Skip to Content
Authors Soeteman DI, Stout NK, Ozanne EM, Greenberg C, Hassett MJ, Schrag D, Punglia RS
Author Profile(s)
Journal J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Volume: 105 Issue: 11 Pages: 774-81
Publish Date 2013 Jun 05
PubMed ID 23644480
PMC ID 3776282

The prevalence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and the marked variability in patterns of care highlight the need for comparative effectiveness research. We sought to quantify the tradeoffs among alternative management strategies for DCIS with respect to disease outcomes and breast preservation.We developed a disease simulation model integrating data from the published literature to simulate the clinical events after six treatments (lumpectomy alone, lumpectomy with radiation, lumpectomy with radiation and tamoxifen, lumpectomy with tamoxifen, and mastectomy with and without breast reconstruction) for women with newly diagnosed DCIS. Outcomes included disease-free, invasive disease-free, and overall survival and breast preservation.For a cohort of 1 million simulated women aged 45 years at diagnosis, both mastectomy and lumpectomy with radiation and tamoxifen were associated with a 12-month improvement in overall survival relative to lumpectomy alone. Adding radiation therapy to lumpectomy resulted in a 6-month improvement in overall survival but decreased long-term breast-preservation outcomes (likelihood of lifetime breast preservation = 0.781 vs 0.843 for lumpectomy alone). This decrement with radiation therapy was mitigated by the addition of tamoxifen (likelihood of lifetime breast preservation = 0.846).Overall survival benefits of the six management strategies for DCIS are within 1 year, suggesting that treatment decisions can be informed by the patient’s preference for breast preservation and disutility for recurrence. Our delineation of personalized outcomes for each strategy can help patients understand the implications of their treatment choice, so their decisions may reflect their own personal values and help improve the quality of care for patients with DCIS.

Full Text Full text available on PubMed Central Copyright © 2017 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System