career in BSO were impacts on patients’ lives (N = 23), intellectual stimulation (N = 22), and earnings (N = 20). The most reported deterrents were lack of personal time (N = 18) and stress (N = 15). ConclusionAn interactive, anatomically based exposure to multidisciplinary breast cancer surgery improves medical student perception and interest in BSO. Medical schools should consider incorporating similar events to foster interest in BSO and other surgical subspecialties.

Optimization of intraoperative lumpectomy specimen labeling

BackgroundAccurate lumpectomy specimen orientation is critical as incorrect orientation may result in excision of the wrong lumpectomy margin. Our goal was to determine if specimen orientation achieved by labeling three surfaces is superior to two. MethodsThis was a prospective single-institution study including 22 breast surgical oncologists. Intraoperative labeling of either two or three surfaces of the lumpectomy specimen was based on surgeon preference. The specimen was delivered to Pathology where it was oriented by the pathology team and the surgeon then determined if the specimen was correctly oriented or if re-orientation was required. Surgeons subsequently recorded orientation technique and if re-orientation was required. Specimen weight, patient age, and BMI were recorded. Fisher’s exact test and two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to determine p-values. ResultsOf 268 specimens, 40 (14.9%) required re-orientation. Labeling specimens on three surfaces was superior to two (22 of 195 (11.2%) versus 18 of 73 (24.6%), p = 0.01). Specimens requiring re-orientation were more likely to be heavier (36 g vs. 24 g, p = 0.02). In multivariable analysis, labeling specimens on three surfaces resulted in a 70% reduction in discordance rates between the surgeon and pathology team (OR 0.3, p = 0.001). Using mean weight of lumpectomy specimens, specimens >33 g were more likely to require reorientation (OR 2.8, p = 0.004). Age and BMI did not impact the need for re-orientation. ConclusionLumpectomy specimen labeling using three surfaces was superior to two. Surgeons should routinely orient their specimens on three or more surfaces to decrease discordance rates.

Core needle biopsy of breast tumours: comparison of diagnostic performance between surgery and radiology services at a national cancer centre in Latin America.

Breast pathology is a very common reason for medical attention. Tissue diagnosis is usually obtained with core needle biopsy which could be performed by breast surgeons or interventional radiologists. Our aim was to assess the comparison of diagnostic performance between the two services. A retrospective, descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out on patients who had breast pathology at Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas in 2019. Descriptive analyses, sensitivity and specificity were calculated using the R program version 4.2.3. From 1,082 patients with breast tumours who underwent core needle biopsy (CNB) during 2019, 782 cases were included. Breast surgeons performed 462 CNBs and radiologists performed 320 CNBs. The 87.5% were palpable tumours and 525 breast carcinomas were identified in the final pathology. The diagnostic performance showed that the sensitivity and specificity were greater than 95% and 98%, respectively. The waiting time in both showed that >95% underwent a CNB before 2 months. The breast surgery service performed the majority of the biopsies in less than 1 week since the indication of the execution of the CNB compared to the radiology service (90% versus 36%). Both hospital services, breast surgery and radiology, are efficient in determining an accurate diagnosis using CNB. However, the breast surgery service performs CNB in a shorter time interval. Breast surgical oncologists are encouraged to perform CNB if there are understaffed radiology services to expedite the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer patients.

Improving Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Documentation at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center

