Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Single Versus Double Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer in 2 Large Databases

PurposeTo identify biologic and outcome differences between double hormone receptor (HR)-positive (dHR⁺, estrogen receptor (ER)⁺/progesterone receptor [PgR⁺]) and single HR-positive (sHR⁺, either ER⁺/PgR⁻ or ER⁻/PgR⁺) breast cancer; and to explore whether hormone therapy (HT) response in HER2-negative breast cancer correlates with HR status.Patients and MethodsThis retrospective study was conducted by using 2 large breast cancer databases: the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) clinical data set. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) among sHR⁺ and dHR⁺ patients.ResultsIn the SEER database, dHR⁺ patients had significantly longer OS and BCSS than ER⁺/PgR⁻ patients in short-term follow-up (OS: hazard ratio = 0.620; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.590, 0.652; P < .001; BCSS: hazard ratio = 0.493; 95% CI, 0.462, 0.526; P < .001). Meanwhile, ER⁻/PgR⁺ patients had younger age, larger tumor size, and higher disease grade than dHR⁺ and ER⁺/PgR⁻ patients. In patients who received HT, dHR⁺ patients had a more favorable OS than ER⁺/PgR⁻ patients (hazard ratio = 0.789; 95% CI, 0.635, 0.982; P = .034), and ER⁻/PgR⁺ patients had a worse OS than ER⁺/PgR⁻ patients at 10 years’ follow-up (hazard ratio = 7.991; 95% CI, 1.053, 60.644; P = .044). However, these groups had similar outcomes over longer periods.ConclusionIn HER2-negative breast cancer, sHR⁺ patients are associated with relatively worse characteristics and worse short-term outcomes than dHR⁺ patients. Additionally, the outcome of patients receiving HT may differ according to the HR status. However, further studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.     

Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Overall Survival and Breast Cancer-Specific Survival Among Men With Stage I-II Breast Cancer: Analysis of SEER, 2000-2018

BackgroundMale breast cancer is a rare malignant tumor, and outcomes of breast conservation therapy (BCT) are currently lacking.MethodThe retrospective, population-based cohort study included 1369 stage I-II (T1–2 N0–1 M0) male breast cancer patients from the SEER database (2000-2018). The patients were grouped in two groups: BCT group and mastectomy group, according to surgical and radiation therapy. Kaplan-Meier method and univariable Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between two treatment groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance the confounding factors.ResultsOf the 1369 men, 97 (7%) patients received BCT, 1272 (93%) received mastectomy alone. The 5- and 10-year OS rates were 92.3% and 80.7% for BCT group compared with 80.4% and 61.4% for mastectomy group. The 5- and 10-year BCSS rates were 96.5% and 93.9% for patients undergoing BCT, as compared with 93.1% and 84.4% for patients undergoing mastectomy. Compared with mastectomy group, BCT group showed improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.294; 95% CI 0.138-0.623, P = .002) and BCSS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.182; 95% CI 0.040-0.820, P = .027). Of the 791 patients with T1 stage, BCT showed insignificant association with OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.555; 95% CI 0.207-1.488, P = .242) and BCSS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.217; 95% CI 0.171-8.675, P = .844).ConclusionThe results of this cohort study suggest that BCT is at least equivalent to mastectomy in male breast cancer patients. The underlying mechanism of this association needs further research.     

Outcome of Male Breast Cancer: A Matched Single-Institution Series

BackgroundBreast cancer occurs rarely in men, accounting for approximately 1% of all breast carcinomas. Data on prognosis principally derive from retrospective studies and from extrapolation of female breast cancer series.Patients and MethodsA total of 99 men with invasive breast cancer were matched with 198 women with breast cancer who had surgery at the same institution from 1999 to 2010. Matching variables were year of surgery, age, primary tumor size, nodal involvement, hormone receptor status, status of HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [ERBB2]), Ki-67, and grade. Median follow-up was 8.6 years.ResultsDisease-free survival (DFS) was significantly poorer in the men (10-year DFS, 51.7% vs. 66.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.79; 95% CI, 1.19-2.68; P = .004). Similar results were observed for overall survival (OS) (10-year OS, 70.7% vs. 84.2%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.01-3.15; P = .043). The cumulative incidence of death for causes not related to the primary breast cancer was significantly higher for men than for women (HR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.58-5.22; P = .001), whereas the breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) was similar between the 2 groups (10-year BCSS, 81.5% vs. 88%; HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.62-2.59; P = .517).ConclusionThis comparative series found that men with breast cancer had a poorer DFS and OS when compared with women. The men also had a higher risk of contralateral tumors and second primaries. Appropriate counseling, surveillance, and prevention are recommended to improve survival for these individuals.     

