Search

Simple Summary: Sacituzumab govitecan is an antibody–drug conjugate that has been approved for the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and, recently, also for metastatic hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer. Although patients with metastatic breast cancer frequently need palliative radiotherapy, none of the published prospective trials studied the combination of radiotherapy and Sacituzumab govitecan. We conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort study to assess the efficacy and safety of Sacituzumab govitecan and palliative radiotherapy. We did not find signs of increased toxicity, and response rates were favorable despite extensive prior treatment. More research is necessary to determine the optimal integration of novel systemic agents and radiotherapy in the palliative setting. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is a new treatment option for patients with metastatic triple-negative and hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. This antibody–drug conjugate is currently approved as monotherapy. Palliative radiotherapy is frequently used to treat symptomatic metastases locally. Concurrent use of SG and irradiation was excluded in clinical trials of SG, and there are currently limited published data. We report here a systematic review, as well as a retrospective multi-center study of 17 patients with triple-negative breast cancer who received concurrent SG and radiotherapy. In these patients, concurrent use was found to be efficient, safe and well tolerated. There were no apparent differences in moderate or severe acute toxicity according to the timing of SG administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Anti-hormonal therapie regimes are well established in oncological treatments in breast cancer. In contrast there is limited knowledge of their effects on metastatic brain metastases in advanced breast cancer and their ability to cross the blood brain-barrier. In this review, we point out the usual antihormonal therapy options in the primary disease, but also in metastatic breast cancer. In addition, we explain the epidemiological facts of brain metastases, as well as the basics of the blood-brain barrier and how this is overcome by metastase. Last but not least, we deal with the known anti-hormonal therapy options and present clinical studies on their intracerebral effect, as well as the known basics of their blood-brain barrier penetration. Not all common anti-hormonal therapeutics are able to penetrate the CNS. It is therefore important for the treating oncologists to use substances that have been proven to cross the BBB, despite the limited data available. Aromataseinhibitors, especially letrozole, probably also tamoxifen, everolimus and CDK4/6 inhibitors, especially abemaciclib, appear to act intracerebrally by overcoming the blood-brain barrier. Nevertheless, further data must be obtained in basic research, but also health care research in relation to patients with brain metastases. The molecular receptor status of breast cancer has implications for prognosis and long-term metastasis. Although metastatic luminal B-like, hormone-receptor-positive, HER2−negative, breast cancer causes brain metastases less frequently than other subtypes, though tumor metastases in the brain are increasingly being detected of this patient group. Despite the many years of tried and tested use of a wide variety of anti-hormonal therapeutic agents, there is insufficient data on their intracerebral effectiveness and their ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. In this review, we therefore summarize the current state of knowledge on anti-hormonal therapy and its intracerebral impact and effects on the blood-brain barrier in breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In order to offer optimal treatment approaches based on available evidence, the Commission Breast of the Working Group Gynecologic Oncology (AGO) of the German Cancer Society developed therapy algorithms for eight complex treatment situations in primary and advanced breast cancer. Summary: Therapy algorithms for the following complex treatment situations are outlined in this paper: (neo)adjuvant therapy of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer; axillary surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy; adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients; adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients; hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: strategies; HR-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: endocrine-based first-line treatment; HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: first to third-line; metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Key Messages: The therapy options shown in these algorithms are based on the current AGO recommendations updated in January 2020 but cannot represent all evidence-based treatment options. Prior therapies, performance status, comorbidities, patient preference, etc. must be taken into account for the actual treatment