To increase the rate of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) patient data collection in healthcare software for new patients at a NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, via targeted identification of Advanced Practice Providers (APP), development of novel SOGI collection workflows, creation of a real-time SOGI data dashboard, and tailored training utilizing existing High Reliability Organization (HRO) huddles in order to measure, analyze, and improve the quality of care, safety, and patient experiences for Sexual and Gender Minority (SGM) patients. Prior to interventions, project leadership (PL) and data analytics staff obtained SOGI baseline data, while cancer center clinical leadership, registration, and administrative staff identified APPs as the most appropriate staff to collect patient SOGI data. Intervention 1: PL met with Disease Management Groups (DMG)/HRO leads of thoracic medical oncology to identify a practice-level APP champion. PL and the APP champion scripted language for multiple scenarios when asking SOGI questions, and served as a resource for additional practice APPs. PL provided SGM-focused training during HRO huddles, which included how to ask and document SOGI, and significance of asking SOGI information. SOGI data completion rate was tracked on a HRO scorecard. This intervention was replicated across additional DMG/HROs during the study period. Intervention 2: Breast surgical oncology completed Intervention 1 and added SOGI questions to their new patient-facing intake form, allowing patients to self-identify. PL and data analytics team provided continuous feedback to DMG/HRO leads on provider-level completion rates and additional education as needed. At the end of the Interventions, there were 9 LGBTQ+ Knowledge and Awareness HRO training sessions completed resulting in over 300 unique individuals receiving advanced SOGI documentation education. For intervention 1, there were 12,322 new patients asked their SOGI information, which was a greater than 300% increase in SOGI documentation (baseline completion rate for sexual orientation and gender identity was 17% and 21%, respectively, which improved to 77% and 84%). For intervention 2, there were 3,217 new patients asked their SOGI information, which was a greater than 400% increase (baseline completion rate for sexual orientation and gender identity was 13% and 16%, respectively, which improved to 81% and 81%). Together, patient self-reporting quickly increased data completion rates from baseline, comparable to clinical sites from Intervention 1, and may decrease the burden of APPs collecting SOGI history; however, clinical review of questions is important and may further increase SOGI data completion. Leadership buy-in, site champions, and active data monitoring are essential to measurable change. Together, improved SOGI data completion will allow for improved equitable cancer care and increased assessment of SGM cancer disparities.

Plastic surgery market share of breast reconstructive procedures: An analysis of two nationwide databases.

Given advances that streamline breast reconstruction (e.g., prepectoral placement, acellular dermal matrix [ADM], oncoplastic surgery), there is concern that nonplastic surgeons are performing a growing proportion of breast reconstructive procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate US trends in the market share of breast reconstruction performed by plastic compared to general surgeons. IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Claims 2006-2017 and NSQIP 2005-2020 were queried to identify women who underwent mastectomy with alloplastic (tissue expander or implant-based) or free flap reconstruction, or lumpectomy with oncoplastic reconstruction (breast reduction, mastopexy, or local/regional flap). MarketScan included immediate and delayed reconstructions, while all NSQIP reconstructions were immediate. Poisson regression with incident rate ratios (IRRs) modeled trends in surgeon type over time. The cohort included 65 168 encounters from MarketScan and 73 351 from NSQIP. Plastic surgeons performed 95.8% of free flap, 93.8% of alloplastic, and 64.9% of oncoplastic reconstructions. Plastic surgeons performed an increasing proportion of immediate oncoplastic reduction and mastopexy (MarketScan IRR: 1.077, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.060-1.094, p < 0.001; NSQIP IRR: 1.041, 95% CI: 1.030-1.052, p < 0.001). There were no clinically significant trends for delayed oncoplastic, alloplastic, or free flap reconstructions. Plastic surgeons were more likely to use ADM compared to general surgeons in NSQIP (p < 0.001). Plastic surgeons gained market share in immediate oncoplastic breast reduction and mastopexy over the past two decades without any loss in alloplastic or free flap breast reconstruction. Plastic surgeons should continue collaboration with breast surgical oncologists to reinforce the shared surgeon model for management of breast cancer.

A Survey of Practice Patterns for Clinical Nodal Staging Prior to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer.

The importance of clinical staging in breast cancer has increased owing to the wide use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). This study aimed to investigate the current practice patterns regarding clinical nodal staging in breast cancer in real-world settings. A web-based survey was administered to board-certified oncologists in Korea, including breast surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists, from January to April 2022. The survey included 19 general questions and 4 case-based questions. In total, 122 oncologists (45 radiation, 44 surgical, and 33 medical oncologists) completed the survey. Among them, 108 (88%) responded that clinical staging before NST was primarily performed by breast surgeons. All the respondents referred to imaging studies during nodal staging. Overall, 64 (52.5%) responders determined the stage strictly based on the radiology reports, whereas 58 (47.5%) made their own decision while noting radiology reports. Of those who made their own decisions, 88% referred to the number or size of the suspicious node. Of the 75 respondents involved in prescribing regimens for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 58 (77.3%) responded that the reimbursement regulations in the selection of NST regimens affected nodal staging in clinical practice. In the case-based questions, high variability was observed among the clinicians in the same cases. Diverse assessments by specialists owing to the lack of a clear, harmonized staging system for the clinical nodal staging of breast cancer can lead to diverse practice patterns. Thus, practical, harmonized, and objective methods for clinical nodal staging and for the outcomes of post-NST response are warranted for appropriate treatment decisions and accurate outcome evaluation.

