Care of Seniors with Breast Cancer – Treatment Received and Refining Decision Making

AimsTreatment decisions for older patients with breast cancer are complex and evidence is largely extrapolated from younger populations. Frailty and comorbidity need to be considered. We studied the baseline characteristics and treatment decisions in older patients in Christchurch with breast cancer and assessed survival outcomes and prognostic/discriminatory performance of several tools.Materials and methodsWe searched the Canterbury Breast Cancer Registry and identified patients aged 70 years or older at diagnosis with invasive, non-metastatic breast cancer between 1 June 2009 and 30 June 2015. We retrieved demographics, treatment and outcome information. Overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival were estimated. Tools analysing performance status and comorbidity were assessed for their prognostic and discriminatory power.ResultsIn total, 440 patients were identified. Primary surgery was carried out for 362 patients (82.3%): breast-conserving surgery in 114 (of whom 88.6% received radiation therapy); mastectomy in 248 (of whom 24.6% received radiation). Hormone therapy was given for 265 (71.1%) patients with oestrogen receptor-positive cancers. Two hundred and seventy-four (62.3%) patients received full standard treatment, which was associated with significantly improved 5-year survival and 5-year breast cancer-specific survival. The median estimated overall survival was 8.2 years (95% confidence interval 7.3–9.1 years). Of those who died, 71.3% of deaths were due to causes other than breast cancer or unknown causes. The comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy (CALE) showed partial prognostic accuracy. CALE, Charlson and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group tools all showed discriminatory value.ConclusionIn this population-based series of older patients with breast cancer, showing high levels of primary and adjuvant treatment, patients were more likely to die of causes other than breast cancer. Performance status and comorbidity tools showed prognostic and discriminatory potential in this population supporting their use in treatment decision making. CALE showed the most potential to improve treatment decisions but requires validation in this population to improve prognostic accuracy.     

Biopsia selectiva de ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama, ¿está justificada la espera al resultado intraoperatorio?

IntroductionIn our institution, the study of selective sentinel node biopsy (SLNB) is performed intraoperatively. The main objective of our study is to know the proportion of patients who benefits from the waiting of the results of SLNB.MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients operated on our center between January 1 st, 2018 and June 30, 2019 was carried out. We included women diagnosed with T1–T2 tumors, treated by lumpectomy and SLNB studied using OSNA method.ResultsOur study included 149 women. There were not statistically significant differences in terms of demographic data between the group treated with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and exclusively SLNB group. After analysis of SLN intraoperatively, there were performed 18 axillary lymphadenectomies. Only in six of these 18 cases, three or more sentinel nodes were founded. The location of the tumor, the presence of lymphovascular permeation and the total tumor load (TTL) showed statistically significant differences between groups. Only the TTL was established as the independent factor of the need for ALND.ConclusionsObtaining a deferred result of the SLNB allowed reducing the time of anesthesia and occupation of the operating room, since in a high percentage of cases an additional procedure is not performed.     

基于超声影像组学的乳腺癌预测模型的诊断性能研究

目的评估并比较基于不同机器学习算法建立的乳腺癌超声影像组学预测模型的诊断性能。 方法回顾性收集2017年1月至2019年4月就诊皖南医学院第一附属医院、有明确病理结果的乳腺肿块病例828例，以2018年8月31日为节点将其分为训练集（526例）和验证集（302例），提取肿块的超声影像组学特征并进行特征筛选，运用k最近邻（kNN）、逻辑回归（LR）、朴素贝叶斯（NB）、随机森林（RF）和支持向量机（SVM）5种机器学习算法分别建立预测模型，使用重复交叉验证方法做内部验证，计算比较各模型的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值（PPV）和阴性预测值（NPV），并实施外部验证，绘制ROC曲线并比较ROC曲线下面积（AUC）以评价模型的鉴别诊断性能，绘制校准曲线评价模型校准度。 结果从提取的109个影像组学特征中筛选出19个特征建立了5种机器学习算法模型。在内部验证中，5种模型的敏感度、特异度、PPV、NPV比较，总体差异均有统计学意义（P均＜0.001）。LR模型的特异度、PPV、NPV中位数分别为0.769、0.816、0.778，3项指标均高于其他4种模型；敏感度中位数为0.824，高于kNN、RF和SVM模型。此外，SVM模型的特异度、PPV、NPV中位数分别为0.706、0.774、0.759，虽均低于LR模型，但均高于其他3种模型。在外部验证中，LR、SVM、RF、kNN和NB的AUC依次为0.890、0.832、0.821、0.746和0.703，其中LR与SVM的AUC差异有统计学意义（P=0.012）；此外，各模型在校准性能上表现并不一致，LR和SVM模型的校准曲线显示乳腺癌实际概率与预测概率之间的一致性较好。 结论以超声影像组学特征为基础，运用不同机器学习算法建立的乳腺癌超声预测模型，均表现出较高的诊断性能，其中LR模型表现最为突出；选择合适的机器学习算法有助于进一步提高预测模型的诊断性能，提供更加准确的量化预测结果。     

情绪释放技术对乳腺癌术后化疗患者预期性悲伤的影响

目的 探讨情绪释放技术对改善乳腺癌术后化疗患者预期性悲伤的效果。方法 采用便利抽样法选取乳腺癌术后化疗患者60例为研究对象,采用随机数字表法将其分为对照组和干预组,各30例。对照组给予常规护理,干预组在对照组的基础上实施情绪释放干预疗法。比较干预前后2组心理痛苦程度和预期性悲伤得分水平。结果 干预后,干预组心理痛苦程度低于对照组(t=-17.930,P＜0.001);预期性悲伤总分及各维度得分均低于对照组(P＜0.001)。结论 对乳腺癌术后化疗患者应用情绪释放技术进行护理干预,可以减轻患者心理痛苦程度,降低患者预期性悲伤,值得临床推广应用。     

Evaluation of Simplified Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventing Healing Approach (SLYMPHA) for the prevention of breast cancer-related lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection using bioimpedance spectroscopy

BackgroundLymphedema is a serious complication of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) with an incidence rate of 20%. Simplified Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventing Healing Approach (SLYMPHA) is a safe and relatively simple method, which decreases incidence of lymphedema dramatically. Our initial study showed an 88% decrease in clinical lymphedema rate. In the initial study, we used arm circumference measurement for the diagnosis of lymphedema and median follow up was 15 months. The aim of this study was to confirm these results after a long-term follow up period and by using bioimpedance spectroscopy (L-Dex) technology in detecting lymphedema.Study designAll patients, undergoing ALND with or without SLYMPHA between January 2014 and November 2020 were included in the study. Patients with no postoperative L-Dex measurements were excluded. A L-Dex score outside the normal range (±10 L-Dex unit) or ≥10 L-Dex unit increase above patient's baseline was considered as lymphedema. The incidence of lymphedema was compared between patients with and without SLYMPHA.Results194 patients were included in the study. 57% of cohort underwent SLYMPHA. Mean follow-up time was 47 ± 37 months. Patients, who underwent SLYMPHA, had a significantly lower rate of lymphedema (16% vs 32%; p = 0.01; OR 0.4 [0.2–0.8]).ConclusionSLYMPHA is a safe and relatively simple method, which continued its efficacy after a long-term follow up period. It should be considered as an adjunct procedure to ALND for all patients during initial surgery.