choice. Therefore, in individual cases, other evidence-based treatment options not listed here may also be appropriate and justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Objectives:BRCA mutation carriers and women at high risk of breast/ovarian cancer are faced with the intricate question to opt for prophylactic surgeries and/or a periodic screening. The aim of this study was therefore to identify objective and emotional factors that have an impact on the decision-making process. Methods: Ninety-five women with BRCA mutations or women at increased breast/ovarian cancer lifetime risk were counseled at our outpatient department and either opted for prophylactic surgery or periodic screening. To identify the psychological factors that could have influenced the decision-making, a standardized questionnaire was applied. Additionally, clinical data were collected and were reviewed by a personal talk. Results: Seventy-one of the patients opted for an increased surveillance only, 21 for prophylactic surgeries. Positive predictors for prophylactic surgeries were sociodemographic characteristics such as parity and objective variables such as verified mutation status. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that the need for safety in health issues has been the only significant psychological predictor of surgery beyond the objective factors. Fear of surgical procedures, menopausal symptoms after surgery, loss of attractiveness, or fear of interferences with sexual life did not significantly affect decision-making. Conclusion: Decision-making towards prophylactic surgeries is influenced by objective but also emotional factors. Knowing that fear and anxiety also have an important impact on decision-making, distinct counselling about the procedures, the subsequent risk reduction as well as the psychological effects of prophylactic surgeries are essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to answer the questions where breast cancer patients in Germany receive follow-up care (with what types of doctors) and what are the long-term problems and treatment regrets of breast cancer patients.Methods: In the prospective multicenter cohort study BRENDA II ("Breast Cancer under Evidence-Based Guidelines"), 456 patients with primary breast cancer were sampled consecutively over a period of 4 years (2009-2012) and contacted again 5 years after surgery. Long-term problems were elicited on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 ('not at all') to 3 ('very much').Results: 82% of the patients receive follow-up (FU) at the private practice gynecologist. In 22%, the initial treating hospital is involved in the FU, and in 20% the general practitioner does this (multiple answers possible). Long-term problems attributed to the treatment were most often related to endocrine therapy (mean 1.29) and to chemotherapy (mean 0.94). Most of the patients were happy to have had radiotherapy (95%). For chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and antibody therapy, the satisfaction for the treatment decision was 87%, 87%, and 84% respectively. Among patients who reported they regretted having undergone a recommended treatment, it was most often for endocrine therapy (5%) and chemotherapy (4%).Conclusion: In Germany, different specialists are involved in the patients' FU care for BC. The detection of long-term problems due to BC treatment is an essential part of FU care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Multimodal therapies affect the quality of life (QoL) of patients with primary breast cancer (PBC). The objectives of this prospective study were to explore the changes in QoL from diagnosis to conclusion of adjuvant therapy and to identify predictive factors of QoL.Methods: Before surgery (t1), before onset of adjuvant treatment (t2) and after completion of adjuvant chemo- or radiotherapy (t3), patients with PBC (n = 759) completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Patient Health Questionnaire and Perceived Involvement in Care Scales. Predictors of the course of global QoL were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. Effect estimates are odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: Global QoL improved between t1 and t3, while physical functioning, emotional functioning and fatigue deteriorated. QoL before surgery was more often poor in patients <60 years (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.5-3.1) and in those with comorbid mental illnesses (OR 8.6, CI 5.4-13.7). Forty-seven percentage reported good global QoL both at t1 and at t3. QoL improved in 28%, worsened in 10% and remained poor in 15%. Compared to patients with consistently good global QoL, a course of improving QoL was more often seen in patients who had received a mastectomy and in those with intense fear of treatment before surgery. A course of decreasing QoL was more often found in patients who were treated with chemotherapy. QoL stayed poor in patients with chemotherapy, mastectomy and intense fear. There was no evidence that radiotherapy, progressive disease or perceived involvement impact