Value of Ambulatory Modified Radical Mastectomy.

Modified radical mastectomy (MRM) still is largely performed in inpatient settings. This study sought to determine the value (expenditures and complications) of ambulatory MRM. Health Care Utilization Project (HCUP) state databases from 2016 were queried for patients who underwent MRM. The study examined rates of 30-day readmission for surgical-site infection (SSI) or hematoma, charges by index care setting, and predictors of 30-day readmission. Overall, 8090 patients underwent MRM: 5113 (63 %) inpatient and 2977 (37 %) ambulatory patients. Compared with the patients who underwent inpatient MRM, those who underwent ambulatory MRM were older (61 vs. 59 years), more often white (66 % vs. 57 %), in the lowest income quartile (28 % vs. 21 %), insured by Medicare (43 % vs. 33 %) and residents in a small metro area (6 % vs. 4 %) (all p < 0.01). Of the 5113 patients treated as inpatients, 126 (2.5 %) were readmitted, whereas 50 (1.7 %) of the ambulatory patients were readmitted (p = 0.02). The adjusted charge for inpatient MRM without readmission was $113,878 (range, $107,355-120,402) compared with $94,463 (range, $86,021-102,907) for ambulatory MRM, and the charge for inpatient MRM requiring readmission was $159,355 (range, $147,142-171,568) compared with $139,940 (range, $125,808-154,073) for ambulatory MRM (all p < 0.01). This difference remained significant after adjustment for hospital length of stay. Adjusted logistic regression showed that the ambulatory setting was protective for readmission (odds ratio, 0.49; 95 % confidence interval, 0.35-0.70; p < 0.01). The analyses suggest that ambulatory MRM is both safe and less expensive. The findings advocate that MRM, a last holdout of inpatient care within breast surgical oncology, can be transitioned to the ambulatory setting for appropriate patients.

ASO Visual Abstract: Surgeon Factors Influencing Breast Surgery Outcomes-A Scoping Review to Define the Modern Breast Surgical Oncologist.

ASO Visual Abstract: Surgeon Factors Influencing Breast Surgery Outcomes-A Scoping Review to Define the Modern Breast Surgical Oncologist.

Surgeon Factors Influencing Breast Surgery Outcomes: A Scoping Review to Define the Modern Breast Surgical Oncologist.

Modern breast surgical oncology incorporates many aspects of care including preoperative workup, surgical management, and multidisciplinary collaboration to achieve favorable oncologic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. However, there is variability in surgical practice and outcomes. This review aims to identify modifiable surgeon factors influencing breast surgery outcomes and provide a definition of the modern breast surgical oncologist. A systematic literature search with additional backward citation searching was conducted. Studies describing modifiable surgeon factors with associated breast surgery outcomes such as rates of breast conservation, sentinel node biopsy, re-excision, complications, acceptable esthetic outcome, and disease-free and overall survival were included. Surgeon factors were categorized for qualitative analysis. A total of 91 studies met inclusion criteria describing both modifiable surgeon factor and outcome data. Four key surgeon factors associated with improved breast surgery outcomes were identified: surgical volume (45 studies), use of oncoplastic techniques (41 studies), sub-specialization in breast surgery or surgical oncology (9 studies), and participation in professional development activities (5 studies). On the basis of the literature review, the modern breast surgical oncologist has a moderate- to high-volume breast surgery practice, understands the use and application of oncoplastic breast surgery, engages in additional training opportunities, maintains memberships in relevant societies, and remains up to date on key literature. Surgeons practicing in breast surgical oncology can target these modifiable factors for professional development and quality improvement.

Improving Medical Student Anatomy Knowledge and Confidence for the Breast Surgical Oncology Rotation.

