Survival Outcomes of Patients with Primary Breast Cancer Following Primary Ovarian Cancer

Abstract

Background Patients with primary breast cancer following primary ovarian cancer do not comprise a large clinical entity, and reports of the survival outcomes of this cohort are rare. The purpose of this retrospective population-based research was to investigate the survival outcomes of patients with primary breast cancer after primary ovarian cancer. Material/Methods A cohort of patients diagnosed with primary breast cancer following primary ovarian cancer between 1973 and 2014 was drawn from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Cox proportional hazards survival regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier were applied to calculate overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and independent predictors of CSS. Results A total of 1455 patients with primary breast cancer following primary ovarian cancer were identified. The 5-year and 10-year OS rates for the entire cohort were 81.7% and 67.4%, respectively. The 5-year and 10-year CSS rates were 84.2% and 74.3% for ovarian cancer, and 76.0% and 67.8% for breast cancer, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that independent predictors of ovarian cancer CSS include age, cancer stage, diagnosis time, and histological subtype. Conclusions Patients diagnosed with breast cancer following ovarian cancer have better survival rates. Patients age, ovarian cancer stage, ovarian cancer histological type, and time of diagnose affect the survival rate.

Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with both primary breast cancer and primary ovarian cancer

“…We also found the interval times between the two tumors were different in two groups ( P = .026). For patients who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer first, available studies have shown that the median diagnosis time from ovarian cancer to breast cancer was 50.5 to 108 months, [ 16 – 18 ] while researches showed the mean interval time from breast cancer to ovarian cancer was 84 to 97.2 months. [ 9 , 19 ] Our results were similar to those in the existing literature, but the interval was significantly shorter in the ovarian cancer first group (79.4 m vs 115.9 m, P = .026).…”

Chemo-photothermal effects of doxorubicin/silica–carbon hollow spheres on liver cancer

“…The disadvantages of chemotherapeutic drugs are nonspecic damage of normal cells, poor drug delivery, and the development of drug resistance, which results in systemic side effects and failed treatments. [7][8][9] Photothermal therapy (PTT) has recently emerged as a feasible alternative approach to treat cancer. [9][10][11][12] PTT can destroy tumor cells by inducing hyperthermia via near-infrared (NIR, 700-2500 nm) light illumination.…”

Selective photothermal killing of cancer cells using LED-activated nucleus targeting fluorescent carbon dots

“…Photothermal therapy (PTT) is a promising non-invasive therapeutic strategy, in which nanoparticles embedded within tumors generate heat, typically in response to exogenously applied light, for thermal ablation of cancer cells. [1][2][3] PTT offers unique advantages in cancer therapy including high specicity, minimal invasiveness and precise spatial-temporal selectivity. 4 A variety of photothermal nanotherapeutics (PTN) including noble metal nanostructures, nanocarbons, carbon dots, transition metal sulde/oxide nanomaterials, and organic nano-agents have been extensively explored with encouraging results.…”