the course of QoL.Conclusions: Younger age and comorbid mental illnesses are associated with poor QoL pre-therapeutically. QoL is more likely to stay or become poor in patients who receive chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The development of metastases is the most aggressive attribute of breast cancer. In this retrospective multicenter study, we evaluated if and how the different pathological breast cancer subtypes influence the spreading of tumor cells, the development of metastasis and the survival of breast cancer patients.Methods: This retrospective German multicenter study is based on the BRENDA collective including 9625 breast cancer patients treated in the adjuvant setting. We used the χ 2 tests for the analysis of the categorical variables between groups of patients with different sites of metastasis. Survival distributions and median survival times were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. The log-rank test was applied to compare survival rates. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio and confidence intervals.Results: 886 women developed metastases during a time interval of 53 months after primary diagnosis. Luminal A tumor patients were more likely to get bone metastases than lung, liver or CNS metastases. Patients with a triple-negative subtype were, however, the least affected by metastasis in the skeleton. They were most likely to develop visceral metastases. Location, numbers of metastases herein and the subtype influenced the overall survival (OAS). Altogether, the best OAS was found in patients with the luminal A subtype, the worst in patients with the triple-negative subtype.Conclusions: Knowledge of the typical metastatic pattern of the subtypes of breast cancer will help to personalize therapeutic options and follow-up examinations of cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In this study based on the BRENDA data, we investigated the impact of endocrine ± chemotherapy for luminal A, nodal positive breast cancer on recurrence free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). In addition, we analysed if tumor size of luminal A breast cancer influences survival in patients with the same number of positive lymph nodes. Methods: In this retrospective multi-centre cohort study data of 1376 nodal-positive patients with primary diagnosis of luminal A breast cancer during 2001–2008 were analysed. The results were stratified by therapy and adjusted by age, tumor size and number of affected lymph nodes. Results: In our study population, patients had a good to excellent prognosis (5-year RFS: 91% and tumorspecific 5-year OS 96.5%). There was no significant difference in RFS stratified by patients with only endocrine therapy and with endocrine plus chemo-therapy. Patients with 1–3 affected lymph nodes had no significant differences in OS treated only with endocrine therapy or with endocrine plus chemotherapy, independent of tumor size. Patients with large tumors and more than 3 affected lymph nodes had a significant worse survival as compared to the small tumors. However, despite the worse prognosis of those, adjuvant chemotherapy failed in order to improve RFS. Conclusions: According to our data, nodal positive patients with luminal A breast cancer have, if any, a limited benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Tumor size and nodal status seem to be of prognostic value in terms of survival, however both tumor size as well as nodal status were not predictive for a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study examined the association between cognitive impairment and guideline adherence for application of chemotherapy in older patients with breast cancer. Patients and methods: In the prospective multicenter cohort study BRENDA II, patients aged ≥65 years with primary breast cancer were sampled over a period of 4 years (2009‐2012). A multiprofessional team (tumor board) discussed recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy according to the German S3 guideline. Cognitive impairment was screened by the clock‐drawing test (CDT) prior to adjuvant treatment. Results: Two hundred and sixty‐three patients were included in the study and CDT data were available for 193 patients. Thirty‐one percent of the patients had cognitive impairment with different degree of severity. In high‐risk patients (n = 61) tumor board recommendation in favor of chemotherapy was 90% and in intermediate‐risk patients (n = 170) 27%. Not receiving recommendation for chemotherapy in spite of guideline recommendation was more frequent in patients with cognitive impairment (67%) vs patients without cognitive impairment (46%) with P = 0.02 (OR 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2‐4.9). Age, education, migration background and comorbidities were not associated with chemotherapy recommendation by the tumor board among cognitively impaired patients. Once the tumor board had recommended chemotherapy, application of chemotherapy was similar in both groups of patients with or without cognitive impairment. Conclusion: Almost one third of