The anatomy curriculum has undergone considerable reductions in class time, resulting in decreased student anatomical knowledge retention and confidence during their surgical rotations. To counter this deficit in anatomy knowledge, a clinical anatomy mentorship program (CAMP) was developed by fourth-year medical student leaders and staff mentors in a near-peer teaching fashion prior to the surgical clerkship. This study analyzed the impact this program had on third-year medical students (MS3s) self-assessed anatomical knowledge and confidence in the operating room on the Breast Surgical Oncology rotation after this near-peer program. A single-center prospective survey study was performed at an academic medical center. Pre- and post-program surveys were administered to all students who participated in the CAMP and rotated on the breast surgical oncology (BSO) service during the surgery clerkship rotation. A control group of individuals who did not rotate on the CAMP was established, and this group was administered a retrospective survey. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess surgical anatomy knowledge, confidence in the operating room, and comfort in assisting in the operating room. Control group versus post-CAMP intervention group and pre- versus post-CAMP intervention groups survey results were compared using the Student's t-test with a p-value of <0.05 statistically significant. All CAMP students rated their surgical anatomy knowledge (p < 0.01), confidence in the operating room (p < 0.01), and comfort in assisting in the operating room (p < 0.01) as greater than those who did not participate in the program. Additionally, the program improved the ability of third-year medical students to prepare for operating room cases going into their third-year breast surgical oncology clerkship (p < 0.03). This near-peer surgical education model appears to be an effective way to prepare third-year medical students for the breast surgical oncology rotation during the surgery clerkship by improving anatomic knowledge and student confidence. The program can serve as a template for medical students, surgical clerkship directors, and other faculty interested in efficiently expanding surgical anatomy at their institution.

Breast cancer in very young (≤35 years) women: clinicopathological and genetic features of the disease from a breast surgical oncology department

Breast cancer in very young (≤35 years) women: clinicopathological and genetic features of the disease from a breast surgical oncology department

Breast Surgical Oncology Epidemiologic Research: A Guide and Comparison of Four National Databases.

National databases are a rich source of epidemiologic data for breast surgical oncology research. However, these databases differ in thedemographic, surgical, and oncologic variables provided. This study aimed to compare the strengths and limitations of four national databases in the context of breast surgical oncology research. The study comprised a descriptive analysis of four national databases (the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program [NSQIP], the Nationwide Inpatient Sample [NIS], the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results [SEER] program, and the National Cancer Database [NCDB]) to assess their strengths and limitations in the context of breast surgical oncology. The study assessed the data available in each database for female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis between 2007 and 2017, and compared patient age, ethnicity, and race distributions. Data from 3.9 million female patients were examined, with most patients beingbetween 60 and 69 years of age, non-Hispanic, and white. Age, ethnicity, and race distributions were similar in the databases. The NSQIP includes data on operative details, comorbidities, and postoperative outcomes. The NIS provides health services and inpatient utilization information, but does not evaluate outpatient procedures. The SEER program provides population-based oncologic detail including stage, histology, and neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment. The NCDB offers hospital-based oncologic information and the largest population in the study period, with approximately 2.5 million breast cancer patients. Epidemiologic datasets offer tremendous potential for the examination of oncologic breast surgery, with each database providing unique data useful for addressing different epidemiologic questions. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each database creates a more efficient and productive research environment.

Single Versus Dual Surgeon Approaches to Oncoplastic Surgery: A Comparison of Outcomes

IntroductionOncoplastic surgery (OPS) is traditionally performed using a dual surgeon (DS) approach that involves both a breast surgeon and a plastic surgeon. It is also performed using a single surgeon (SS) approach with a surgeon trained in both breast surgical oncology and plastic surgery. We sought to determine if outcomes differed between SS versus DS OPS approaches. MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted of all OPS performed in a single health system over a 6-y period by either an SS or a DS approach. Primary outcomes were rates of positive margins and the overall complication rate; secondary outcomes were loco-regional recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival. ResultsA total of 217 patients were identified; 117 were SS cases and 100 were DS cases. Baseline preoperative patient characteristics were similar between the two groups as there was no difference in mean Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (P = 0.07). There was no difference in tumor stage (P = 0.09) or nodal status (P = 0.31). Rates of positive margins were not significantly different (10.9% (SS) versus 9% (DS); P = 0.81), nor were rates of complications (11.1% (SS) versus 15% (DS); P = 0.42). Rates of locoregional recurrence were also not significantly different (1.7% (SS) versus 0% (DS); P = 0.5). Disease-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different at 1-y, 3-y, and 5-y time points (P = 0.20 and P = 0.23, respectively) although follow-up time was not sufficient for definitive analysis regarding survival. ConclusionsBoth SS and DS approaches to OPS have similar outcomes with regards to positive margin rates and surgical complication rates and are comparably safe.

Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship applicant selection and ranking: A survey of Society of Surgical Oncology programs.

