618 Gynäkologie, Geburtsmedizin, Pädiatrie, Geriatrie
Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (6) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (6)
Language
- English (6) (remove)
Keywords
- breast cancer (6) (remove)
The activation of immune cells by targeting checkpoint inhibitors showed promising results with increased patient survival in distinct primary cancers. Since only limited data exist for human brain metastases, we aimed at characterizing tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and expression of immune checkpoints in the respective tumors. Two brain metastases cohorts, a mixed entity cohort (n = 252) and a breast carcinoma validation cohort (n = 96) were analyzed for CD3+, CD8+, FOXP3+, PD-1+ lymphocytes and PD-L1+ tumor cells by immunohistochemistry. Analyses for association with clinico-epidemiological and neuroradiological parameters such as patient survival or tumor size were performed. TILs infiltrated brain metastases in three different patterns (stromal, peritumoral, diffuse). While carcinomas often show a strong stromal infiltration, TILs in melanomas often diffusely infiltrate the tumors. Highest levels of CD3+ and CD8+ lymphocytes were seen in renal cell carcinomas (RCC) and strongest PD-1 levels on RCCs and melanomas. High amounts of TILs, high ratios of PD-1+/CD8+ cells and high levels of PD-L1 were negatively correlated with brain metastases size, indicating that in smaller brain metastases CD8+ immune response might get blocked. PD-L1 expression strongly correlated with TILs and FOXP3 expression. No significant association of patient survival with TILs was observed, while high levels of PD-L1 showed a strong trend towards better survival in melanoma brain metastases (Log-Rank p = 0.0537). In summary, melanomas and RCCs seem to be the most immunogenic entities. Differences in immunotherapeutic response between tumor entities regarding brain metastases might be attributable to this finding and need further investigation in larger patient cohorts.
Evaluation of clinical parameters influencing the development of bone metastasis in breast cancer
(2016)
Background
The development of metastases is a negative prognostic parameter for the clinical outcome of breast cancer. Bone constitutes the first site of distant metastases for many affected women. The purpose of this retrospective multicentre study was to evaluate if and how different variables such as primary tumour stage, biological and histological subtype, age at primary diagnosis, tumour size, the number of affected lymph nodes as well as grading influence the development of bone-only metastases.
Methods
This retrospective German multicentre study is based on the BRENDA collective and included 9625 patients with primary breast cancer recruited from 1992 to 2008. In this analysis, we investigated a subgroup of 226 patients with bone-only metastases. Association between bone-only relapse and clinico-pathological risk factors was assessed in multivariate models using the tree-building algorithms “exhausted CHAID (Chi-square Automatic Interaction Detectors)” and CART(Classification and Regression Tree), as well as radial basis function networks (RBF-net), feedforward multilayer perceptron networks (MLP) and logistic regression.
Results
Multivariate analysis demonstrated that breast cancer subtypes have the strongest influence on the development of bone-only metastases (χ2 = 28). 29.9 % of patients with luminal A or luminal B (ABC-patients) and 11.4 % with triple negative BC (TNBC) or HER2-overexpressing tumours had bone-only metastases (p < 0.001). Five different mathematical models confirmed this correlation. The second important risk factor is the age at primary diagnosis. Moreover, BC subcategories influence the overall survival from date of metastatic disease of patients with bone-only metastases. Patients with bone-only metastases and TNBC (p < 0.001; HR = 7.47 (95 % CI: 3.52–15.87) or HER2 overexpressing BC (p = 0.007; HR = 3.04 (95 % CI: 1.36–6.80) have the worst outcome compared to patients with luminal A or luminal B tumours and bone-only metastases.
Conclusion
The bottom line of different mathematical models is the prior importance of subcategories of breast cancer and the age at primary diagnosis for the appearance of osseous metastases. The primary tumour stage, histological subtype, tumour size, the number of affected lymph nodes, grading and NPI seem to have only a minor influence on the development of bone-only metastases.
Purpose
An increasing incidence of breast cancer can be observed worldwide. Since a delay of therapy can have a negative impact on prognosis, timely cancer care is an important quality indicator. By receiving treatment at a certified breast cancer center, the patient has the best chance of treatment in accordance with guidelines and the best prognosis. The identification of risk factors for a delay of therapy is of central importance and should be the basis for a continuous optimization of treatment at breast cancer centers.
Methods
This retrospective study included women with breast cancer (primary diagnosis, relapse, or secondary malignancy) at the University Hospital Würzburg in 2019 and 2020. Data were retrieved from patients’ records. Correlations and regression analyses were performed to detect potential risk factors for treatment delay.
Results
Patients who received the histological confirmation of breast cancer at an external institution experienced a later therapy start than those patients who received the histological confirmation at the University Hospital Würzburg itself. (35.7 vs. 32.2 days). The interval between histological confirmation and the first consultation at the University Hospital Würzburg correlated statistically significant with age, distress and distance to the hospital.