older patients with breast cancer are affected by cognitive impairment prior to adjuvant treatment. In these patients, cognitive impairment was associated with tumor board decision against chemotherapy in spite of a positive guideline recommendation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among patients with breast or gynecological cancer, supportive care needs are both highly prevalent and enduring. However, little is known about whether meeting patients' needs is accompanied by increased quality of life (QoL). We aimed to explore patients' supportive care needs reported at the beginning of inpatient rehabilitation and examined whether meeting these needs resulted in improved QoL. Material and methods: In a multicenter, prospective cohort study with 2 measurement occasions (beginning and end of inpatient rehabilitation), 292 patients with breast and gynecological cancer (mean age 55 years; 71% breast cancer) were enrolled. In 73%, time since diagnosis was longer than 6 months. We obtained self-reports of supportive care needs in 12 domains and measured QoL using the EORTC QLQ-C30 functioning subscales. Results: At the beginning of inpatient rehabilitation, top-ranking severe supportive care needs concerned coordination of care (48%), medical information (45%), alleviation of physical symptoms (42%) and support with improving health behaviors (36%). At the end of inpatient rehabilitation, all needs assessed declined significantly, although many patients still expressed strong needs in some domains. However, meeting patients' needs was accompanied by improvements in all functioning subscales. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that meeting breast and gynecological cancer patients' supportive care needs during inpatient rehabilitation resulted in improved QoL. Given the considerable proportions of patients still reporting unmet needs at the end of their stay, stronger and continuing efforts seem warranted to meet these needs and thus further increase QoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The decision making process for axillary dissection has changed in recent years for patients with early breast cancer and positive sentinel lymph nodes (LN). The question now arises, what is the optimal surgical treatment for patients with positive axillary LN (pN+). This article tries to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a survival benefit for breast cancer patients with 3 or more positive LN (pN3+) and with more than 10 removed LN? (2) Is there a survival benefit for high risk breast cancer patients (triple negative or Her2 + breast cancer) and with 3 or more positive LN (pN3+) with more than 10 removed LN? (3) In pN + patients is the prognostic value of the lymph node ratio (LNR) of pN+/pN removed impaired if 10 or less LN are removed?Methods: A retrospective database analysis of the multi center cohort database BRENDA (breast cancer under evidence based guidelines) with data from 9625 patients from 17 breast centers was carried out. Guideline adherence was defined by the 2008 German National consensus guidelines.Results: 2992 out of 9625 patients had histological confirmed positive lymph nodes. The most important factors for survival were intrinsic sub types, tumor size and guideline adherent chemo- and hormonal treatment (and age at diagnosis for overall survival (OAS)). Uni-and multivariable analyses for recurrence free survival (RFS) and OAS showed no significant survival benefit when removing more than 10 lymph nodes even for high-risk patients. The mean and median of LNR were significantly higher in the pN+ patients with ≤10 excised LN compared to patients with > 10 excised LN. LNR was in both, uni-and multivariable, analysis a highly significant prognostic factor for RFS and OAS in both subgroups of pN + patients with less respective more than 10 excised LN. Multivariable COX regression analysis was adjusted by age, tumor size, intrinsic sub types and guideline adherent adjuvant systemic therapy.Conclusion: The removal of more than 10 LN did not result in a significant survival benefit even in high risk pN + breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In the treatment of breast cancer, decisions on adjuvant treatment reflect individual patient characteristics like age and comorbidity. This study assessed the association between adherence to guidelines for adjuvant treatment and survival while taking into account age at diagnosis and comorbidities. We collected the Charlson comorbidity index at baseline for 2179 women treated for primary breast cancer from 1992 to 2008 who participated in a German retrospective multicenter cohort study. We assessed subsequent adjuvant therapy guideline adherence and survival in relation to baseline comorbidities. Guidelines for adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy were more often violated in patients with higher Charlson score. Patients with higher Charlson scores received chemotherapy and radiotherapy less often and had higher rates of mastectomy. Irrespective of comorbidity (Charlson score 0, 1‐2, ≥3), patients with 100% guideline‐adherent adjuvant treatment showed better overall and disease‐free survival (DFS) compared to patients with guideline violations (GVs). Controlling for age, comorbidity and tumor characteristics, the hazard ratio for at least one GV was 1.65 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33‐2.07) for overall survival and 1.84 (95% CI: 1.53‐2.22) for DFS. Guideline‐adherent treatment was significantly less frequent in comorbid patients, although guideline adherence was strongly associated with improved survival, irrespective of severity, and number of comorbid diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most breast cancer patients require lumpectomy with axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The ACOSOG Z0011-trial failed to detect significant effects of ALND on disease-free and overall survival among patients with limited sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases. Intense dose-dense chemotherapy and supraclavicular fossa radiation (SFR) are indicated for patients with extensive axillary metastases. In this multicentered study, we investigated the relevance of ALND after positive SLNB to determine adequate adjuvant therapy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 1,214 patients with clinically nodal negative T1-T2 invasive breast cancer undergoing surgery at Hanau City Hospital Breast cancer center. Results: 681 patients underwent ALND after SLNB. 20 patients (8.5%) from the group with 1 or 2 SLN metastases (n = 236) showed more than 3 lymph node metastases after ALND. 13 patients (31.7%) from the group with more than 2 SLN metastases (n = 41) were diagnosed with a minimum of 4 axillary lymph node metastases after ALND. Conclusions: In 8.5% of the patients with 1 or 2 SLN metastases, ALND detected more than 3 macrometastases, setting the indication for intense dose-dense chemotherapy and SFR. More than 2 SLN metastases, T stage and grading predict lymph node metastases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify subgroups of patients with pT1 pN0 breast cancer (BC) who might not profit from adjuvant systemic therapy (AST). Methods: Data of 3,774 pT1 pN0 BC patients from 17 certified BC centres within the BRENDA study group were collected between 1992 and 2008 and retrospectively analysed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models. Results: 279 (7.4%) of the pT1 pN0 BC patients were T1a, 944 (25.0%) were T1b and 2,551 (67.6%) were T1c. There was no significant difference (p > 0.1) in recurrence-free survival (RFS)/overall survival (OAS) between patients with pT1a, pT1b, and T1c. Patients receiving any type of AST had a better outcome compared to women without AST after adjusting for age, tumour size, and intrinsic subtypes (RFS: p < 0.001; OAS: p < 0.001). AST was the most important prognostic parameter for RFS followed by intrinsic subtypes and age. Conclusion: Patients with pT1 pN0 BC profit from AST independently of molecular subtypes, tumour size, age or comorbidity, with 5-year RFS of more than 95%. The correct definition of subgroups of patients who do not need AST is still an open question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Luminal A breast cancers respond well to anti-hormonal therapy (HT), are associated with a generally favorable prognosis and constitute the majority of breast cancer subtypes. HT is the mainstay of treatment of these patients, accompanied by an acceptable profile of side effects, whereas the added benefit of chemotherapy (CHT), including anthracycline and taxane-based programs, is less clear-cut and has undergone a process of critical revision. Methods: In the framework of the BRENDA collective, we analyzed the benefits of CHT compared to HT in 4570 luminal A patients (pts) with primary diagnosis between 2001 and 2008. The results were adjusted by nodal status, age, tumor size and grading. Results: There has been a progressive reduction in the use of CHT in luminal A patients during the last decade. Neither univariate nor multivariate analyses showed any statistically significant differences in relapse free survival (RFS) with the addition of CHT to adjuvant HT, independent of the nodal status, age, tumor size or grading. Even for patients with more than 3 affected lymph nodes, there was no significant difference (univariate: p = 0.865; HR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.46–1.93; multivariate: p = 0.812; HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.45–1.88). Conclusions: The addition of CHT to HT provides minimal or no clinical benefit at all to patients with luminal A breast cancer, independent of the RFS-risk. Consequently, risk estimation cannot be the initial step in the decisional process. These findings–that are in line with several publications–should encourage the critical evaluation of applying adjuvant CHT to patients with luminal A breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mammography and ultrasound are the gold standard imaging techniques for preoperative assessment and for monitoring the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Maximum accuracy in predicting pathological tumor size non-invasively is critical for individualized therapy and surgical planning. We therefore aimed to assess the accuracy of tumor size measurement by ultrasound and mammography in a multicentered health services research study.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 6543 patients with unifocal, unilateral primary breast cancer. The maximum tumor diameter was measured by ultrasound and/or mammographic imaging. All measurements were compared to final tumor diameter determined by postoperative histopathological examination. We compared the precision of each imaging method across different patient subgroups as well as the method-specific accuracy in each patient subgroup.Results: Overall, the correlation with histology was 0.61 for mammography and 0.60 for ultrasound. Both correlations were higher in pT2 cancers than in pT1 and pT3. Ultrasound as well as mammography revealed a significantly higher correlation with histology in invasive ductal compared to lobular cancers (p < 0.01). For invasive lobular cancers, the mammography showed better correlation with histology than ultrasound (p = 0.01), whereas there was no such advantage for invasive ductal cancers. Ultrasound was significantly superior for HR negative cancers (p < 0.001). HER2/neu positive cancers were also more precisely assessed by ultrasound (p < 0.001). The size of HER2/neu negative cancers could be more accurately predicted by mammography (p < 0.001).Conclusion: This multicentered health services research approach demonstrates that predicting tumor size by mammography and ultrasound provides accurate results. Biological tumor features do, however, affect the diagnostic precision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study examined the frequency of psychiatric co-morbidity in patients with breast cancer, its changes over time and predictors for these changes.Methods: In a prospective study with measurements before surgery (t1, baseline), 1 month (t2) and 8 months thereafter (t3) using the Patient Health Questionnaire, we examined the course of psychiatric co-morbidity in breast cancer patients. The co-morbidity courses were grouped into healthy (no co-morbidity during the study), acute (co-morbidity at t1 and/or t2, but not at t3), emerging (no co-morbidity at t1, but at t3) and chronic (co-morbidity at t1 and t3).Results: Of the 598 participants, 19% had acute, 10% emerging and 9% chronic psychiatric co-morbidity. Acute co-morbidity was more common in patients with poor quality of life (odds ratio (OR) 9.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.4-20.8) and somatic co-morbidity (OR 3.8, CI 1.1-12.4). Patients who perceived support from their doctors had acute co-morbidity less frequently (OR 0.7, CI 0.5-1.0). Emerging co-morbidity occurred more often in younger patients (OR 2.4, CI 1.2-4.7) and in patients with another cancer in their own (OR 2.0, CI 1.1-3.9) or family (OR 2.1, CI 1.1-4.3) histories, less often in patients with support from doctors (OR 0.6, CI 0.4-1.0). Chronic co-morbidity was related to poor quality of life (OR 12.1, CI 3.6-39.9).Conclusion: We found acute and emerging psychiatric co-morbidities less often in patients who reported having a supportive doctor-patient relationship. Patients that require psycho-oncological support often have poor quality of life and have experienced cancer before. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fear of cancer treatment can become overwhelming. It is important to understand what patients are mainly afraid of and what factors are correlated with intense fear of treatment. Methods: Patients with primary breast cancer (n = 761) completed questionnaires about fear of treatment before surgery (t1), and before (t2) and after (t3) adjuvant treatment. Psychological co-morbidity was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire. Logistic regression identified predictors of intense fear of treatment. Results: Patients were most afraid of chemotherapy (mean score 3.5), and fear remained high throughout follow-up; fear of radiotherapy and of surgery was lower and decreased over time (from 2.7 to 2.2, p < 0.0001; and from 2.6 to 2.2, p < 0.0001, respectively). Patients with psychological co-morbidity (odds ratios (OR) 1.7-3.0) and those who had heard reports of negative experiences with cancer treatments from others (OR 3.8-16.2) were more likely to have intense fear of all the treatments. Patients with a previous cancer less often expressed fear of surgery (OR 0.6, 95% confidence interval 0.4-1.0). Conclusion: Fear of treatment, especially of chemotherapy, is prevalent in many patients with primary breast cancer. Patients with psychological co-morbidity and those who have heard reports of negative experiences with cancer treatment are at higher risk of experiencing intense fear. © 2015 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cystosarcoma phylloides (CSP) is a fibro-epithelial neoplasm of the breast. Not all CSP cases present as malignant tumors; they are therefore classified as benign, malignant, and