Reproductive behaviors and risk of developing breast cancer according to tumor subtype: A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies

BackgroundBreast cancer is composed of distinct subtypes defined mainly based on the expression of hormone receptors (HR) and HER2. For years, reproductive factors were shown to impact breast cancer risk but it is unclear whether this differs according to tumor subtype. In this meta-analysis we evaluated the association between parity, age at first birth, breastfeeding and the risk of developing breast cancer according to tumor subtype.MethodsPubMed and Embase were searched to identify epidemiological studies that evaluated the impact of parity and/or age at first birth and/or breastfeeding on breast cancer risk with available information on HR and HER2. Tumor subtypes were defined as: luminal (HR-positive, HER2-negative or HER2-positive), HER2 (HR-negative, HER2-positive) and triple-negative (HR-negative, HER2-negative). Summary risk estimates (pooled OR [pOR]) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects models. The MOOSE guidelines were applied.ResultsThis meta-analysis evaluated 15 studies, including 21,941 breast cancer patients and 864,177 controls. Parity was associated with a 25% reduced risk of developing luminal subtype (pOR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70–0.81; p < 0.0001). Advanced age at first birth was associated with an increased risk of developing luminal subtype (pOR 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00–1.32; p = 0.05). Ever breastfeeding was associated with a reduced risk of developing both luminal (pOR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66–0.88; p = 0.003) and triple-negative (pOR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.66–0.94; p = 0.01) subtypes.ConclusionsThe reproductive behaviors impact the risk of developing breast cancer but this varies according to subtype.     

Prevalence,Outcome, and Management of Risk Factors in Patients With Breast Cancer With Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Tertiary Cancer Center’s Experience

IntroductionThe risk factors of breast cancer overlap with those of peripheral arterial disease (PAD), with increasing prevalence. In addition, there is under-utilization of risk factor modification measures in patients with PAD.Materials and MethodsElectronic medical records of patients with breast cancer with International Classification of Diseases 9/10 codes for PAD spanning 10 years from June 1, 2009 to June 1, 2019 were reviewed.ResultsA total of 248 patients, 98% women, with a median age of 75 years and with a median follow-up of 76 months, were included. PAD risk factors were identified as smoking (44%), obesity (38%), hyperlipidemia (68%), hypertension (HTN) (74%), and diabetes (42%). Overall, survival was significantly impacted by smoking (P = .0301) and HTN (P = .0052). In a Cox proportion hazard ratio regression, HTN (overall death hazard ratio [HR], 3.1784; 95% CI, 1.0291-6.7490; P = .0070; cancer-related death HR, 2.6354; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0291-6.7490; P = .0434) and smoking (overall death HR, 1.7452; 95% CI 1.0707-2.8444; P = .0255; cancer-related death HR, 2.7432; 95% CI, 1.4190-5.3030; P = .0027) were predictors of overall death and cancer-related death. Of all patients, 48% were on statins and 54% were on antiplatelet therapies. Of the patients, 62% of current smokers were offered a smoking cessation program, 27% of obese patients were offered a nutrition consult, 42% of patients with diabetes had blood glucose controlled, and 54% of patients with HTN had blood pressure controlled.ConclusionSmoking and HTN are risk factors associated with decreased survival and predictive of overall death and cancer-related death. In this population, risk factor modification was under-utilized.     

Combined Estrogen Receptor and Progesterone Receptor Level Can Predict Survival Outcome in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-positive Early Breast Cancer

