Search

Male breast cancer (BC) represents less than 1% of male tumors. Little is known about male BC characteristics, management, and survival, with many studies based on a small number of cases. Consequently, the treatment of male BC lacks specific guidelines. The aims of the study are to compare male and female breast cancer (FBC) in terms of cancer clinical and anatomopathological features and treatment approach, and to identify differences between male BC and FBC in terms of survival. Patients and methods: Data from 2006 to 2018 were retrospectively acquired. Amounts of 49 males and 680 postmenopausal females with primary non-metastatic BC who underwent breast surgery at Mauriziano Hospital or IRCCS Candiolo (TO—Italy) were included. The mean age at diagnosis for male BC was 68.6 years, and males presented a smaller tumor size than women (p < 0.05) at diagnosis. Most male BC patients received adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) with tamoxifen (73.5%). AET drop-out rate due to side effects was 16.3% for males compared to 7.6% for women (p = 0.04). Comparing FBC and male BC, no differences have been identified in terms of DFS and OS, with a similar 10-year-relapse rate (12% male BC vs. 12.4% FBC). Propensity Score Matching by age, nodal status, pT, and molecular subtype had been performed and no differences in OS and DFS were seen between male BC and FBC. In conclusion, male BC and FBC have similar prognostic factors and survival outcomes. The drop-out rate of AET was higher in males, and side effects were the main reason for drug discontinuation.

Background: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence and mortality of women with hormone-receptor-positive tumors, but poor adherence remains a significant problem. The aim of this study was to analyze AET side effects and their impact on adherence to treatment. Methods: A total of 373 breast cancer patients treated with AET filled out a specific questionnaire during their follow up visits at the Breast Unit of our Centre. Results: Side effects were reported by 81% of patients, 84% of those taking tamoxifen and 80% of those taking aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The most common side effect in the tamoxifen group was hot flashes (55.6%), while in the AI group it was arthralgia (60.6%). The addition of GnRH agonists to both tamoxifen and AI significantly worsened all menopausal symptoms. Overall, 12% of patients definitively discontinued AET due to side effects, 6.4% during the first 5 years and 24% during extended therapy. Patients who had previously received chemotherapy or radiotherapy reported a significantly lower discontinuation rate. Conclusions: AET side effects represent a significant problem in breast cancer survivors leading to irregular assumption and discontinuation of therapy. Adherence to AET may be improved by trustful patient–physician communication and a good-quality care network.

(1) Background: In intermediate–high- and high-risk endometrial cancer (EC), radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) play a basic role. However, there is controversy regarding the optimal timing of their combination. The “sandwich” schedule involves adjuvant CT followed by RT and subsequent CT. The aim of this study is to assess the tolerability and efficacy of the “sandwich” schedule. (2) Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in two gynecological oncology units in Torino, Italy, from 1 January 2003 until 31 December 2021. Intermediate–high- and high-risk patients with available clinical data were included. Compliance with treatment, CT and RT toxicities, disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. (3) Results: A total of 118 patients were selected: 27.1% FIGO I-II stages and 72.9% III-IV. Most of the patients (75.4%) received a carboplatin–paclitaxel combination, and as much as 94.9% of CT cycles were completed. Chemotherapy-related G3-4 toxicities were detected in 5.3% of the patients, almost half of which were hematological. Grade 2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were reported in 8.4% and 4.2% of cases, respectively. With a median follow-up of 46 months, DFS was 77.6%, CSS was 70% and 5-year OS was 54%. (4) Conclusions: The “sandwich” schedule for CT and RT combination is an effective adjuvant treatment with low toxicity both in intermediate–high- and high-risk EC.

Background: atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) is a precancerous condition implying a high risk of concurrent endometrial cancer (EC), which might be occult and only diagnosed at postoperative histopathological examination after hysterectomy. Our study aimed to investigate potential differences in preoperative clinical, sonographic, and hysteroscopic characteristics in patients with AEH and postoperative diagnosis of EC. Methods: a retrospective single-center study was carried out on a case series of 80 women with AEH undergoing diagnostic workup, including ultrasonography and hysteroscopy, with subsequent hysterectomy. Women with AEH confirmed at the histopathological examination were compared with patients with a postoperative diagnosis of EC. Results: in our population, EC was diagnosed in 53 women, whereas the preoperative diagnosis of AEH was confirmed in 27 cases. At ultrasonography, women with occult EC showed greater endometrial thickness (20.3 mm vs. 10.3 mm, p 0.001) and size of the endocavitary lesion (maximum diameter 25.2 mm vs. 10.6 mm, p 0.001), and a higher prevalence of irregular endometrial-myometrial junction (40.5% vs. 6.7%, p 0.022) and endouterine vascularization at color Doppler (64.2% vs. 34.6%, p 0.017). At hysteroscopy, patients with occult EC showed a higher prevalence of necrosis (44.2% vs. 4.2%, p 0.001) and atypical vessels (70.6% vs. 33.3%, p 0.003), whereas true AEH mainly presented as a protruding intracavitary lesion (77.8% vs. 50.9%, p 0.029). In EC, subjective assessment by the operator was more frequently indicative of cancer (80.0% vs. 12.5%). No difference was found for clinical variables. Conclusions: occult EC in AEH may exhibit some differences in ultrasonographic and hysteroscopic patterns of presentation compared with real AEH, which could prompt a more significant suspect for the possible presence of concurrent EC at preoperative diagnostic workup.

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) remains the most effective treatment for menopausal symptoms and has been shown to prevent bone loss and fracture. The progestogen is added to provide endometrial protection in women with an intact uterus. After the publication of the initial WHI (Women’s Health Initiative) results in 2002 reporting an overall increased risk of breast cancer, many women discontinued HRT. Despite the re-analysis of the results by subgroups of patients and updates with extended follow-up, much controversy remains, which we will analyze later in the text. Different types of estrogen or progestogen, as well as different formulations, doses, and durations, may play a role in HRT’s effects on breast tissue. Evidence states that conjugated equine estrogen (CEE), compared to estro-progestin therapy, shows a better profile risk (HR 0.79, CI 0.65−0.97) and that, among different type of progestins, those structurally related to testosterone show a higher risk (RR 3.35, CI 1.07−10.4). Chronic unopposed endometrial exposure to estrogen increases the risk of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer, whereas the association with progestins, especially in continuous combined regimen, seems to reduce the risk (RR 0.71, CI 0.56−0.90). HRT was also associated with a protective effect on colon cancer risk (HR 0.61, CI 0.42−0.87). Data about ovarian and cervical cancer are still controversial.