Skin Disease and the Gut

D. M. Roberts,F. Preston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.3.5721.521-b

1970-08-29

Abstract:SIR,-While agreeing with Dr. H. J. G. Bloom and others (25 July, p. 181) that the results of radical treatment for medullary carcinoma of the breast are remarkably good we cannot accept the validity of two of their conclusions. Firstly, there is insufficient evidence to support their view that conservative treatment would not have achieved similar results as compared with a radical approach. In their non-randomized retrospective study only 14 patients out of 104 had either a simple mastectomy or wedge excision. Of these 10 also had postoperative radiotherapy. No attempt was made to explain why the policy of radical surgery was abandoned in these cases. We believe that it is not possible to reach a reasonable conclusion on the results of conservative surgery alone on the basis of four patients. Secondly, we feel that it is very difficult for the authors to make judgements on the importance of the role of possible local defence mechanisms in medullary carcinoma of the breast. This would entail a prospective randomized trial comparing the results of radical treatment, which would involve ablation of the lymph nodes by surgery or radiotherapy, with conservative surgery by itself, which would result in the least interference with regional lymph nodes. Taking cancer of the breast as a whole there is increasing evidence of the importance of local defence mechanisms.' We would agree wholeheartedly with Dr. Bloom and his colleagues when they say that the value of treating the axilla in the initial therapy of early breast cancer awaits the results of well-conducted clinical trials where the comparison of radical and conservative therapy can be made on secure foundations.1-We are, etc., MICEuEL BAUM. M. H. EDWARDS. King's Colleee Hosoital Medical School, London S.E.5.