Search

Simple Summary: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer which multiplies and spreads quickly and is often resistant to traditional therapies which makes it challenging for treatment. While new treatments are being developed, investigators still lack essential information about the occurrence and real-world treatment of the disease. Our goal was to document the demographics of TNBC patients in a large Polish clinical centre and to identify changes in their treatment. We found that most patients had other health issues and their tumours were often growing quickly. About one-third of patients had BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations affecting treatment choices. We noticed a great increase in using multi-stage treatment among these patients, especially involving certain drugs and their high doses. Using these treatments before surgery was linked to more conserving surgeries. Our findings match global trends and will add to our understanding of planning effective treatments. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) poses a serious therapeutic challenge due to the occurrence of frequently aggressive, heterogenic, and metastatic tumours. The absence of therapeutic targets for traditional therapies is a hindrance to establishing a standardised therapy for TNBC. There is limited TNBCs epidemiological and real-world data about TNBC treatment regimens in Poland. We retrospectively analysed clinical data from our hospital registry from 2015 and 2020. A total of 8103 individuals with breast cancer were admitted to the MSCI, while 856 (10.6%) were diagnosed with TNBC. Most of the early-stage or locally advanced TNBC individuals had underlying conditions, presented mostly poorly differentiated (G3) stage II tumours and featured a bi-modal age distribution. On average, one-third of all tested TNBCs carried BRCA mutations and its identification impacted surgery preference. We observed a significant increase in the use of systemic therapy among TNBCs, whereas carboplatin and dose-dense regimens showed the most prominent upsurge in the neoadjuvant setting. Moreover, the use of neoadjuvants was positively correlated with less invasive breast and lymph node surgeries. The presented data align with general trends observed in other countries and will contribute to expanding knowledge in the planning of treatment regimens and their outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Performing this real-world analysis, we intended to see if postoperative (adjuvant) systemic treatment outcomes in a Polish melanoma patient population are comparable to the results from international trials based on which the treatment was registered worldwide. We intended to provide evidence on the efficacy and safety of postoperative melanoma treatment from everyday practice. We have shown that the type of surgical procedure on the lymph nodes prior to adjuvant treatment does not influence the outcome of that treatment. Our results support a de-escalation of surgery approach in melanoma patients. We support the value of adjuvant treatment for melanoma patients selected according to new guidelines implemented in parallel to the registration process. Analyzing the recorded side effects of adjuvant systemic treatment in our group of patients, we have noticed that severe complications worsen survival, giving us an indication not to treat by all means despite toxicity, particularly since it is a complementary to surgery treatment. Background: The landscape of melanoma management changed as randomized trials have launched adjuvant treatment. Materials and Methods: An analysis of data on 248 consecutive melanoma stage III and IV patients given adjuvant therapy in eight centers (February 2019 to January 2021) was conducted. Results: The analyzed cohort comprised 147 melanoma patients given anti-PD1 (33% nivolumab, 26% pembrolizumab), and 101 (41%) were given dabrafenib plus trametinib (DT). The 2-year overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and distant-metastases-free survival (DMFS) rates were 86.7%, 61.4%, and 70.2%, respectively. The disease stage affected only the RFS rate; for stage IV, it was 52.2% (95% CI: 33.4–81.5%) vs. 62.5% (95% CI: 52.3–74.8%) for IIIA-D, p = 0.0033. The type of lymph node surgery before adjuvant therapy did not influence the outcomes. Completion of lymph node dissection cessation after positive SLNB did not affect the results in terms of RFS or OS. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were associated with longer 24-month RFS, with a rate of 68.7% (55.5–84.9%) for TRAE vs. 56.6% (45.8–70%) without TRAE, p = 0.0031. For TRAE of grade ≥ 3, a significant decline in OS to 60.6% (26.9–100%; p = 0.004) was observed. Conclusions: Melanoma adjuvant therapy with anti-PD1 or DT outside clinical trials appears to be effective and comparable with the results of registration studies. Our data support a de-escalating surgery approach in melanoma treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]