Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (44)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (44)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (44) (remove)
Language
- English (44)
Keywords
- breast cancer (44) (remove)
Institute
- Frauenklinik und Poliklinik (17)
- Institut für Humangenetik (5)
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (5)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004) (4)
- Pathologisches Institut (4)
- Abteilung für Funktionswerkstoffe der Medizin und der Zahnheilkunde (3)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie (3)
- Institut für Experimentelle Biomedizin (2)
- Lehrstuhl für Biochemie (2)
- Lehrstuhl für Orthopädie (2)
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 641833 (1)
Background: The majority of breast cancer patients are severely psychologically affected by breast cancer diagnosis and subsequent therapeutic procedures. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions on public life have additionally caused significant psychological distress for much of the population. It is therefore plausible that breast cancer patients might be particularly susceptible to the additional psychological stress caused by the pandemic, increasing suffering. In this study we therefore aimed to assess the level of psychological distress currently experienced by a defined group of breast cancer patients in our breast cancer centre, compared to distress levels preCOVID-19 pandemic.
Methods: Female breast cancer patients of all ages receiving either adjuvant, neoadjuvant, or palliative therapies were recruited for the study. All patients were screened for current or previous COVID-19 infection. The participants completed a self-designed COVID-19 pandemic questionnaire, the Stress and Coping Inventory (SCI), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (R) (NCCN (R)) Distress Thermometer (DT), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ C30, and the BR23.
Results: Eighty-two breast cancer patients were included. Therapy status and social demographic factors did not have a significant effect on the distress caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of the DT pre and during COVID-19 pandemic did not differ significantly. Using the self-designed COVID-19 pandemic questionnaire, we detected three distinct subgroups demonstrating different levels of concerns in relation to SARS-CoV-2. The subgroup with the highest levels of concern reported significantly decreased life quality, related parameters and symptoms.
Conclusions: This monocentric study demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected psychological health in a subpopulation of breast cancer patients. The application of a self-created "COVID-19 pandemic questionnaire"could potentially be used to help identify breast cancer patients who are susceptible to increased psychological distress due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and therefore may need additional intensive psychological support.
Background
Mammography and ultrasound are the gold standard imaging techniques for preoperative assessment and for monitoring the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Maximum accuracy in predicting pathological tumor size non-invasively is critical for individualized therapy and surgical planning. We therefore aimed to assess the accuracy of tumor size measurement by ultrasound and mammography in a multicentered health services research study.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed data from 6543 patients with unifocal, unilateral primary breast cancer. The maximum tumor diameter was measured by ultrasound and/or mammographic imaging. All measurements were compared to final tumor diameter determined by postoperative histopathological examination. We compared the precision of each imaging method across different patient subgroups as well as the method-specific accuracy in each patient subgroup.
Results
Overall, the correlation with histology was 0.61 for mammography and 0.60 for ultrasound. Both correlations were higher in pT2 cancers than in pT1 and pT3. Ultrasound as well as mammography revealed a significantly higher correlation with histology in invasive ductal compared to lobular cancers (p < 0.01). For invasive lobular cancers, the mammography showed better correlation with histology than ultrasound (p = 0.01), whereas there was no such advantage for invasive ductal cancers. Ultrasound was significantly superior for HR negative cancers (p < 0.001). HER2/neu positive cancers were also more precisely assessed by ultrasound (p < 0.001). The size of HER2/neu negative cancers could be more accurately predicted by mammography (p < 0.001).
Conclusion
This multicentered health services research approach demonstrates that predicting tumor size by mammography and ultrasound provides accurate results. Biological tumor features do, however, affect the diagnostic precision.
Objective
In this study, we investigated to which extent patients feel well informed about their disease and treatment, which areas they wish more or less information and which variables are associated with a need for information about the disease, medical tests and treatment.
Methods
In a German multi-centre prospective study, we enrolled 759 female breast cancer patients at the time of cancer diagnosis (baseline). Data on information were captured at 5 years after diagnosis with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Information Module (EORTC QLQ-INFO24). Good information predictors were analysed using linear regression models.
Results
There were 456 patients who participated at the 5-year follow-up. They reported to feel well informed about medical tests (mean score 78.5) and the disease itself (69.3) but relatively poorly about other services (44.3) and about different places of care (31.3). The survivors expressed a need for more information concerning: side effects and long-term consequences of therapy, more information in general, information about aftercare, prognosis, complementary medicine, disease and therapy. Patients with higher incomes were better informed about medical tests (β 0.26, p 0.04) and worse informed with increasing levels of fear of treatment (β − 0.11, p 0.02). Information about treatment was reported to be worse by survivors > 70 years old (β -0.34, p 0.03) and by immigrants (β -0.11, p 0.02). Survivors who had received additional written information felt better informed about disease, medical tests, treatment and other services (β 0.19/0.19/0.20/0.25; each p < 0.01).
Conclusion
Health care providers have to reconsider how and what kind of information they provide. Providing written information, in addition to oral information, may improve meeting those information needs.
Rare variants in at least 10 genes, including BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, and CHEK2, are associated with increased risk of breast cancer; however, these variants, in combination with common variants identified through genome-wide association studies, explain only a fraction of the familial aggregation of the disease. To identify further susceptibility genes, we performed a two-stage whole-exome sequencing study. In the discovery stage, samples from 1528 breast cancer cases enriched for breast cancer susceptibility and 3733 geographically matched unaffected controls were sequenced. Using five different filtering and gene prioritization strategies, 198 genes were selected for further validation. These genes, and a panel of 32 known or suspected breast cancer susceptibility genes, were assessed in a validation set of 6211 cases and 6019 controls for their association with risk of breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor (ER) disease subtypes, using gene burden tests applied to loss-of-function and rare missense variants. Twenty genes showed nominal evidence of association (p-value < 0.05) with either overall or subtype-specific breast cancer. Our study had the statistical power to detect susceptibility genes with effect sizes similar to ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2, however, it was underpowered to identify genes in which susceptibility variants are rarer or confer smaller effect sizes. Larger sample sizes would be required in order to identify such genes.