Half of elderly patients with breast cancer are undertreated, with strongly decreased specific survival as a consequence. Treatments need to be adapted to the patient's health status, but also should offer the best chance of cure.

Complete surgical excision of the primary tumor improves survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis, particularly among women with only bone metastases.

LNR predicts survival after breast cancer more accurately than pN classification and should be considered as an alternative to pN staging.

Reasons of the important impact of socioeconomic status on breast cancer prognosis are far from established. This study aims to evaluate and explain the social disparities in breast cancer survival in the Swiss canton of Geneva, where healthcare costs and life expectancy are among the highest in the world. This populationbased study included all 3,920 female residents of Geneva, who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer before the age of 70 years between 1980 and 2000. Patients were divided into 4 socioeconomic groups, according to the woman's last occupation. We used Cox multivariate regression analysis to identify reasons for the socioeconomic inequalities in breast cancer survival. Compared to patients of high social class, those of low social class had an increased risk (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.4, 95% CI: 1.6-3.5) of dying as a result of breast cancer. These women were more often foreigners, less frequently had screen-detected cancer and were at more advanced stage at diagnosis. They less frequently underwent breast-conserving surgery, hormonal therapy, and chemotherapy, in particular, in case of axillary lymph node involvement. When adjusting for all these factors, patients of low social class still had a significantly increased risk of dying of breast cancer (HR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.6). Overmortality linked to low SES is only partly explained by delayed diagnosis, unfavorable tumor characteristics and suboptimal treatments. Other factors, not measured in this study, also could play a role. While waiting for the outcome of other researches, we should consider socioeconomic status as an independent prognostic factor and provide intensified support and surveillance to women of low social class. ' 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: breast carcinoma; socioeconomic status; incidence; mortality; survivalIn North America and Western Europe, breast cancer accounts for more than 30% of new cancer cases and for 25% of cancer deaths among women. Breast cancer mortality rates are now decreasing because of the widely generalized use of mammography screening and the improvement in treatment. 1 Besides stage, tumor characteristics and treatment, only few factors are recognized as independent prognostic factors. Socioeconomic status (SES) could be one of them.Breast cancer occurs more frequently in wealthy countries 2 and among women with high SES. 3 This is partly due to a higher prevalence of breast cancer risk factors, such as older age at first pregnancy, low parity, high-calorie intake, sedentary occupation and use of hormonal replacement therapy in women with high SES. [3][4][5] On the other hand, breast cancer survival is in general lower in less affluent countries 6 and in women with low income or educational level. 3

No abstract

BACKGROUND: The Women's Health Initiative randomized clinical trial reported that menopausal hormone therapy increases lung cancer mortality risk. If this is true, use of anti-estrogens should be associated with decreased lung cancer mortality risk. The authors compared lung cancer incidence and mortality among breast cancer patients with and without anti-estrogen therapy. METHODS: Our study included all 6655 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1980 and 2003 and registered at the Geneva Cancer Registry. Among these women, 46% (3066) received anti-estrogens. All women were followed for occurrence and death from lung cancer until December 2007. The authors compared incidence and mortality rates among patients with and without anti-estrogens with those expected in the general population by Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIRs) and Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMRs). RESULTS: After a total of 57,257 person-years, 40 women developed lung cancer. SIRs for lung cancer were not significantly decreased among breast cancer patients with and without anti-estrogens (0.63, 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.33-1.10; and 1.12, 95% CI, 0.74-1.62, respectively) while SMR was decreased among women with anti-estrogens (0.13, 95% CI, 0.02-0.47, P<.001) but not for women without anti-estrogens (0.76, 95% CI, 0.43-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with expected outcomes in the general population, breast cancer patients receiving antiestrogen treatment for breast cancer had lower lung cancer mortality. This study further supports the hypothesis that estrogen therapy modifies lung cancer prognosis. Cancer 2011;117:1288-

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of socioeconomic disparities on prostate cancer presentation, treatment, and prognosis in Geneva, Switzerland, in which healthcare costs, medical coverage, and life expectancy are considered to be among the highest in the world. METHODS: This population-based study included all patients diagnosed with invasive prostate cancer among the resident population between 1995 and 2005. Patients were divided into 3 socioeconomic groups according to their last known occupation. Compared were patient and tumor characteristics and treatment patterns between socioeconomic groups. Cox multivariate regression analysis was used to assess and explain socioeconomic inequalities in prostate cancer-specific mortality. RESULTS: Compared with patients of high socioeconomic class, those of low socioeconomic class were more often foreigners, were found less frequently to have screen-detected cancer, were found to have a more advanced stage of disease at diagnosis, and less often had information regarding disease characteristics and staging. These patients underwent prostatectomy less frequently and were more often managed with watchful waiting. The risk of dying as a result of prostate cancer (hazards ratio [HR]) in patients of a low versus high socioeconomic status was increased 2-fold (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.5-2.6). After adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics and treatment, the mortality risk was no longer found to be significantly increased (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.8-1.6). CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, patients of low socioeconomic class were found to be at increased risk of dying as a result of their prostate cancer. This increased mortality is largely attributable to delayed diagnosis, poor diagnostic workup, and less invasive treatments in these individuals

Background Controversy exists on the impact of bilaterality of breast cancer on survival. We used population-based data to compare survival of women with unilateral versus bilateral breast cancer. Patients and methods At the Geneva cancer registry, we identified all 7,912 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 1970 and 2002. Breast cancers were categorized as unilateral, synchronous bilateral (contralateral tumour diagnosed within six months after the first tumour) and metachronous bilateral (contralateral tumour diagnosed over six months after the first tumour). With multivariate modelling we compared characteristics and survival between women with unilateral and bilateral disease.Results Patients with synchronous bilateral tumours (n = 155, 2.0%) had more often lobular histology and less frequently stage I disease than women with unilateral disease. Women with metachronous breast cancer (n = 219, 2.8%) received less often chemotherapy or hormone therapy for their first tumours. Ten-year disease-specific survival was similar (66%) after unilateral and metachronous bilateral breast cancer, but worse after synchronous bilateral cancer (51%). After adjustment, breast cancer mortality risks were not significantly increased for women with either synchronous or metachronous bilateral disease (Hazard ratios 1.1 (0.8-1.5) and 0.8 (0.5-1.4), respectively). Conclusion This large population-based study indicates that bilaterality of breast cancer is not associated with impaired survival.