Breast conservation versus mastectomy for metaplastic breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Metaplastic breast cancer is a rare aggressive subtype of breast cancer for which there are no clear treatment guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate survival outcomes of patients with metaplastic breast cancer undergoing breast conservation compared with mastectomy. We identified studies from MEDLINE, Pubmed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library Register of Controlled Trials and the EBM Reviews Register. Studies were deemed suitable for inclusion where they compared breast-conserving surgery to mastectomy with the primary outcome of overall survival. Survival data were pooled using a random-effects model.From the 456 citations screened by our search, three studies were assessed as eligible for inclusion. There were a total of 2995 patients who underwent mastectomy and 1909 who underwent breast conservation. The median follow-up time was 43 months. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between breast conservation and mastectomy (pooled HR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.56-1.42, p = 0.631). Wide local excision, in conjunction with adjuvant radiation and judicious use of chemotherapy, may be a reasonable alternative to mastectomy as surgical management of metaplastic breast cancer as part of an individualized, multidisciplinary approach. Metaplastic breast cancer is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer without clear surgical treatment guidelines. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no difference in overall survival between breast conservation and mastectomy, suggesting that both may be reasonable treatment approaches for this condition. image