Breast cancer is still a lethal disease and the leading cause of death in women, undermining patients’ survival and quality of life. Modern techniques of surgery and radiotherapy allow for the obtaining of good results in terms of survival, however they cause long-term side effects that persist over time, such as lymphedema and neuropathy. Similarly, the advent of new therapies such as endocrine therapy revolutionized breast cancer outcomes, but side effects are still present even in years of follow-up after cure. Besides the side effects of medical and surgical therapy, breast cancer is a real disruption in patients’ lives considering quality of life-related aspects such as the distortion of body image, the psychological consequences of the diagnosis, and the impact on family dynamics. Therefore, the doctor-patient relationship is central to providing the best support both during treatment and afterwards. The aim of this review is to summarize the consequences of medical and surgical treatment on breast cancer patients and to emphasize the importance of early prevention of side effects to improve patients’ quality of life.
Background
The TOPAZ‐1 phase III trial reported a survival benefit with the anti‐programmed death cell ligand 1 (anti‐PD‐L1) durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of this new standard treatment in a real‐world setting.
Methods
The analysed population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the biliary tract treated with durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin at 17 Italian centres. The primary endpoint of the study was progression‐free survival (PFS), whereas secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) by baseline characteristics were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model.
Results
From February 2022 to November 2022, 145 patients were enrolled. After a median follow‐up of 8.5 months (95% CI: 7.9–13.6), the median PFS was 8.9 months (95% CI: 7.4–11.7). Median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI: 10.9–12.9). The investigator‐assessed confirmed ORR was 34.5%, and the disease control rate was 87.6%. Any grade adverse events (AEs) occurred in 137 patients (94.5%). Grades 3–4 AEs occurred in 51 patients (35.2%). The rate of immune‐mediated AEs (imAEs) was 22.7%. Grades 3–4 imAEs occurred in 2.1% of the patients. In univariate analysis, non‐viral aetiology, ECOG PS >0 and NLR ≥3 correlated with shorter PFS.
Conclusion
The results reported in this first real‐world analysis mostly confirmed the results achieved in the TOPAZ‐1 trial in terms of PFS, ORR and safety.
Background: The aim of this study is to identify miRNAs able to predict the outcomes in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 24 patients receiving NAC and not reaching pathologic complete response (pCR). miRNAs were analyzed using an Illumina Next-Generation-Sequencing (NGS) system. Results: Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly higher in patients with up-regulation of let-7a-5p (EFS p = 0.006; OS p = 0.0001), mirR-100-5p (EFS s p = 0.01; OS p = 0.03), miR-101-3p (EFS p = 0.05; OS p = 0.01), and miR-199a-3p (EFS p = 0.02; OS p = 0.01) in post-NAC samples, independently from breast cancer subtypes. At multivariate analysis, only let-7a-5p was significantly associated with EFS (p = 0.009) and OS (p = 0.0008). Conclusion: Up-regulation of the above miRNAs could represent biomarkers in breast cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.