IntroductionObese breast cancer patients have worse prognosis than normal weight patients, but the level at which obesity is prognostically unfavorable is unclear.MethodsThis retrospective analysis was performed using data from the SUCCESS A trial, in which 3754 patients with high-risk early breast cancer were randomized to anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy with or without gemcitabine. Patients were classified as underweight/normal weight (body mass index (BMI) < 25.0), overweight (BMI 25.0–29.9), slightly obese (BMI 30.0–34.9), moderately obese (BMI 35.0–39.9) and severely obese (BMI ≥ 40.0), and the effect of BMI on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated (median follow-up 65 months). In addition, subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the effect of BMI in luminal A-like, luminal B-like, HER2 (human epidermal growth factor 2)-positive and triple-negative tumors.ResultsMultivariate analyses revealed an independent prognostic effect of BMI on DFS (p = 0.001) and OS (p = 0.005). Compared with underweight/normal weight patients, severely obese patients had worse DFS (hazard ratio (HR) 2.70, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.71–4.28, p < 0.001) and OS (HR 2.79, 95 % CI 1.63–4.77, p < 0.001), while moderately obese, slightly obese and overweight patients did not differ from underweight/normal weight patients with regard to DFS or OS. Subgroup analyses showed a similar significant effect of BMI on DFS and OS in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but not in patients with other tumor subtypes.ConclusionsSevere obesity (BMI ≥ 40) significantly worsens prognosis in early breast cancer patients, particularly for triple-negative tumors.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02181101. Registered September 2005.
An ECV is a safe procedure. ECV should be offered as an option for the mother-to-be on the basis of an informed consent. Identified fetal and maternal factors can help to estimate the chances of success and in particular multi-parity and increased amniotic fluid seem to be associated with successful ECV.
!Purpose: Although surgical therapy for breast cancer has become less radical, intrasurgical placement of drains and the use of compression bandages is still standard practice. However, evidence for the clinical benefit of wound drains is controversial, and use of drains is associated with increased pain and longer hospital stays. This raises the question whether, given the latest surgical techniques, wound drainage is still medically necessary. Material and Method: A retrospective analysis was done of patients with breast cancer treated surgically between January 2009 and April 2012 in the Breast Centre Hohenlohe (n = 573). Complication rates and revision following surgery with and without placement of wound drains were compared for patients who had breast-conserving surgery (n = 425) and patients who underwent mastectomy (n = 148). Results: The baseline characteristics (age, number of resected lymph nodes, numbers of patients who had sentinel lymph node resection, tumour characteristics, receptor status and affected side) were comparable for the investigated patient groups. The overall rate of complications was 4 %. There was no significant difference with regard to complication rates after surgery with and without placement of wound drains between the group of patients with breast-conserving surgery and the group of patients with mastectomy (p = 0.68 and p = 0.54, respectively). Conclusion: Our data indicate that nonplacement of a wound drain does not influence complication or revision rates after breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy.
Zusammenfassung
There is no reliable diagnostic tool to differentiate a fibroid from a uterine sarcoma preoperatively. Tumor morcellation occurs in various open and closed surgical techniques and is not limited to laparoscopic surgery only. There is an urgent need for a presurgical diagnostic parameter.
BackgroundImprovement in clinical outcomes of patients with platinum-resistant disease is an unmet medical need and trials in this population are urgently needed. Checkpoint-inhibitors have already shown activity in multiple other tumor entities and ovarian cancer, especially in the combination with anti-angiogenic treatment.Primary objectiveTo test if the activity of non-platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab could be improved by the addition of atezolizumab.Study hypothesisThe addition of atezolizumab to standard non-platinum combination of chemotherapy and bevacizumab improves median overall survival from 15 to 20 months.Trial designPatients are randomized to chemotherapy (paclitaxel weekly or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin) + bevacizumab + placebo vs chemotherapy + bevacizumab + atezolizumab. Stratification factors are: number of prior lines, planned type of chemotherapy, prior use of bevacizumab, and tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status.Major inclusion/exclusion criteriaRecurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer with up to three prior therapies and a treatment-free interval after platinum of less than 6 months. Patients with three prior lines of chemotherapy are eligible irrespective of the platinum free-interval. A de novo tumor tissue sample biopsy for determination of PD-L1 status prior to randomization for stratification is mandatory. Major exclusion criteria consider bevacizumab-specific and immunotherapy-specific criteria.Primary endpointOverall survival and progression-free survival are co-primary endpoints.Sample sizeIt is planned to randomize 664 patients.Trial registrationNCT03353831.
Background: The current surgical debate has led to a reduction in the extent of surgery performed and thereby to a reduced occurrence of surgical trauma and, over the recent years, reduced seroma formation. This reduction in surgical procedures calls the need for a drain into question. Method: Using Google Scholar and the National Library of Medicine (PubMed), a literature review was performed on systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding breast cancer surgery ± axillary dissection. Additionally, randomized trials for the time period after the last systematic review were included and evaluated according to the Jadad score. Results: The search returned 5 systematic reviews, in which a total of 1,075 patients were included (537 cases and 538 controls). Since the last review, no prospective randomized trial meeting the inclusion criteria has been published. The current reviews conclude that insertion of a drain is associated with a longer hospital stay and reduced seroma formation. The data regarding wound infection and drain insertion is inconclusive. The omission of a drain is associated with early discharge, reduced postsurgical pain, and early mobilization, but also with an increase in out-patient seroma aspirations. Conclusion: The omission of a drain is possible in early breast cancer surgery (wide local excision and sentinel node biopsy) with adequate surgical techniques and instruments.
Introduction. The anatomic position of the sentinel lymph node is variable. The purpose of the following study was to assess the dose distribution delivered to the surgically marked sentinel lymph node site by 3D conformal radio therapy technique. Material and Method. We retrospectively analysed 70 radiotherapy (RT) treatment plans of consecutive primary breast cancer patients with a successful, disease-free, sentinel lymph node resection. Results. In our case series the SN clip volume received a mean dose of 40.7 Gy (min 28.8 Gy/max 47.6 Gy). Conclusion. By using surgical clip markers in combination with 3D CT images our data supports the pathway of tumouricidal doses in the SN bed. The target volume should be defined by surgical clip markers and 3D CT images to give accurate dose estimations.
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.