BackgroundIn human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, emerging evidence imply that clinical behaviors differ according to hormone receptor (HR) status. However, there is no conclusion about the relevance between estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) expression and clinical outcome of HER2+ breast cancer. Our study aimed to determine the influence of different ER/PR levels on survival outcome of HER2+ early breast cancer.Patients and MethodsNine hundred and nineteen early HER2+ breast cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed and HR+/HER2+ patients were further divided based on ER level (Low/L: 1%-9%; Median/M: 10%-79%; High/H: 80%-100%) and PR level (Low/L: 0%-19%; High/H: 20%-100%) according to restricted cubic spline (RCS) smoothing curve. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan–Meier method and log rank test.ResultsFour hundred and forty two HR+/HER2+ and 477 HR-/HER2+ breast cancer patients were included in our study and 73.2% received target therapy (HR+ 69.7%, HR- 76.5%). While HR+/HER2+ breast cancer showed better survival than HR-/HER2+ subtype in 5-year disease free survival (DFS, 93.0% vs. 86.8%, P < .001), no significant difference was observed between DFS in ER+/PR+ and ER+/PR- subgroup (94.4% vs. 90.4%, P = .22). However, a potential correlation was found between ER/PR levels and DFS in HR+/HER2+ (P = .074) tumors. In HR+/HER2+ breast cancer, all subgroups showed DFS improvement trend versus M-ER/L-PR. In all HER2+ patients, hazard ratio of H-ER/H-PR compared with HR- subtype was 0.10 (95%CI 0.01-0.74, P = .024) in all patients and 0.14 (95%CI, 0.02-1.02, P = .053) in patients receiving anti-HER2 therapy.ConclusionER/PR expression may become a predictor of survival benefit in HER2+ early breast cancer and a higher ER/PR level might be associated with better DFS.     

Divergent effects of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor expression on prognosis of estrogen receptor positive versus triple negative invasive ductal breast carcinoma

The insulin-like growth factor type 1 receptor (IGF1R) is involved in progression of breast cancer and resistance to systemic treatment. Targeting IGF1R signaling may, therefore, be beneficial in systemic treatment. We report the effect of IGF1R expression on prognosis in invasive ductal breast carcinoma (IDC), the most common type of breast cancer. Immunohistochemistry was performed on tumor tissue of a consecutive cohort of 429 female patients treated for operable primary IDC. Associations between IGF1R expression with clinicopathological parameters, disease free survival (DFS) and breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) were evaluated by multivariate analyses focusing on ER-positive and triple negative IDC (TN-IDC). To enlarge the TN-IDCs cohort, we analyzed a combined dataset of 51 TN-IDC tumors from our series with 64 TN-IDCs with similar clinicopathological parameters. Patients with tumors expressing cytoplasmic IGF1R have a longer DFS and BCSS (DFS: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27–0.49, P = 0.005, BCSS: HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19–0.74, P = 0.005). This effect was most prominent in ER-positive tumors. However, in a combined series of 105 TN-IDCs cytoplasmic IGF1R expression was associated with a shorter DFS (HR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.08–4.84, P = 0.03), also when combined in a multivariate model, including well-known prognostic factors (HR 2.06; 95% CI 0.95–4.47; P = 0.07). IGF1R expression in ER-positive IDC is strongly related to a favorable DFS and BCSS, but to a shorter DFS in TN-IDC tumors. This divergent effect of IGF1R expression in subgroups of IDC may affect selection of patients for IGF1R targeted therapy.     

Type of Breast Cancer Diagnosis,Screening, and Survival

IntroductionBreast cancer screening is known to reduce mortality. In the present study, we analyzed the prevalence of breast cancers detected through screening, before and after introduction of an organized screening, and we evaluated the overall survival of these patients in comparison with women with an extrascreening imaging-detected breast cancer or those with palpable breast cancers.Materials and MethodsWe collected data about all women who underwent a breast operation for cancer in our department between 2001 and 2008, focusing on type of tumor diagnosis, tumor characteristics, therapies administered, and patient outcome in terms of overall survival, and recurrences. Data was analyzed by R (version 2.15.2), and P < .05 was considered significant.ResultsAmong the 2070 cases of invasive breast cancer we considered, 157 were detected by regional mammographic screening (group A), 843 by extrascreening breast imaging (group B: 507 by mammography and 336 by ultrasound), and 1070 by extrascreening breast objective examination (group C). The 5-year overall survival in groups A, B, and C were, respectively, 99% (95% CI, 98%-100%), 98% (95% CI, 97%-99%), and 91% (95% CI, 90%-93%), with a significant difference between the first 2 groups and the third (P < .05) and a trend between groups A and B (P = .081).ConclusionThe diagnosis of invasive breast cancer with screening in our population resulted in a survival gain at 5 years from the diagnosis, but a longer follow-up is necessary to confirm this data.     

