Skip to main content

Daily Cosmetic Research Analysis

3 papers

Three clinically-oriented studies reshape cosmetic and quality-of-life outcomes in oncology and scar care. Level II oncoplastic breast surgery reduced re-excisions and improved BREAST-Q scores versus conventional BCS; long-term data support APBI via multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy as a safe alternative to WBI with better QoL; and prolonged follow-up of postoperative HDR brachytherapy for keloids identifies ear lesions as optimal candidates.

Summary

Three clinically-oriented studies reshape cosmetic and quality-of-life outcomes in oncology and scar care. Level II oncoplastic breast surgery reduced re-excisions and improved BREAST-Q scores versus conventional BCS; long-term data support APBI via multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy as a safe alternative to WBI with better QoL; and prolonged follow-up of postoperative HDR brachytherapy for keloids identifies ear lesions as optimal candidates.

Research Themes

  • Oncoplastic techniques to optimize cosmesis and oncologic safety
  • Accelerated partial breast irradiation and long-term quality of life
  • Radiation-based strategies for keloid scar control

Selected Articles

1. Comparative analysis of level II oncoplastic surgery and conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer with a ductal carcinoma in situ component.

71.5Level IIICohortBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025PMID: 41015984

In a 163-patient retrospective comparative cohort, level II oncoplastic surgery achieved a significantly lower re-excision rate (10% vs 30%, p=0.035) than conventional BCS and yielded higher BREAST-Q scores for satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being. No significant differences were noted in key tumor or demographic variables.

Impact: Demonstrates simultaneous oncologic and cosmetic advantages of level II oncoplastic techniques, directly informing surgical planning for tumors with a DCIS component.

Clinical Implications: Surgeons should consider level II oncoplastic approaches to reduce re-excision and optimize patient-reported cosmetic and psychosocial outcomes when BCS is indicated for invasive cancer with DCIS.

Key Findings

  • Re-excision rate was 10% with level II OBS vs 30% with conventional BCS (p=0.035).
  • BREAST-Q showed higher satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being in OBS patients (p<0.001).
  • No significant differences in tumor laterality, menopausal status, ER/PR/HER2 positivity, or E-cadherin expression between groups.
  • Donut mastopexy was the most common level II technique (50%).

Methodological Strengths

  • Comparative cohort with clear inclusion period and group definitions
  • Use of validated patient-reported outcome measures (BREAST-Q)

Limitations

  • Retrospective, non-randomized design with potential selection bias
  • Short and unspecified follow-up duration; single-center experience

Future Directions: Prospective multicenter studies or randomized designs assessing margin status, long-term local recurrence, and cost-effectiveness of level II oncoplastic techniques.

2. Long-term outcomes of accelerated partial breast irradiation with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy versus whole breast irradiation: an 11-Year clinical practice follow-up study.

69.5Level IICohortClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025PMID: 41015980

Across two prospectively collected cohorts (n=76) with median 11-year follow-up, APBI via multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy provided comparable OS/DFS and late clinical toxicity to WBI, while sustaining superior patient-reported quality of life. Mammographic architectural distortion was more frequent after APBI.

Impact: Provides rare long-term, real-world evidence that APBI matches WBI for tumor control while improving quality of life, informing patient-centered radiotherapy decisions.

Clinical Implications: For appropriately selected stage I–II patients meeting GEC-ESTRO criteria, APBI with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy is a safe, effective alternative to WBI, offering QoL advantages without compromising survival.

Key Findings

  • Median follow-up 11 years; APBI maintained significantly better patient-reported QoL.
  • No significant differences in late clinical toxicity or cosmetic outcomes between APBI and WBI.
  • Higher rates of mammographic architectural distortion/tissue retraction after APBI.
  • 5- and 10-year OS: 94.7% and 81.1%; DFS: 92.1% and 79.7%; no group differences.

Methodological Strengths

  • Prospectively collected cohorts with extended long-term follow-up
  • Use of validated QoL instruments (QLQ-BR23, S-BIS) and standardized eligibility (GEC-ESTRO)

Limitations

  • Non-randomized design and modest sample size (n=76)
  • Single-center real-world data may limit generalizability

Future Directions: Randomized trials or larger multicenter prospective registries to refine patient selection for APBI and to correlate imaging changes with clinical endpoints.

3. Treatment of refractory keloid by postoperative HDR brachytherapy: An 89-month median follow-up retrospective study.

59Level IIICohortBrachytherapy · 2025PMID: 41015665

In 87 keloids with a median 89.7-month follow-up, postoperative HDR brachytherapy yielded 39% recurrences overall; however, ear keloids had a significantly lower recurrence risk (HR 0.38, p=0.02). One- and five-year recurrence-free survival were 0.89 and 0.67, respectively.

Impact: Provides long-term, site-specific evidence to refine indications for postoperative HDR brachytherapy in keloid management, directly impacting aesthetic scar care.

Clinical Implications: Consider postoperative HDR brachytherapy especially for ear keloids, where recurrence risk is lower; counsel male and previously treated patients regarding higher recurrence tendency and the need for close follow-up.

Key Findings

  • Median follow-up 89.7 months; overall recurrence rate 39%.
  • Recurrence-free survival: 0.89 at 1 year and 0.67 at 5 years.
  • Ear keloids had significantly lower recurrence risk vs other sites (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17–0.85, p=0.02).
  • Male sex and prior treatment trended toward higher recurrence risk.

Methodological Strengths

  • Long median follow-up with time-to-event analysis
  • Defined inclusion/exclusion criteria with histologic confirmation

Limitations

  • Retrospective single-center design without a non-brachytherapy control group
  • Potential confounding by lesion site, sex, and prior treatments

Future Directions: Prospective, controlled studies stratified by anatomical site to validate risk modifiers and optimize dose/fractionation for keloid HDR brachytherapy.