In 2003, the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) initiated a breast surgical oncology fellowship, which has now grown to 60 SSO accredited programs as of 2021. Limited knowledge exists on the traits of successful applicants and the factors influencing the rank list. A web-based, anonymous survey was sent to all SSO Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship program directors. The survey consisted of 26 questions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses and evaluate impact on applicant interview and rank list. Thirty-four programs (57% response rate) completed the survey. Programs received an average of 70 applications and granted 24 interviews. Most programs reported a minimum ABSITE cut-off score (n = 28, 82%) and a defined publication requirement (n = 22, 65%), including a first-author requirement (n = 18, 53%) to extend an invitation to interview. For postinterview rank, applicant interpersonal skills were highly valued. The interview was the most important aspect for the rank list. Many programs have ABSITE and publication thresholds before offering an interview. Upon receiving interview invitation, the applicant's interview performance, interpersonal skills, and letters of recommendation were the most important aspect in rank list decision making.

The impact of COVID-19 on breast surgery during the height of the New York City pandemic

: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant changes in cancer care delivery. This report describes the Breast Surgical Oncology Division’s experience at a quaternary care hospital within the geographic epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States. This is a cohort study of patients scheduled for breast surgery at a single academic institution in New York City (NYC) between March 23–April 21, 2020. Patients who were scheduled for surgery were prospectively tracked in a surgical database. The primary outcome was the proportion of cases actually performed. Secondary outcomes were the clinical characteristics of the patients who received surgery and the perioperative methods used in this group. Of the 43 cases scheduled, 0% were emergent, 39.5% urgent, and 60.5% elective, and 15 (34.9%) actually had surgery during the study period. Thirty-two patients (74.4%) experienced a surgical delay. The mean delay of an urgent case was 3 days. Two of the patients had a change in surgical plan from bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) to lumpectomy with SLNB. Only two patients were admitted postoperatively. Of the 17 patients who had localization, the planned localization method differed from the actual method in 7 (42%) patients. Of the 28 patients who did not have surgery during the study period, 8 (28.6%) initiated neoadjuvant endocrine therapy as a bridge to their eventual surgery. We conclude that the surgical management of patients with breast cancer has been significantly impacted at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in NYC.

Innovation in Breast Surgery: Practical and Ethical Considerations.

The adoption of innovation is essential to the evolution of patient care. Breast surgical oncology advances through incorporating new techniques, devices, and procedures. Historical changes in practice standards from radical to modified radical mastectomy or axillary node dissection to sentinel node biopsy reduced morbidity without sacrifice in oncologic outcome. Contemporary oncoplastic techniques afford broader consideration for breast conservation and the potential for improved cosmetic outcomes. At present, many breast surgeons face the decision of which wireless device to use for localization of nonpalpable lesions. Consideration for future changes, such as robotic mastectomy, are on the horizon. No guideline exists to assist breast surgeons in the adoption of innovation into practice. The Ethics Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons acknowledges that breast surgeons confront many questions associated with onboarding innovation. This paper aims to provide a framework for asking relevant questions along with the ethical principles to consider when integrating an innovation into practice.

Treatment Recommendations and Prioritization Planning for Breast Cancer Patients During COVID-19 Pandemic. Part 1: High Risk Lesions, DCIS And Hormonal Positive Breast Cancer. A Caribbean Breast Surgeon’s Perspective.

ABSTRACT The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has presented a challenging approach to breast surgical oncology both internationally and locally. Triage and prioritization are the cornerstones of international recommendations for cancer management during this pandemic. This formidable and unique set of challenges influences the delivery of oncological and supportive care to breast cancer patients. Preservation of hospital resources, reduction in patients’ hospital visits and health care provider exposure to infection, result in non-urgent cases being deferred or cancelled. Delay of treatment, both medical or surgical, may influence patients’ outcome if not strategically planned and discussed with a multidisciplinary approach. As physicians, we need to weigh the risk-to-benefit ratio on a case-by-case scenario. Several expert oncology bodies have collaboration in the triaging, prioritizing and treatment processes of breast cancer management. The adaptation and utilization of neoadjuvant therapy is one bridging and mitigating technique heavily implemented during the pandemic. The existing recommendations will be presented in two articles for ease of interpretation. In this article, the current recommendations for the pandemic response to high-risk lesions, Ductal Carcinoma In-Situ (DCIS) and Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer management are highlighted. Suggestions for regional and national implementation of these guidelines in accordance with local resources and conditions will be outlined.