Nomograms for Predicting Overall and Recurrence-free Survival From Pathologic Stage IA and IB Lung Cancer After Lobectomy

BackgroundStage I non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is potentially curable with surgical resection. Significant proportions of patients may still experience recurrence and death despite undergoing curative surgery. This study describes predictive nomograms for recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) after lobectomy.Patients and MethodsA total of 301 patients with the American Joint Committee on Cancer pathologic stage IA and IB NSCLC who underwent open, thoracoscopic, or robotic lobectomy from January 2011 to April 2017 were analyzed. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to create nomograms for OS and RFS. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated for OS and RFS comparing high-risk and low-risk cohorts based on nomogram scores.ResultsHistology (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.56; P = .002), lymphovascular invasion (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29-0.74; P = .001), smoking status (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.25-9.55: P = .02), and total lymph nodes removed (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; P = .021) were significant predictors for OS in a multivariate model. Lymphovascular invasion (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83; P = .0040), smoking status (HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.16-5.62; P = .02), total lymph nodes removed (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.08; P = .029), and tumor size (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.30-1.68; P = .047) were significant predictors of RFS in a multivariate model.ConclusionNomograms can predict OS and RFS for pathologic stage IA and IB NSCLC after lobectomy regardless of operative approach. The risk for death and recurrence after stratification by the nomogram scores may provide guidance regarding adjuvant therapy and surveillance.     

Long-term Survival Comparison of Repeated Breast-conserving Surgery Versus Mastectomy for Patients with DCIS with Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence: A Real-world Longitudinal Study

BackgroundAlthough patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) harbor excellent overall survival (OS) after breast-conserving therapy, the evidence regarding to surgical management for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is scarce. This study aimed to assess the prognosis of repeated breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy for IBTR in DCIS survivors.Materials and MethodsHerein, 5344 DCIS cases with IBTR were identified during 702,748 person-years of follow-up, 3532 (66.09%) received mastectomy, and 1812 (33.91%) received repeated BCS. Cox regression and competing risk regression were employed to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for OS and breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS), which was respectively calculated within spontaneous and matched cohorts.ResultsAfter adjustment for confounders, no statistically significant survival difference was observed between the repeated BCS and mastectomy for patients with DCIS with IBTR. The stratified analyses further revealed that patients with DCIS with IBTR receiving repeated BCS combined with radiation therapy were associated with both superior OS (HR, 0.79; CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .04) and BCSS (HR, 0.54; CI, 0.33-0.90; P = .02) compared with counterparts undergoing mastectomy. Furthermore, patients with DCIS who were age older than 60 years at IBTR diagnosis benefit from repeated BCS with radiotherapy (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.24-0.84; P = .01) than mastectomy.ConclusionWe suggest that repeated BCS with radiation therapy deserves consideration when DCIS survivors suffered IBTR. The choice of surgical management should be tailored based on patients’ age at IBTR diagnosis and size of recurrent disease.     

Evaluating Family History Links between Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer Among PLCO Trial Participants

IntroductionThe objective of this study was to assess family history links between breast cancer and prostate cancer in a prospectively collected cohort from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovary (PLCO) trial.Patients and MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of the PLCO trial datasets. Eligible patients included female participants with complete information about prostate cancer family history and male participants with complete information about breast cancer family history. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess the impact of prostate cancer family history on breast cancer incidence and mortality. Likewise, multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess the impact of breast cancer family history on prostate cancer incidence and mortality.ResultsA total of 45,807 female participants were eligible and included in the current study, and a total of 43,009 male participants were eligible and included in the current analysis. Within a multivariate Cox regression analysis, prostate cancer family history in a first-degree relative (FDR) was associated with a higher probability of diagnosis of breast cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 1.128; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.007-1.265; P = .038); whereas it was not associated with a higher risk of death from breast cancer (HR, 1.065; 95% CI, 0.668-1.698; P = .791). Similarly, within a multivariate Cox regression analysis, breast cancer family history in an FDR was associated with a higher probability of diagnosis of prostate cancer (HR, 1.092; 95% CI, 1.011-1.180; P = .026) but not death from prostate cancer (HR, 0.442; 95% CI, 0.137-1.432; P = .173).ConclusionsFemale participants with a family history of prostate cancer in an FDR were more likely to develop postmenopausal breast cancer. Likewise, male participants with a family history of breast cancer in an FDR are at a higher probability of prostate cancer development. Risk correlation for premenopausal breast cancer could not be assessed owing to the nature of the PLCO study.     

Second invasive breast cancers in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy

ObjectiveSecond breast cancers after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) include ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Each IBTR is further classified as true recurrence (TR) or new primary tumor (NP). We aim to compare survival outcomes of TR, NP and CBC, and explore the optimal treatments.Methods168,427 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent BCT between 1990 and 2005 were identified in the SEER database. The risks of IBTR and CBC were estimated by annual hazard rate. The breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analysis.ResultsWith median follow-up of 13 years after BCT, 5413 patients developed an IBTR and 4050 patients had a CBC. The risk of IBTR peaked between 10 and 15 years after BCT, while the risk of CBC distributed evenly. 45.9% of IBTRs were classified as a TR and 54.1% as an NP. The time interval from primary breast cancer to NP was longer than to TR and CBC (P < 0.001). Patients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP (P = 0.003) and CBC (P = 0.002). There was no difference in BCSS between mastectomy and repeat BCT for treating TR (P = 0.584) or NP (P = 0.243). The BCSS of CBCs treated with BCT was better than mastectomy (P = 0.010). Chemotherapy didn't improve the survival of patients with TR (P = 0.058). However, TRs with grade III or negative hormone receptors benefited from chemotherapy significantly.ConclusionPatients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP and CBC. Classifying IBTR may provide clinical significance for treatments.     

Prognostic Significance of Androgen Receptor Expression in Triple Negative Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The androgen receptor (AR) is increasingly considered as a potential biomarker for breast cancer. Nevertheless, the prognostic value of AR expression in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains controversial. Therefore, in this meta-analysis, we investigated AR expression and its impact on survival outcome. PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and references of articles were searched to identify relevant studies that investigated the association between AR expression and prognosis in patients diagnosed with TNBC and were published between 1946 and May 2019. The hazard ratio (HR) and confidence interval (CI) of disease-free survival, overall survival, distant disease-free survival, and recurrence-free survival were weighted and pooled by using the fixed-effect or random-effect model based on the heterogeneity of included studies. A total of 27 studies including 4914 patients with TNBC were included. AR was expressed in 27.96% (1315/4703) of patients with TNBC. In addition, AR expression in TNBC was not associated with disease-free survival (HR, 0.923; 95% CI, 0.671-1.271; P = .634), overall survival (HR, 0.910; 95% CI, 0.678-1.222; P = .531), distant disease-free survival (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.08; P = .489), or recurrence-free survival (HR, 0.957; 95% CI, 0.462-1.982; P = .906) in TNBC, regardless of confounding factors and heterogeneity that existed among included studies. In patients with TNBC, AR expression is not associated with prognosis.     

Survival of older patients with metastasised breast cancer lags behind despite evolving treatment strategies – A population-based study

BackgroundOlder women are more likely to be diagnosed with primary metastasised breast cancer than their younger counterparts. Evolving treatment strategies of metastasised breast cancer have resulted in improved survival in younger patients, but it remains unclear if this improvement has occurred in older patients as well. The aim of this study was to assess changes in treatment strategies over time in relation to overall and relative survival of older patients compared to younger patients with primary metastasised breast cancer.MethodsAll patients with a breast cancer diagnosis and distant metastases at first presentation (stage IV), between 1990 and 2012, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes in treatment over time per age-group (<65 years, 65–75 years and >75 years) were assessed using logistic regression. Overall survival over time was calculated using Cox Regression Models and relative survival was assessed using the Ederer II method.ResultsOverall, 14,310 patients were included. Treatment strategies have strongly changed in the past twenty years; especially the use of chemotherapy has increased (P < 0.001 in all age-groups). Overall survival of patients <65 has significantly improved (Hazard Ratio (HR) per year 0.98, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.98–0.99, P < 0.001), but the survival of older patients has not improved (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99–1.01, P = 0.86 for patients aged 65–75 and HR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00–1.01, P = 0.46 for patients aged >75). Similarly, relative survival has improved in patients <65 but not in women aged 65–75 and >75.ConclusionOverall and relative survival of older patients with metastasised breast cancer at first presentation have not improved in recent years in contrast with the survival of younger patients, despite increased treatment with chemotherapy for women of all ages. Future studies should focus on stratification models that can be used to predict which patients may benefit from specific treatment options.     

The Association Between Survival and Receipt of Post-mastectomy Radiotherapy According to Age at Diagnosis Among Women With Early Invasive Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study

AimsClinical trials of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) for early invasive breast cancer (EIBC) have included few older women. This study examined whether the association between overall survival or breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and receipt of PMRT for EIBC altered with age.Materials and methodsThe study used patient-level linked cancer registration, routine hospital and radiotherapy data for England and Wales. It included 31 243 women aged ≥50 years diagnosed between 2014 and 2018 with low- (T1-2N0), intermediate- (T3N0/T1-2N1) or high-risk (T1-2N2/T3N1-2) EIBC who received a mastectomy within 12 months from diagnosis. Patterns of survival were analysed using a landmark approach. Associations between overall survival/BCSS and PMRT in each risk group were analysed with flexible parametric survival models, which included patient and tumour factors; whether the association between PMRT and overall survival/BCSS varied by age was assessed using interaction terms.ResultsAmong 4711 women with high-risk EIBC, 86% had PMRT. Five-year overall survival was 70.5% and BCSS was 79.3%. Receipt of PMRT was associated with improved overall survival [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.64–0.87] and BCSS (aHR 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.65–0.95) compared with women who did not have PMRT; associations did not vary by age (overall survival, P-value for interaction term = 0.141; BCSS, P = 0.077). Among 10 814 women with intermediate-risk EIBC, 59% had PMRT; 5-year overall survival was 78.4% and BCSS was 88.0%. No association was found between overall survival (aHR 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.92–1.11) or BCSS (aHR 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.32) and PMRT. There was statistical evidence of a small change in the association with age for overall survival (P = 0.007), although differences in relative survival were minimal, but not for BCSS (P = 0.362).ConclusionsThe association between PMRT and overall survival/BCSS does not appear to be modified by age among women with high- or intermediate-risk EIBC and, thus, treatment recommendations should not be modified on the basis of age alone.     

Survival in breast cancer patients with spine metastases: Prognostic assessment involving molecular markers

BackgroundTo clarify and update the prognostic assessment for heterogeneous population of patients with breast cancer and spine metastases (SpM), using molecular markers.MethodsThe patient data used in this study was obtained from a French national multi-center database of patients treated for breast cancer with SpM between 2014 and 2017. 556 SpM cases were diagnosed.ResultsMedian overall survival (OS) time for all patients following the SpM event was 43.9 months. First, we confirmed 3 previously known significant prognostic factors for survival of patients with SpM: young age [HR: 2.019, 95% CI 1.343–3.037; p = 0.001], good WHO status [ Status 0 HR: 2.823, 95% CI 1.231–3.345; p < 0.0001] or [ Status 1 HR: 1.956, 95% CI 0.768–2.874; p = 0.001] and no-ambulatory neurological status: Frankel A-C [HR: 0.438, 95% CI 0.248–0.772; p = 0.004]. Secondly, we determined the effect of gene mutations on survival in patients with SpM, and we identified that HER2+ cancer subtype [HR: 1.567, 95% CI 0.946–2.557; p = 0.008] was an independent predictor of longer survival, whereas basal cancer subtype [HR: 0.496, 95% CI 0.353–0.699; p < 0.0001] was associated with a poorer prognosis. Other factors including the number of SpM, surgery, extraspinal metastases, synchrone metastases, metastasis-free survival, and SpM recurrence were not identified as prognostically relevant to survival.ConclusionSurvival and our ability to estimate it in breast cancer patients with SpM has improved significantly. Therefore, SpM prognostic scoring algorithms should be updated and incorporate genotypic data on subtypes to make treatment more adaptive.     

Impact of NCI Socioeconomic Index on the Outcomes of Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of SEER Census Tract–Level Socioeconomic Database

PurposeTo assess the impact of National Cancer Institute socioeconomic status (SES) index on breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) of nonmetastatic breast cancer patients registered within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) census tract–level SES database.Patients and MethodsThe census tract–level SES index is a composite score integrating 7 parameters that assess different dimensions of SES. Women with a nonmetastatic breast cancer diagnosis (stage I-III) diagnosed during 2010-2015 and included in the SEER-SES specialized database were included in the current analysis. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess the impact of SES index on BCSS.ResultsA total of 296,100 women with nonmetastatic breast cancer were included in the current study. The impact of SES index on BCSS was evaluated in the overall cohort of patients through multivariate Cox regression analysis (adjusted for age at diagnosis, race, stage, and breast cancer subtype). Lower SES was associated with worse BCSS (hazard ratio for group 1 [lowest SES group] vs. group 3 [highest SES group]: 1.428; 95% confidence interval, 1.359-1.499; P < .001). Using additional interaction testing within Cox regression models, the impact of SES on BCSS seems to be modified by breast cancer subtype (P for interaction < .001), race (P for interaction = .001), and stage (P for interaction = .015).ConclusionLower SES index is associated with worse BCSS. Further efforts need to be directed to improving breast cancer outcomes among women with socioeconomically vulnerable attributes (poverty, lower education, and unemployment).