Top

Published in:

01-03-2020 | Breast Cancer | Original Article

kOBCS^©: a novel software calculator program of the Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale (OBCS)

Authors: Tamer Soror, Valentina Lancellotta, György Kovács, Vito Lanzotti, Luca Tagliaferri, Calogero Casà, Cynthia Aristei, Francesco Barberini, Mohamed Mahmoud, Harun Badakhshi

Published in: Breast Cancer | Issue 2/2020

Abstract

Purpose

The Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale (OBCS) is an objective method that documents the aesthetic changes in breast cancer patients. This work evaluates the kOBCS^© software (http://www.kobcs.info) which simplifies the estimation of the OBCS values.

Methods

Five schematic drawings were photographed and imported into the kOBCS^©. Thirty photos of breast cancer patients were imported into kOBCS^©; 20 users (experts and non-experts) evaluated the photographs on two different settings. Subjective evaluation was performed using the Harvard breast cosmesis scale.

Results

There was a highly significant correlation between the OBCS values based on hand measurements and the values estimated by kOBCS^© (r = 0.997, P < 0.001). Agreement among the users using the kOBCS^© was strong with high statistical significance (ICC = 0.846, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.774–0.910, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.991). Results of the subjective analyses and mean OBCS values as estimated by kOBCS^© correlated significantly (r = 0.961, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The kOBCS^© is a reliable and reproducible easy-to-use software for reporting breast cosmesis following breast-conserving therapy.

Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):1233–41.CrossRef

Litière S, Werutsky G, Fentiman IS, Rutgers E, Christiaens M-R, Van Limbergen E, et al. Breast conserving therapy versus mastectomy for stage I–II breast cancer: 20 year follow-up of the EORTC 10801 phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(4):412–9.CrossRef

Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, Taylor C, Arriagada R, Clarke M, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;378(9804):1707–16.CrossRef

Christie DRH, O’Brien MY, Christie JA, Kron T, Ferguson SA, Hamilton CS, et al. A comparison of methods of cosmetic assessment in breast conservation treatment. Breast. 1996;5(5):358–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9776(96)90004-1.CrossRef

Vrieling C, Collette L, Fourquet A, Hoogenraad WJ, Horiot JH, Jager JJ, et al. The influence of patient, tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC “boost vs. no boost” trial. EORTC Radiotherapy and Breast Cancer Cooperative Groups. Radiother Oncol. 2000;55(3):219–32.CrossRef

Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson ARM, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD. Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg. 2003;90(12):1505–9.CrossRef

Triedman SA, Osteen R, Harris JR. Factors influencing cosmetic outcome of conservative surgery and radiotherapy for breast cancer. Surg Clin N Am. 1990;70(4):901–16.CrossRef

Vrieling C, Collette L, Bartelink E, Borger JH, Brenninkmeyer SJ, Horiot JC, et al. Validation of the methods of cosmetic assessment after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC “boost versus no boost” trial. EORTC Radiotherapy and Breast Cancer Cooperative Groups. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45(3):667–76.CrossRef

Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS, Vrieling C, MacMillan D, Rainsbury D, Heil J, et al. Recommendations for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135:629–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-1978-8.2012Oct;135(3):629-37.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Cardoso MJ, Oliveira H, Cardoso J. Assessing cosmetic results after breast conserving surgery. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(1):37–44.CrossRef

11.

Harris JR, Levene MB, Svensson G, Hellman S. Analysis of cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for stages I and II carcinoma of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1979;5(2):257–61.CrossRef

12.

Beadle GF, Come S, Henderson IC, Silver B, Hellman S, Harris JR. The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on the cosmetic results after primary radiation treatment for early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1984;10(11):2131–7.CrossRef

13.

Kaija H, Rauni S, Jorma I, Matti H. Consistency of patient- and doctor-assessed cosmetic outcome after conservative treatment of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997;45(3):225–8.CrossRef

14.

Van Limbergen E, van der Schueren E, Van Tongelen K. Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 1. Proposal of a quantitative scoring system. Radiother Oncol. 1989;16(3):159–67.CrossRef

15.

Soror T, Kovács G, Seibold N, Melchert C, Baumann K, Wenzel E, et al. Cosmetic changes following surgery and accelerated partial breast irradiation using HDR interstitial brachytherapy. Strahlentherapie Onkol. 2017;193(5):367–74.CrossRef

16.

Racz JM, Hong NL, Latosinsky S. In search of a gold standard scoring system for the subjective evaluation of cosmetic outcomes following breast-conserving therapy. Breast J. 2015;21(4):345–51.CrossRef

17.

Chen Z, Ning R. Why should breast tumour detection go three dimensional? Phys Med Biol. 2003;48(14):2217–28.CrossRef

18.

Hussain Z, Roberts N, Whitehouse GH, García-Fiñana M, Percy D. Estimation of breast volume and its variation during the menstrual cycle using MRI and stereology. Br J Radiol. 1999;72(855):236–45.CrossRef

19.

Moyer HR, Carlson GW, Styblo TM, Losken A. Three-dimensional digital evaluation of breast symmetry after breast conservation therapy. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207(2):227–32.CrossRef

20.

Kovacs L, Yassouridis A, Zimmermann A, Brockmann G, Wöhnl A, Blaschke M, et al. Optimization of 3-dimensional imaging of the breast region with 3-dimensional laser scanners. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56(3):229–36.CrossRef

21.

Fitzal F, Krois W, Trischler H, Wutzel L, Riedl O, Kühbelböck U, et al. The use of a breast symmetry index for objective evaluation of breast cosmesis. Breast. 2007;16(4):429–35.CrossRef

22.

Pezner RD, Patterson MP, Hill LR, Vora N, Desai KR, Archambeau JO, et al. Breast retraction assessment: an objective evaluation of cosmetic results of patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11(3):575–8.CrossRef

23.

Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ. Towards an intelligent medical system for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Artif Intell Med. 2007;40(2):115–26.CrossRef

24.

Soror T, Kovács G, Kovács Á, Seibold N, Melchert C, Baumann K, et al. New objective method in reporting the breast cosmesis after breast-conservative treatment based on nonstandardized photographs: the Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale. Brachytherapy. 2016;15(5):631–6.CrossRef

25.

Lancellotta V, Seipelt L, Hannoun-Levi JM, Tagliaferri L, Chand ME, Perrucci E, et al. Multi-institutional evaluation of the reproducibility and the accuracy of the Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale. Brachytherapy. 2018;17(6):944–8.CrossRef

Authors: Tamer Soror
Valentina Lancellotta
György Kovács
Vito Lanzotti
Luca Tagliaferri
Calogero Casà
Cynthia Aristei
Francesco Barberini
Mohamed Mahmoud
Harun Badakhshi
Publication date: 01-03-2020
Publisher: Springer Japan
Keywords: Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Published in: Breast Cancer / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1340-6868
Electronic ISSN: 1880-4233
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-019-01006-w

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Risk factors for early postoperative psychological problems in breast cancer patients after axillary lymph node dissection

Internal mammary node irradiation improves 8-year survival in breast cancer patients: results from a retrospective cohort study in real-world setting

Vitamin K2 induces non-apoptotic cell death along with autophagosome formation in breast cancer cell lines

Comparison of subjective, objective and patient-reported cosmetic outcomes between accelerated partial breast irradiation and whole breast radiotherapy: a prospective propensity score-matched pair analysis

The Turkish SentiMAG feasibility trial: preliminary results

Comparative anti-proliferative effects of potential HER2 inhibitors on a panel of breast cancer cell lines

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer