Patient-Level Evaluation of Optimal Margin Width for Lumpectomy in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: An Analysis of Patients in the National Cancer Database Special Study

PURPOSE Re-excision for close margins in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) aims to reduce recurrence rates. The current recommended margin width of ≥2 mm is based on study-level data. Using a multicenter cohort, we aimed to determine whether patient-level analysis of margin width support that negative margins <2 mm confer higher recurrence rates than margins ≥2 mm. METHODS We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of women diagnosed with DCIS between 2008 and 2015 treated with BCS. Patient, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome data were abstracted by local registrars and from a national database. Final margin width was categorized as positive (tumor on ink), 0.01-0.9 mm, 1.0-1.9 mm, or ≥2 mm. The primary outcome was ipsilateral recurrence. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of margin width on recurrence risk. RESULTS Among 11,156 women in the final cohort, 72.2% (n = 8,059) received BCS + radiotherapy and 27.8% (n = 3,097) received BCS alone. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years; median follow-up was 66.6 months. A total of 445 (4%) women experienced a recurrence during follow-up. In a multivariable adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in recurrence risk between the negative margin groups both in patients who had either BCS with radiation or BCS alone. In subgroup analyses by age, race, hormone receptor status, grade, size, endocrine therapy, and radiation treatment, only the age <50 years subgroup showed a significant difference in recurrence risk between narrow (0.01-1.9 mm) and wide (≥2 mm) margins. CONCLUSION In this multivariable analysis of 11,156 patients, negative margins <2 mm were not associated with a higher local recurrence risk compared with margins ≥2 mm except in patients younger than 50 years at diagnosis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco-25-02476
Primary Topic
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Patient-Level Evaluation of Optimal Margin Width for Lumpectomy in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: An Analysis of Patients in the National Cancer Database Special Study

Marc D. Ryser, Amanda L. Nash, Alastair Mark Thompson, Amanda B. Francescatti et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
article

Patient-Level Evaluation of Optimal Margin Width for Lumpectomy in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: An Analysis of Patients in the National Cancer Database Special Study

Marc D. Ryser, Amanda L. Nash, Alastair Mark Thompson, Amanda B. Francescatti, Jennifer Kay Plichta, Akiko Chiba, Ann H. Partridge, Anne McCarthy, Maggie Lee DiNome, Samantha Marie Thomas, Terry Hyslop, E. Shelley Hwang, Laura Horst Rosenberger, Susan G. R. McDuff, Elizabeth S. Frank, Ronald Weigel, Astrid Botty van den Bruele, Thomas Lynch, Yan Li
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE Re-excision for close margins in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) aims to reduce recurrence rates. The current recommended margin width of ≥2 mm is based on study-level data. Using a multicenter cohort, we aimed to determine whether patient-level analysis of margin width support that negative margins <2 mm confer higher recurrence rates than margins ≥2 mm. METHODS We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of women diagnosed with DCIS between 2008 and 2015 treated with BCS. Patient, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome data were abstracted by local registrars and from a national database. Final margin width was categorized as positive (tumor on ink), 0.01-0.9 mm, 1.0-1.9 mm, or ≥2 mm. The primary outcome was ipsilateral recurrence. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of margin width on recurrence risk. RESULTS Among 11,156 women in the final cohort, 72.2% (n = 8,059) received BCS + radiotherapy and 27.8% (n = 3,097) received BCS alone. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years; median follow-up was 66.6 months. A total of 445 (4%) women experienced a recurrence during follow-up. In a multivariable adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in recurrence risk between the negative margin groups both in patients who had either BCS with radiation or BCS alone. In subgroup analyses by age, race, hormone receptor status, grade, size, endocrine therapy, and radiation treatment, only the age <50 years subgroup showed a significant difference in recurrence risk between narrow (0.01-1.9 mm) and wide (≥2 mm) margins. CONCLUSION In this multivariable analysis of 11,156 patients, negative margins <2 mm were not associated with a higher local recurrence risk compared with margins ≥2 mm except in patients younger than 50 years at diagnosis.

Journal of Clinical Oncology
University of Geneva (CH), University of Iowa (US), Lurie Children's Hospital (US), Duke University (US), Baylor College of Medicine (US), Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center (US), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), Duke Medical Center (US), Duke University Hospital (US), American College of Surgeons (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.