Skip Navigation
request an appointment my chart notification lp musc-logo-white-01 facebook twitter youtube blog find a provider circle arrow
MUSC mobile menu

STAT

An MUSC blog
Keyword: breast cancer

A new approach to breast reconstruction offers better results for more women. According to MUSC plastic surgeon Kevin O. Delaney, M.D., pre-pectoral breast reconstruction can benefit women who:

  • Are seeking reconstruction for the first time
  • Underwent reconstruction surgery years or decades ago but aren’t happy with the results or suffer side effects

If women aren’t satisfied with how their breasts look or feel after reconstruction—or have lingering pain from the procedure—this new technique may help them.

Pre-Pectoral Breast Reconstruction: What Is It?

MUSC Health provides a range of treatment options for women seeking breast reconstruction after a mastectomy. Whether a mastectomy was performed to treat or prevent breast cancer, Dr. Delaney works closely with MUSC Health’s Hollings Cancer Center team to guide women toward the best available options.

MUSC Health offers 2 main types of breast reconstruction today. Free-flap DIEP (deep inferior epigastric perforator) breast reconstruction relies on a patient’s own skin and fat tissue to rebuild breast tissue, whereas other procedures use breast implants.

As Dr. Delaney explains, pre-pectoral breast reconstruction is a new way of performing implant-based procedures, an approach MUSC Health has been offering for close to 2 years.

“We're one of the first centers in the region to perform this pre-pectoral, or subcutaneous, breast reconstruction,” says Dr. Delaney. “In this procedure, we place a breast implant just beneath the breast skin, which means we don't need to cut a patient’s pec muscles.”

Previously, surgeons would need to cut a patient’s pec (or pectoralis major) muscles in order to set the implant underneath these muscles. That’s how implant-based breast reconstruction has traditionally been performed for the past 20 to 30 years.

Breast Reconstruction Technique Offers Many Benefits

According to Dr. Delaney, the new pre-pectoral approach offers many pros and few cons. Two significant benefits to patients: a better cosmetic outcome and less pain.

“One main benefit to this approach is that the cosmetic outcome of the reconstructed breast looks a lot better,” Dr. Delaney explains. “Pre-pectoral breast reconstruction avoids what is commonly known as an animation deformity, which happens to most women who’ve had implant reconstruction under the muscle, to varying degrees.”

This animation deformity occurs when a woman moves her arms or flexes her muscles. The implant, as well as the overlying breast skin, flattens and moves towards the armpit, which many women consider undesirable, says Dr. Delaney.

Because the pre-pectoral technique eliminates the need for cutting the pec muscle, women experience significantly less pain in the short and long term. This equates to a much faster and easier recovery following the surgery. Women also don't lose any functionality of their pec muscle, which is a possibility with the traditional approach.

Dr. Delaney says this new technique is now the preferred route of implant-based breast reconstruction at MUSC. He says it’s slowly catching on nationwide but that as of now, it’s largely offered only through academic centers.

Pre-Pectoral Breast Reconstruction: The Right Candidates

Dr. Delaney assesses the best reconstruction approach on a case-by-case basis, but he says there are only a few reasons why he would recommend against the pre-pectoral approach for implant-based reconstruction.

The main caveat is if a woman has previously undergone radiation therapy to the breast. “Since the breast skin typically doesn't heal as well after it's been exposed to radiation, it makes the pre-pectoral breast reconstruction more risky from a healing and ultimately infection standpoint,” says Dr. Delaney.

However, the majority of women seeking breast reconstruction can benefit from this approach. In addition to offering current patients a better treatment option, this procedure could also benefit a wide swath of women who received breast reconstruction previously but aren’t happy with the results.

“Many women who have undergone sub-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction in the past, whether it was 3 years ago or 20 years ago, have significant complaints,” says Dr. Delaney. “Patients come to us with tightness in their chest or up into their arm, chronic pain in that area, as well as complaints about the animation deformity and how they don't like the look of their reconstructed breasts. Those are all real complaints that we hear every day.”

Previously, Dr. Delaney says he couldn’t offer those patients many solutions. But now, with this pre-pectoral technique, he says he can significantly improve many patients’ symptoms or complaints in a straightforward outpatient surgery that takes just a few hours.

