A scar for life: Male breast cancer and the experience of the post-surgical body.

Background and aims: Male breast cancer is an uncommon disease. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of male breast cancer patients has not been determined. The aim of this study was to explore the value of adjuvant chemotherapy in men with stage I–III breast cancer, and we hypothesized that some male patients may safely skip adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: Male breast cancer patients between 2010 and 2015 from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database were included. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were used to analyse the factors associated with survival. The propensity score matching method was adopted to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to evaluate the impacts of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival. The primary endpoint was survival. Results: We enrolled 514 patients for this study, including 257 patients treated with chemotherapy and 257 patients without. There was a significant difference in overall survival (OS) but not in breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between the two groups ( p < 0.001 for OS and p = 0.128 for BCSS, respectively). Compared with the non-chemotherapy group, the chemotherapy group had a higher 4-year OS rate (97.5% versus 95.2%, p < 0.001), while 4-year BCSS was similar (98% versus 98.8%, p = 0.128). The chemotherapy group had longer OS than the non-chemotherapy group among HR+, HER2–, tumour size >2 cm, lymph node-positive male breast cancer patients ( p < 0.05). Regardless of tumour size, there were no differences in OS or BCSS between the chemotherapy and non-chemotherapy cohorts for lymph node-negative patients (OS: p > 0.05, BCSS: p > 0.05). Adjuvant chemotherapy showed no signiﬁcant effects on both OS and BCSS in patients with stage I (OS: p = 0.100, BCSS: p = 0.858) and stage IIA breast cancer (OS: p > 0.05, BCSS: p > 0.05). Conclusion: For stage I and stage IIA patients, adjuvant chemotherapy could not improve OS and BCSS. Therefore, adjuvant chemotherapy might be skipped for stage I and stage IIA male breast cancer patients.

Download Full-text

Male breast cancer with axillary lymph metastasis incidentally detected by 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in a patient with prostate cancer

Revista Española de Medicina Nuclear e Imagen Molecular (English Edition) ◽

10.1016/j.remnie.2020.04.004 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Seval Erhamamci ◽

Nesrin Aslan

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Prostate Cancer ◽

Male Breast Cancer ◽

Male Breast ◽

Axillary Lymph ◽

Psma Pet ◽

Pet Ct ◽

Lymph Metastasis

Download Full-text

Evaluation of multiple transcriptomic gene risk signatures in male breast cancer

npj Breast Cancer ◽

10.1038/s41523-021-00301-0 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Jane Bayani ◽

Coralie Poncet ◽

Cheryl Crozier ◽

Anouk Neven ◽

Tammy Piper ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Male Breast Cancer ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Gene Signature ◽

Male Breast ◽

Risk Scores ◽

Breast Cancers ◽

Academic Risk ◽

Genomic Grade Index ◽

Prognostic Utility

AbstractMale breast cancer (BCa) is a rare disease accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancers and 1% of all cancers in males. The clinical management is largely extrapolated from female BCa. Several multigene assays are increasingly used to guide clinical treatment decisions in female BCa, however, there are limited data on the utility of these tests in male BCa. Here we present the gene expression results of 381 M0, ER+ve, HER2-ve male BCa patients enrolled in the Part 1 (retrospective analysis) of the International Male Breast Cancer Program. Using a custom NanoString™ panel comprised of the genes from the commercial risk tests Prosigna®, OncotypeDX®, and MammaPrint®, risk scores and intrinsic subtyping data were generated to recapitulate the commercial tests as described by us previously. We also examined the prognostic value of other risk scores such as the Genomic Grade Index (GGI), IHC4-mRNA and our prognostic 95-gene signature. In this sample set of male BCa, we demonstrated prognostic utility on univariate analysis. Across all signatures, patients whose samples were identified as low-risk experienced better outcomes than intermediate-risk, with those classed as high risk experiencing the poorest outcomes. As seen with female BCa, the concordance between tests was poor, with C-index values ranging from 40.3% to 78.2% and Kappa values ranging from 0.17 to 0.58. To our knowledge, this is the largest study of male breast cancers assayed to generate risk scores of the current commercial and academic risk tests demonstrating comparable clinical utility to female BCa.

Download Full-text