Search

Objective: The number of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) procedures has been increasing in China. This study aimed to investigate the oncological safety of IBR, and to compare the survival and surgical outcomes between implant-based and autologous reconstruction. Methods: Data from patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer who underwent immediate total breast reconstruction between 2001 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Long-term breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were evaluated. Patient satisfaction with the breast was compared between the implantbased and autologous groups. BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were compared between groups after propensity score matching (PSM). Results: A total of 784 IBR procedures were identified, of which 584 were performed on patients with invasive breast cancer (implantbased, n = 288; autologous, n = 296). With a median follow-up of 71.3 months, the 10-year estimates of BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were 88.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) (85.1%-93.0%)], 79.6% [95% CI (74.7%-84.8%)], and 94.0% [95% CI (90.3%-97.8%)], respectively. A total of 124 patients completed the Breast-Q questionnaire, and no statistically significant differences were noted between groups (P = 0.823). After PSM with 27 variables, no statistically significant differences in BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were found between the implant-based (n = 177) and autologous (n = 177) groups. Further stratification according to staging, histological grade, lymph node status, and lymph-venous invasion status revealed no significant survival differences between groups. Conclusions: Both immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction were reasonable choices with similar long-term oncological outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction among patients with invasive breast cancer in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: European lung cancer screening studies using computed tomography (CT) have shown that a management protocol based on measuring lung nodule volume and volume doubling time (VDT) is more specific for early lung cancer detection than a diameter-based protocol. However, whether this also applies to a Chinese population is unclear. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of a volume-based protocol with a diameter-based protocol for lung cancer detection and optimize the nodule management criteria for a Chinese population. Methods: This study has a population-based, prospective cohort design and includes 4000 participants from the Hexi district of Tianjin, China. Participants will undergo low-dose chest CT at baseline and after 1 year. Initially, detected lung nodules will be evaluated for diameter and managed according to a routine diameter-based protocol (Clinical Practice Guideline in Oncology for Lung Cancer Screening, Version 2.2018). Subsequently, lung nodules will be evaluated for volume and management will be simulated according to a volume-based protocol and VDT (a European lung nodule management protocol). Participants will be followed up for 4 years to evaluate lung cancer incidence and mortality. The primary outcome is the diagnostic performance of the European volume-based protocol compared to diameter-based management regarding lung nodules detected using low-dose CT. Results: The diagnostic performance of volume- and diameter-based management for lung nodules in a Chinese population will be estimated and compared. Conclusions: Through the study, we expect to improve the management of lung nodules and early detection of lung cancer in Chinese populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]