Abstract
The recommendations of the AGO Breast Committee on the surgical therapy of breast cancer were last updated in March 2022 (www.ago-online.de). Since surgical therapy is one of several partial steps in the treatment of breast cancer, extensive diagnostic and oncological expertise of a breast surgeon and good interdisciplinary cooperation with diagnostic radiologists is of great importance. The most important changes concern localization techniques, resection margins, axillary management in the neoadjuvant setting and the evaluation of the meshes in reconstructive surgery. Based on meta-analyses of randomized studies, the level of recommendation of an intraoperative breast ultrasound for the localization of non-palpable lesions was elevated to ++. Thus, the technique is considered to be equivalent to wire localization, provided that it is a lesion which can be well represented by sonography, the surgeon has extensive experience in breast ultrasound and has access to a suitable ultrasound device during the operation. In invasive breast cancer, the aim is to reach negative resection margins (no tumor on ink), regardless of whether an extensive intraductal component is present or not. Oncoplastic operations can also replace a mastectomy in selected cases due to the large number of existing techniques, and are equivalent to segmental resection in terms of oncological safety at comparable rates of complications. Sentinel node excision is recommended for patients with cN0 status receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy after completion of chemotherapy. Minimally invasive biopsy is recommended for initially suspect lymph nodes. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, patients with initially 1-3 suspicious lymph nodes and a good response (ycN0) can receive the targeted axillary dissection and the axillary dissection as equivalent options.
| Titel in Übersetzung | AGO-Empfehlungen zur operativen Therapie des Mammakarzinoms: Update 2022 |
|---|---|
| Originalsprache | Englisch |
| Zeitschrift | Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde |
| Jahrgang | 82 |
| Ausgabenummer | 10 |
| Seiten (von - bis) | 1031-1043 |
| Seitenumfang | 13 |
| ISSN | 0016-5751 |
| DOIs | |
| Publikationsstatus | Veröffentlicht - 30.09.2022 |
Fördermittel
Maggie Banys-Paluchowski received fees for lectures and consultancy activities from Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, pfm, Eli Lilly, Onkowissen, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Samsung, MSD, GSK, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Sirius Pintuition, Pierre Fabre and study support from EndoMag, Mammotome, MeritMedical. Marcus Schmidt reports that he received personal fees for lectures and consulting activities from AstraZeneca, BioNTech, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pantarhei Bioscience, Pfizer, Roche and SeaGen, which are not related to this publication. Jens Huober: Research support: Celgene, Novartis, Hexal, Lilly. Lecture activity: Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Celgene; Eisai, Abbvie, Seagen, Gilead. Consultancy: Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Hexal, AstraZeneca, MSD, Celgene, Abbvie. Travel expenses: Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo. Peter Dall: Lecture fees: Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche, Lilly. Ad Boards: Novartis, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Roche, Gilead. David Krug: honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer as well as research funding from Merck KGaA. Other authors do not indicate any conflicts of interest./ Maggie Banys-Paluchowski erhielt Honorare für Vorträge und beratende Tätigkeiten von Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, pfm, Eli Lilly, Onkowissen, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Samsung, MSD, GSK, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Sirius Pintuition, Pierre Fabre und Studienunterstützung von EndoMag, Mammotome, MeritMedical. Marcus Schmidt berichtet, persönliche Honorare für Vorträge und Beratungstätigkeiten von AstraZeneca, BioNTech, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pantarhei Bioscience, Pfizer, Roche und SeaGen erhalten zu haben, die nicht im Zusammenhang mit der vorliegenden Publikation stehen. Jens Huober: Forschungsunterstützung: Celgene, Novartis, Hexal, Lilly. Vortragstätigkeit: Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Celgene; Eisai, Abbvie, Seagen, Gilead. Beratertätigkeit: Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Hexal, AstraZeneca, MSD, Celgene, Abbvie. Reisekosten: Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo. Peter Dall: Vortragshonorare: Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche, Lilly. Ad-Boards: Novartis, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Roche, Gilead. David Krug: honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer as well as research funding from Merck KGaA. Weitere AutorInnen geben keine Interessenkonflikte an.
| Träger | Trägernummer |
|---|---|
| Amgen | |
| Eli Lilly and Company | |
| Pfizer | |
| AstraZeneca | |
| GlaxoSmithKline | |
| Novartis | |
| Roche | |
| Samsung | |
| Gilead Sciences | |
| Meso Scale Diagnostics | |
| Merck KGaA | |
| Merck Sharp and Dohme | |
| Eisai GmbH | |
| Daiichi Sankyo Europe |
UN SDGs
Dieser Output leistet einen Beitrag zu folgendem(n) Ziel(en) für nachhaltige Entwicklung
-
SDG 3 – Gesundheit und Wohlergehen
Strategische Forschungsbereiche und Zentren
- Profilbereich: Lübeck Integrated Oncology Network (LION)
DFG-Fachsystematik
- 2.22-21 Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe
Fingerprint
Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „AGO-Empfehlungen zur operativen Therapie des Mammakarzinoms: Update 2022“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.Zitieren
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver