Clinical Features and Survival Analysis of Very Young (Age<35) Breast Cancer Patients

Introduction Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death in women worldwide, and its metastasis is a major cause of disease mortality. Therefore, identification of the mechanisms underlying breast cancer metastasis is crucial for the development of therapeutic and diagnostic strategies. Our recent study of immunodeficient female mice transplanted with MDA-MB231 breast cancer cells demonstrated that tumor cell-derived angiopoietin-like protein 2 (ANGPTL2) accelerates metastasis through both increasing tumor cell migration in an autocrine/paracrine manner, and enhancing tumor angiogenesis. To determine whether ANGPTL2 contributes to its clinical pathogenesis, we asked whether serum ANGPTL2 levels reflect the clinical features of breast cancer progression. Methods We monitored the levels of secreted ANGPTL2 in supernatants of cultured proliferating MDA-MB231 cells. We also determined whether the circulating ANGPTL2 levels were positively correlated with cancer progression in an in vivo breast cancer xenograft model using MDA-MB231 cells. Finally, we investigated whether serum ANGPTL2 levels were associated with clinical features in breast cancer patients. Results Both in vitro and in vivo experiments showed that the levels of ANGPTL2 secreted from breast cancer cells increased with cell proliferation and cancer progression. Serum ANGPTL2 levels in patients with metastatic breast cancer were significantly higher than those in healthy subjects or in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or non-metastatic invasive ductal carcinoma. Serum ANGPTL2 levels in patients negative for estrogen receptors and progesterone receptors, particularly triple-negative cases, reflected histological grades. Conclusions These findings suggest that serum ANGPTL2 levels in breast cancer patients could represent a potential marker of breast cancer metastasis.

Download Full-text

Survival Analysis of Breast Cancer Patients Treated at a Tertiary Care Centre in Southern India

Annals of Oncology ◽

10.1093/annonc/mdu327.72 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 25 ◽

pp. iv107

Author(s):

R. Arumugham ◽

A. Raj ◽

M. Nagarajan ◽

R. Vijilakshmi

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Survival Analysis ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Tertiary Care ◽

Southern India ◽

Care Centre ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Tertiary Care Centre

Download Full-text

Young Age is not an Ominous Prognostic Factor in Breast Cancer Patients

Tumori Journal ◽

10.1177/030089168707300305 ◽

1987 ◽

Vol 73 (3) ◽

pp. 233-235 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Giuseppe Muscolino ◽

Corrado Villani ◽

Amedeo Vittorio Bedini ◽

Alberto Luini ◽

Bruno Salvadori

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Prognostic Factor ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Young Women ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Disease Free Survival ◽

Young Age ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Free Survival ◽

Disease Free

Analysis of a series of 137 women 20–30 years of age, operated for breast carcinoma, excluding patients pregnant, lactating or with inflammatory cancer, showed that disease-free survival rates were similar and not lower than those reported for a large series of 716 breast cancer patients of all ages, treated and followed at the same Institute. Ten-year disease-free survival rates for the two series of 137 young women and 716 patients of all ages were 43.7% and 47.1% respectively. Even when considering the subgroups of patients with and without nodal axillary involvement, the corresponding figures for the two series considered were 72.6% vs. 72.1% (N−) and 25.1% vs. 24.5% (N+). It can be concluded that young age cannot be considered as an unfavorable prognostic factor.

Download Full-text

Survival Analysis of Early-Stage Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Axillary Lymph Node Dissection and Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection

Journal of the American College of Surgeons ◽

10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.07.685 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 225 (4) ◽

pp. e61

Author(s):

Apoorve Nayyar ◽

Paula D. Strassle ◽

Kandace P. McGuire

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Survival Analysis ◽

Lymph Node ◽

Sentinel Lymph Node ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Lymph Node Dissection ◽

Early Stage ◽

Axillary Lymph ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Node Dissection

Download Full-text

Guideline adherence and clinical outcome in vulnerable and healthy breast cancer patients: Results of a prospective cross-sectional study in Germany.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.e18132 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e18132-e18132

Author(s):

Elna Kuehnle ◽

Wulf Siggelkow ◽

Iris Schrader ◽

Kristina Luebbe ◽

Stefanie Noeding ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Survival Analysis ◽

Clinical Outcome ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Guideline Adherence ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Vulnerable Patients

e18132 Background: In 2003 the German Cancer Society and the German Society for Breast Disease introduced a number of Quality Indicators (QIs) to improve standards of breast cancer care. Although QIs should be based on clinical evidence, evidence for important subpopulations (i.e. vulnerable patients) is often limited. In this prospective cross-sectional study we assessed conformity and non-conformity of guidelines and their impact on clinical outcome in a real-world setting. Methods: This prospective analysis included patients with primary breast cancer. Patients with stage IV and recurrent breast cancer were excluded. Data was collected from 2012-2016 in six certified breast care centers using a personal questionnaire and data from the patients' medical records. Guideline adherence to a set of 11 QIs was explored. Overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) were correlated with fulfillment of QIs and tumor characteristics. Results: Survival analysis was conducted in 2390 patients with a median follow-up of 16 months. 88 (4%) patients had a recurrent disease. 31 (1.3%) patients died of breast cancer. Tumor stage, grading, Her2- and hormone receptor status and Ki-67 correlated with DFS and OS. 1725/1907 patients (90.5%) received a guideline adherent treatment. The most prevalent reasons for non-conformity were old age (24.7%) and/or comorbidity (20.9%). Breast cancer specific DFS and OS were not significantly different between patients treated adherent or not adherent to the guidelines. In contrast, survival analysis of death other than breast cancer showed a significantly worse OS (p = 0.006) for patients not treated according to guideline recommendation. Conclusions: Conformity of clinical guidelines was observed in the majority of patients including healthy and vulnerable patients. These patients tended to have a longer breast cancer specific survival. Patients who were not considered suitable for guideline-adherent therapy died more often from other medical reasons rather than from breast cancer. In our study 10% of the patients had a limited life expectancy due to old age and co-morbidities with no assumed benefit from guideline adherence.

Download Full-text