The first topic of the consensus panel was the estimated clinical benefit of tumour-free margins after excision of the primary invasive tumour. At the St. Gallen Conference 2017, the panel suggested that “no ink on tumour” (meaning the tumour does not extend to the edge of excised tissue) provides adequate local control, i.e. an optimal local recurrence rate and/or lower rate of secondary surgery, in patients to receive standard radiotherapy . This year, the panel zoomed in further on this topic. The majority of the panellists (86%) agreed that “no ink on tumour” also provides clinical benefit in patients with multifocal residual disease after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. In case of lobular cancer (no neoadjuvant systemic therapy!), 73% of the panellists accepted “no ink on tumour” to provide clinical benefit, and in case of the presence of extensive intraductal component, 63% of the panellists agreed “no ink on tumour” to provide clinical benefit. In addition, almost half of the panellists (46%) took the view that even 1 mm “ink on tumour” should require re-excision. In contrast, 38% of the panellists regarded 4 mm “ink on tumour” acceptable to forgo re-excision.
- Curiglioane G, et al. Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 1700–1712.
« Prostate cancer active surveillance: Better patient risk stratification and use of imaging Next Article
Male infertility/Premature ejaculation »
Table of Contents: BCC 2019
St. Gallen Consensus
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.