Conclusion
Patients with an in-house diagnosis of breast cancer are treated more quickly than those whose diagnosis was confirmed in an external institution. We identified factors such as increased age, greater distance to the hospital as well as increased distress to prolong the time until start of oncological treatment. Intensified patient care should be offered to these subgroups.
Background
Identification of families at risk for ovarian cancer offers the opportunity to consider prophylactic surgery thus reducing ovarian cancer mortality. So far, identification of potentially affected families in Germany was solely performed via family history and numbers of affected family members with breast or ovarian cancer. However, neither the prevalence of deleterious variants in \(BRCA1/2\) in ovarian cancer in Germany nor the reliability of family history as trigger for genetic counselling has ever been evaluated.
Methods
Prospective counseling and germline testing of consecutive patients with primary diagnosis or with platinum-sensitive relapse of an invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. Testing included 25 candidate and established risk genes. Among these 25 genes, 16 genes (\(ATM\), \(BRCA1\), \(BRCA2\), \(CDH1\), \(CHEK2\), \(MLH1\), \(MSH2\), \(MSH6\), \(NBN\), \(PMS2\), \(PTEN\), \(PALB2\), \(RAD51C\), \(RAD51D\), \(STK11\), \(TP53\)) were defined as established cancer risk genes. A positive family history was defined as at least one relative with breast cancer or ovarian cancer or breast cancer in personal history.
Results
In total, we analyzed 523 patients: 281 patients with primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer and 242 patients with relapsed disease. Median age at primary diagnosis was 58 years (range 16–93) and 406 patients (77.6%) had a high-grade serous ovarian cancer. In total, 27.9% of the patients showed at least one deleterious variant in all 25 investigated genes and 26.4% in the defined 16 risk genes. Deleterious variants were most prevalent in the \(BRCA1\) (15.5%), \(BRCA2\) (5.5%), \(RAD51C\) (2.5%) and \(PALB2\) (1.1%) genes. The prevalence of deleterious variants did not differ significantly between patients at primary diagnosis and relapse. The prevalence of deleterious variants in \(BRCA1/2\) (and in all 16 risk genes) in patients <60 years was 30.2% (33.2%) versus 10.6% (18.9%) in patients \(\geq\)60 years. Family history was positive in 43% of all patients. Patients with a positive family history had a prevalence of deleterious variants of 31.6% (36.0%) versus 11.4% (17.6%) and histologic subtype of high grade serous ovarian cancer versus other showed a prevalence of deleterious variants of 23.2% (29.1%) and 10.2% (14.8%), respectively. Testing only for \(BRCA1/2\) would miss in our series more than 5% of the patients with a deleterious variant in established risk genes.
Conclusions
26.4% of all patients harbor at least one deleterious variant in established risk genes. The threshold of 10% mutation rate which is accepted for reimbursement by health care providers in Germany was observed in all subgroups analyzed and neither age at primary diagnosis nor histo-type or family history sufficiently enough could identify a subgroup not eligible for genetic counselling and testing. Genetic testing should therefore be offered to every patient with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer and limiting testing to \(BRCA1/2\) seems to be
not sufficient.
Purpose
Therapeutic options for breast cancer (BC) treatment are constantly evolving. The Human Epidermal Growth Factor 2 (HER2)-low BC entity is a new subgroup, representing about 55% of all BC patients. New antibody–drug conjugates demonstrated promising results for this BC subgroup. Currently, there is limited information about the conversion of HER2 subtypes between primary tumor and recurrent disease.
Methods
This retrospective study included women with BC at the University Medical Centre Wuerzburg from 1998 to 2021. Data were retrieved from patients' records. HER2 evolution from primary diagnosis to the first relapse and the development of secondary metastases was investigated.
Results
In the HR-positive subgroup without HER2 overexpression, HER2-low expression in primary BC was 56.7 vs. 14.6% in the triple-negative subgroup (p < 0.000). In the cohort of the first relapse, HER2-low represented 64.1% of HR-positive vs. 48.2% of the triple-negative cohort (p = 0.03). In patients with secondary metastases, HER2-low was 75.6% vs. 50% in the triple negative subgroup (p = 0.10). The subgroup of HER2-positive breast cancer patients numerically increased in the course of disease; the HER2-negative overall cohort decreased. A loss of HER2 expression from primary BC to the first relapse correlated with a better OS (p = 0.018). No clinicopathological or therapeutic features could be identified as potential risk factors for HER2 conversion.
Conclusion
HER2 expression is rising during the progression of BC disease. In view of upcoming therapeutical options, the re-analysis of newly developed metastasis will become increasingly important.
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.