Abstract:Abstract Background The appropriate negative margin width following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for both ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma (IC) has witnessed a shift towards de-escalation in international guidelines. However, there are limited nationwide data regarding margin assessment practice for BCS in China. This study aims to clarify the current real-world status of margin assessment from a single institution audit and secondarily to update the evidence on the association between margin width and local recurrence. Methods Eligible cases were derived from an extensive series of consecutive unselected patients with early invasive breast cancer who were treated with BCS at the Department of Breast Surgery in Shanghai Cancer Center Fudan University (FUSCC) between January 2015 and December 2017. Patient demographic and clinicopathological information as well as follow-up data were extracted from the hospital's electronic medical records. Pathological evaluation of negative margins was defined as no ink on tumor for IC in accordance with the SSO/ASTRO consensus guidelines released in 2014. Where applicable, margins were categorized as tumor on ink (involved), close margins (no tumor on ink but ≤1 mm), clear margins (1-2 mm), wide margins (2-5 mm), and wider margins (>5 mm). The positive margin rate (PMR), reoperation rate, and ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR) rate were calculated according to different margin widths. Multivariable analyses of factors associated with re-excision were performed using binary logistic regression. Kaplan‒Meier survival curve analysis was performed for local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Results A total of 2707 patients were enrolled in the current study, with a total PMR of 2.7%. The distribution of margin width revealed that wider margins (>5 mm) were optimized by most surgical oncologists (2092/2707, 77.3%) for BCS in our center. Additionally, the reoperation rates were 1.9% in the whole population, accounting for 48.3%, 7.5%, 4.2%, 0.8%, and 0.4% in each margin group. Specifically, among 247 patients with margins ≤2 mm, 41 (16.6%) received reoperation either by margin re-excision or mastectomy. Multivariable analyses identified that lobular histology, no selective additional resection and in situ pathology of involved/close margins are independent factors of re-excision recommendation. With a median follow-up of 54.3 months, the incidence of IBR was 1.7% in the whole cohort, representing for 5.2%, 4.2%, 2.8%, 1.9%, and 1.3% in each margin group, respectively. Kaplan‒Meier survival curve analysis showed a marginally significant difference in 5-year LRFS between groups with margins >2 mm and margins ≤2 mm (95.9% vs 97.8%, Table 1). Conclusions A wider margin width was preferably adopted in the routine practice of BCS. Our audit was aligned with previous evidence that a minimum clear margin of 2 mm is associated with a lower reoperation rate but favorable local control. Patients with margins no more than 2 mm were more likely to have re-excision in cases of lobular histology, no selective additional resection, and in situ pathology of involved/close margins. Ipsilateral breast recurrence models by margin status Citation Format: Feilin Qu, Cheng-Jia Shen, Wen-Tao Yang, Jun-Jie Li, Guangyu Liu, Zhi-Ming Shao. Current margin assessment practice for breast-conserving surgery in China: a single institution audit [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-22-09.

Cavity Shave Margins In Breast Cancer

Value of Intraoperative Frozen Section Analysis in Re-Excision Margin Evaluation in Breast-Conserving Surgery for Cancer: a Single Institution Experience

Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Conservative Surgery a Strategy to Reduce Positive Margins and Surgical Time

Abstract PO2-03-03: The Significance of Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Carcinoma on Margin Status and Re-excision Rates

Impact of cavity shave margins in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing conserving breast surgery

Circumferential Shaving of the Cavity in Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Low Rate of Positive Margins and Re-Excision after Partial Mastectomy in Highly Selected Breast Cancer Patients: A Chinese Single-Institution Experience

Cavity Shaving Plus Lumpectomy Versus Lumpectomy Alone for Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Prognostic Improvement of Reexcision for Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer.

Standardized and Reproducible Methodology for the Comprehensive and Systematic Assessment of Surgical Resection Margins During Breast-Conserving Surgery for Invasive Breast Cancer

Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Cavity margins and lumpectomy margins for pathological assessment: which is superior in breast-conserving surgery?

Revisiting Surgical Margins for Invasive Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Breast Conservation Therapy - Evidence for Adopting a 1mm Negative Width

Role for Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Patients Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery

Abstract PO1-22-09: Current Margin Assessment Practice for Breast-Conserving Surgery in China: a Single Institution Audit

Revisiting surgical margins for invasive breast cancer patients treated with breast conservation therapy - Evidence for adopting a 1 mm negative width

What's behind Margin Status in Oral Cancer?

Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call?

Clinical Relevance of Resection Margins in Patients with Total Laryngectomy or Laryngopharyngectomy

Risk Factors for Positive Resection Margins in Breast-Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer—Retrospective Analysis

Does Preoperative MRI Reduce Positive Margins after Breast-Conserving Surgery?