borderline subtypes according to the WHO classification. The classification is based on several histopathological features of the neoplasm, such as mitosis rate or invasive growth of the tumor. The progression of this disease is mainly influenced by the classification of their degree. In western countries, this tumor entity usually occurs between 50 and 60 years of age. The major problem in the handling of these patients is the high local recurrence rate, whereas haematogenous metastasis is seldom seen. We therefore report three cases of haematogenous spread in a group of eight patients (two borderline and six malignant cases of CSP). Materials and methods: In this study, we investigated all patients suffering from malignant or borderline CSP, between May 1995 and January 2009, who were under the care of the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, Ulm. A written and informed consent was obtained from all patients included in this retrospective study. During this period, eight patients, fulfilling the criteria discussed before, were under the care of the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. All therapeutic decisions were taken by the interdisciplinary tumor board of the department (after 1999). Results: In the retrospective analysis of our study group, we found a high percentage of haematogenous metastasis that was always accompanied with a very poor prognosis in malignant CSP patients. Those patients always died within a short period of time. Two of these patients showed, while they underwent initial surgery, no metastatic suspect lesions and underwent R0 resection; both received a radical mastectomy. One patient already showed lung metastasis while undergoing first line surgery, because she initially declined surgery. We therefore speculate that postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy could lead to a favorable outcome in high risk patients, concerning the development of haematogenous metastasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The BRENDA-Score provides an easy to use tool for clinicians to estimate the risk of recurrence in primary breast cancer. The algorithm has been validated via a second independent database and provides five recurrence risk groups. This grouping helps clinicians to encourage high risk patients to undergo the recommended treatment. Background Current research in breast cancer focuses on individualization of local and systemic therapies with adequate escalation or de-escalation strategies. As a result, about two-thirds of breast cancer patients can be cured, but up to one-third eventually develop metastatic disease, which is considered incurable with currently available treatment options. This underscores the importance to develop a metastatic recurrence score to escalate or de-escalate treatment strategies. Patients and methods Data from 10,499 patients were available from 17 clinical cancer registries (BRENDA-project. In total, 8566 were used to develop the BRENDA-Index. This index was calculated from the regression coefficients of a Cox regression model for metastasis-free survival (MFS). Based on this index, patients were categorized into very high, high, intermediate, low, and very low risk groups forming the BRENDA-Score. Bootstrapping was used for internal validation and an independent dataset of 1883 patients for external validation. The predictive accuracy was checked by Harrell's c-index. In addition, the BRENDA-Score was analyzed as a marker for overall survival (OS) and compared to the Nottingham prognostic score (NPS). Results: Intrinsic subtypes, tumour size, grading, and nodal status were identified as statistically significant prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis. The five prognostic groups of the BRENDA-Score showed highly significant (p < 0.001) differences regarding MFS:low risk: hazard ratio (HR) = 2.4, 95%CI (1.7–3.3); intermediate risk: HR = 5.0, 95%CI.(3.6–6.9); high risk: HR = 10.3, 95%CI (7.4–14.3) and very high risk: HR = 18.1, 95%CI (13.2–24.9). The external validation showed congruent results. A multivariate Cox regression model for OS with BRENDA-Score and NPS as covariates showed that of these two scores only the BRENDA-Score is significant (BRENDA-Score p < 0.001; NPS p = 0.447). Therefore, the BRENDA-Score is also a good prognostic marker for OS. Conclusion: The BRENDA-Score is an internally and externally validated robust predictive tool for metastatic recurrence in breast cancer patients. It is based on routine parameters easily accessible in daily clinical care. In addition, the BRENDA-Score is a good prognostic marker for overall survival. Highlights: The BRENDA-Score is a highly significant predictive tool for metastatic recurrence of breast cancer patients. The BRENDA-Score is stable for at least the first five years after primary diagnosis, i.e., the sensitivities and specificities of this predicting system is rather similar to the NPI with AUCs between 0.76 and 0.81 the BRENDA-Score is a good prognostic marker for overall survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]