Introduction The use of telemedicine in oncology practice is rapidly expanding and is considered safe and cost effective. However, the implications of telemedicine on patient‐physician interaction, patient satisfaction, and absence of the personal touch have not been studied to date. Following the spread of COVID‐19, telemedicine services were rapidly incorporated at the Oncology Division of Tel Aviv Medical Center. We aimed to evaluate patients' perspectives and preferences regarding telemedicine and to assess whether this virtual communication platform affects the patient‐physician relationship. Methods Between March 2020 and May 2020, adult cancer patients who conducted at least one successful telemedicine meeting were interviewed by trained medical personnel. The interview was based on validated patient satisfaction questionnaires and focused on patient‐physician interaction in relation to the last in‐patient visit. Results Of 236 patients, 172 (74%) patients agreed to participate. The study population comprised mainly patients with gastrointestinal malignancies ( n = 79, 46%) with a median age of 63 years (range 21–88). The majority of patients were male ( n = 93, 54%). Eighty‐nine (51.7%) patients were receiving active oncologic treatment, and 58 (33.7%) were under routine surveillance following completion of active therapy. Almost all had a sense of secured privacy ( n = 171, 96%), the majority of patients affirmed that their concerns were met ( n = 166, 93%) and perceived that eye contact with the treating physician was perceived ( n = 156, 87%). Only a minority felt that the absence of physical clinic visits harmed their treatment ( n = 36, 20%). Most patients ( n = 146, 84.9%) wished to continue telemedicine services. A multivariate analysis revealed that higher satisfaction and visits for routine surveillance were both predictors of willingness to continue future telemedicine meetings over physical encounters (odds ratio [OR] = 2.41, p = .01; OR = 3.34, p = .03, respectively). Conclusion Telemedicine is perceived as safe and effective, and patients did not feel that it compromised medical care or the patient‐physician relationship. Integration of telemedicine is ideal for patients under surveillance after completion of active oncologic treatment. Physician communication skills workshops are warranted with implementing this platform. Implications for Practice During the COVID‐19 pandemic, telemedicine was rapidly implemented worldwide to facilitate continuity of quality care and treatment. Despite many potential setbacks, telemedicine has become a useful and safe tool for oncology practitioners to care for their pa...

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. Up to 75% of breast cancers express the estrogen receptor (ER)α and/or the progesterone receptor (PR). Patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer are typically treated with endocrine therapy. Yet, not all patients with metastatic breast cancer respond to endocrine treatments and are considered to have primary (de novo) resistance. Furthermore, all patients who initially respond to endocrine treatment will eventually develop acquired resistance. Several mechanisms have been linked to the development of endocrine resistance, including reduced expression of ERα, altered regulation of the ER pathway, and activation of various growth factor signaling pathways, among them the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathway. This pathway is involved in critical processes including cell survival, proliferation, and angiogenesis, and plays a central role in breast cancer development. Recent laboratory and clinical data implicate this pathway as mediating endocrine resistance, and agents directed against critical components of this pathway are either already approved for clinical use in breast cancer patients or are currently being tested in clinical trials. In this review, we describe the interaction between the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and the ER cascade, its role in mediating endocrine resistance, and the clinical implications of this interaction.

No abstract

No abstract

Hereditary breast cancer syndromes affect a small (10-15% of cases) but significant group of patients. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are the most familiar and well-studied genes associated with inherited breast cancer. However, mutations in the high-penetrance genes, TP53, PTEN, CDH1, MSH1, MLH1, MSH6, PMS2, PALB2, and STK11, and in the moderate-penetrance genes, CHEK2, ATM, and BRIP1, also correlate with high lifetime risks of breast cancer and other malignancies as well. Advances in breast cancer genetics have led to an improved perception of diagnosis and screening strategies. The specific considerations and challenges involved in treating this unique population have become a fertile ground for research. Indeed, these genes and downstream molecular pathways have now become potential therapeutic targets in breast cancer patients, including those with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. This review describes the variety of hereditary breast cancer genes, from their molecular origins to the prognosis and multidisciplinary clinical decisionmaking processes. Key publications and other reported recent clinical trials and guidelines are provided.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Extrapulmonary small-cell cancer (EPSCC) is a relatively rare malignancy. The management of EPSCC is usually extrapolated from small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In spite of the morphological similarity of the 2 malignancies, there are many differences in clinical features, prognosis, and recommendations of treatment of these disorders. The data on the correlation of clinical-pathological characteristics of EPSCC and treatment results is scarce. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> This retrospective analysis of 41 consecutively treated patients diagnosed with EPSCC in 2015–2018 was performed in a tertiary medical center. The correlation between the clinical and pathological characteristics and the treatment outcome (response rate, disease-free interval, and overall medial survival) was done using the standard statistics, Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate analyses. The stratification was done on the stage of the disease, Ki-67 proliferative index, the location of the tumor, and smoking. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Forty-one patients were included with a median age of 66.3 years. The most common primary site was the gastrointestinal tract (28, 68.3%) including the pancreas. The most common distant metastasis site was the liver (23, 56.1%). Only 2 patients (4.9%) had brain metastases. Unlike in SCLC, most patients did not have any history of smoking (23, 56.1%). Nineteen patients with metastatic disease received systemic treatment, mostly cisplatin-based chemotherapy, with a response rate of 57.9%. The results of treatment were significantly better in patients with disseminated EPSCC with Ki-67 &#x3c;55%, while its role in limited disease was nonsignificant. <b><i>Discussion:</i></b> The results of our study show the unique entity of EPSCC. The rarity of brain metastases proves that prophylactic brain irradiation should not be recommended in practice. The provocative idea of prophylactic liver irradiation in limited-stage EPSCC of gastrointestinal origin can be evaluated in future studies. The predictive role of Ki-67 is important in metastatic EPSCC. There is probably no role of smoking in developing EPSCC.

Background Approximately 50% of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer lesions express hormone receptors. These tumors present a unique therapeutic challenge, and the optimal endocrine therapeutic approach remains controversial. We aimed to study the optimal adjuvant endocrine therapy in this setting, to better establish the basis for clinical recommendations in HER2-positive disease. Methods We conducted a literature search up to May 2020, in which we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of various adjuvant hormonal therapies among premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-positive early breast cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated with the random effect model and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Six RCTs ( N = 5390 patients) were included in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in DFS between adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors and tamoxifen (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68-1.44, P = 0.96). Furthermore, after omitting the ALTTO trial, as it did not randomize patients to hormonal therapy, no significant difference was observed between the two protocols (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.65-1.73, P = 0.81). Conclusion Our study demonstrates similar DFS with tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant endocrine treatment in HER2-positive HR-positive early-stage breast cancer patients. Future larger prospective studies focusing on the various contemporary endocrine regimens are warranted to validate our findings.

No abstract