“We can remove their old implant, put their muscle back down to where it belongs anatomically, and then put a newer, better implant in below the skin,” he says. “Their pain significantly improves. Their animation deformity goes away. And they're incredibly pleased with how much better their reconstructed breasts look and feel as opposed to when they were below the muscle.”

A Better Breast Reconstruction Option Now Available

Dr. Delaney wants to spread the message that there’s a new option available for women who may fall into this category—and that their health insurance would likely cover it because it’s a part of breast reconstruction care.

“As plastic surgeons, if patients have had breast cancer treated but they're displeased with their reconstruction, we want to help,” he says. “If they’re not local, we can often talk to patients via telehealth and let them know whether this procedure might benefit them.”

For more information, contact Dr. Delaney at delaneyk@musc.edu.
 

SUMMARY: A genomics approach at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) has unmasked genetic signatures in breast cancer cells that predict their sensitivity to certain drugs. The findings, published in the May 2, 2016 issue of Oncotarget, provide proof of concept for personalized pharmaceutical therapies that target the genes responsible for driving tumor growth.

Drug treatments for breast cancer patients might soon be designed based on the unique genetic autograph of their tumor.

A genomics approach at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) has unmasked genetic signatures in breast cancer cells that predict their sensitivity to certain drugs. The findings, published in the May 2, 2016 issue of Oncotarget, provide proof of concept for personalized pharmaceutical therapies that target the genes responsible for driving tumor growth.

Dr. Stephen EthierCertain oncogenes drive solid tumor growth in some breast cancer patients but are just passenger genes in others—expressed but not essential for growth. As a result, tumors in different breast cancer patients may respond differently to the same treatment depending on which oncogenes are active and which are just along for the ride. Identifying the panel of active genes in a patient’s tumor—called the functional oncogene signature—could help an oncologist select therapies that target its growth, according to Stephen P. Ethier, Ph.D., Interim Director of the Center for Genomic Medicine at MUSC and senior author on the study.  

“In order to move the field forward, we now need to be able to use oncogene signatures to tailor therapies using combinations of targeted drugs so that multiple driving oncogenes can be targeted at once,” said Ethier.  “Doing this successfully requires the identification of the oncogenes to which the cancer cells are addicted, as this allows the use of targeted drugs at very low doses. Low doses are essential if we are to use combinations of different targeted drugs.”

Ethier’s group identified unique functional oncogene signatures in four different human breast cancer cell types. Using next-generation genome sequencing and genome silencing as each cancer cell type grew and multiplied, they assembled a list of genes for each cell type’s functional oncogene signature—those genes that were copy number amplified or point mutated, and most essential to cancer cell survival. Although thousands of candidate oncogenes were screened during experimentation, only a handful made the list—fewer than 20 for each cell type.

The brevity of each list facilitated selection of the best oncogene for pharmaceutical targeting. Because lower doses of targeted drugs can be highly effective, side effects could be reduced. For example, Ethier’s group found that targeting two or more members of a signature with much lower total drug concentrations in combination still killed cancer cells better than one higher-concentration drug alone.

Remarkably, a BCL2L1-targeted drug  that worked in one cell line also then worked in a fifth breast cancer cell line with a similar oncogene signature containing BCL2L1, an oncogene not normally associated with breast cancer. This work demonstrates that one signature-targeting treatment can be extended to more than one cancer cell type. This means that patients with other types of cancer who have a similar functional oncogene signature might benefit from drugs that target BCL2L1, which are already in development.

Ethier thinks that oncogenes identified in a tumor biopsy might one day soon provide a rational and individualized approach to pharmaceutical treatment with targeted drug combinations. Meanwhile, these findings from his laboratory—showing the importance of considering a patient’s functional oncogene signature before testing a new drug— could provide a rationale for redesigning clinical trials for breast cancer.

Stephen T. Guest, Ph.D., of the MUSC Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, was first author on the study.

Subscribe to Progressnotes

Submit a Story Idea


Current Issue of Progressnotes

Digital EditionPDF | Home

Progressnotes - Spring 2017 cover thumb

Back Issues of Progressnotes

past issues of progressnotes