Medizin
Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
Language
- English (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- breast cancer (5) (remove)
Institute
Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of interstitial multicatheter high dose rate brachytherapy (imHDR- BRT) as accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) after second breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Between January 2010 and December 2019, 20 patients with IBTR who refused salvage mastectomy (sMT) were treated with second BCS and post-operative imHDR-BRT as APBI. All patients had undergone primary BCS followed by adjuvant external beam radiotherapy. Median imHDR-BRT dose was 32 Gy delivered in twice-daily fractions of 4 Gy. Five-year IBTR-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS) as well as toxicity and cosmesis were evaluated in the present retrospective analysis. Median age at recurrence and median time from the first diagnosis to IBTR was 65.1 years and 12.2 years, respectively. After a median follow-up of 69.9 months, two patients developed a second local recurrence resulting in 5-year IBTR free-survival of 86.8%. Five-year DMFS and 5-year OS were 84.6% and 92.3%, respectively. Grade 1–2 fibrosis was noted in 60% of the patients with no grade 3 or higher toxicity. Two (10%) cases of asymptomatic fat necrosis were documented. Cosmetic outcome was classified as excellent in 6 (37.5%), good in 6 (37.5%), fair in 3 (18.75%) and poor in 1 (6.25%) patient, respectively. We conclude that imHDR-BRT as APBI re-irradiation is effective and safe for IBTR and should be considered in appropriately selected patients.
Objective: Many cancer patients complain about cognitive dysfunction. While cognitive deficits have been attributed to the side effects of chemotherapy, there is evidence for impairment at disease onset, prior to cancer-directed therapy. Further debated issues concern the relationship between self-reported complaints and objective test performance and the role of psychological distress.
Method: We assessed performance on neuropsychological tests of attention and memory and obtained estimates of subjective distress and quality of life in 27 breast cancer patients and 20 healthy controls. Testing in patients took place shortly after the initial diagnosis, but prior to subsequent therapy.
Results: While patients showed elevated distress, cognitive performance differed on a few subtests only. Patients showed slower processing speed and poorer verbal memory than controls. Objective and self-reported cognitive function were unrelated, and psychological distress correlated more strongly with subjective complaints than with neuropsychological test performance.
Conclusion: This study provides further evidence of limited cognitive deficits in cancer patients prior to the onset of adjuvant therapy. Self-reported cognitive deficits seem more closely related to psychological distress than to objective test performance.
The tumor-microenvironment (TME) is an amalgamation of various factors derived from malignant cells and infiltrating host cells, including cells of the immune system. One of the important factors of the TME is microRNAs (miRs) that regulate target gene expression at a post transcriptional level. MiRs have been found to be dysregulated in tumor as well as in stromal cells and they emerged as important regulators of tumorigenesis. In fact, miRs regulate almost all hallmarks of cancer, thus making them attractive tools and targets for novel anti-tumoral treatment strategies. Tumor to stroma cell cross-propagation of miRs to regulate protumoral functions has been a salient feature of the TME. MiRs can either act as tumor suppressors or oncogenes (oncomiRs) and both miR mimics as well as miR inhibitors (antimiRs) have been used in preclinical trials to alter cancer and stromal cell phenotypes. Owing to their cascading ability to regulate upstream target genes and their chemical nature, which allows specific pharmacological targeting, miRs are attractive targets for anti-tumor therapy. In this review, we cover a recent update on our understanding of dysregulated miRs in the TME and provide an overview of how these miRs are involved in current cancer-therapeutic approaches from bench to bedside.
A myriad of signaling molecules in a heuristic network of the tumor microenvironment (TME) pose a challenge and an opportunity for novel therapeutic target identification in human cancers. MicroRNAs (miRs), due to their ability to affect signaling pathways at various levels, take a prominent space in the quest of novel cancer therapeutics. The role of miRs in cancer initiation, progression, as well as in chemoresistance, is being increasingly investigated. The canonical function of miRs is to target mRNAs for post-transcriptional gene silencing, which has a great implication in first-order regulation of signaling pathways. However, several reports suggest that miRs also perform non-canonical functions, partly due to their characteristic non-coding small RNA nature. Examples emerge when they act as ligands for toll-like receptors or perform second-order functions, e.g., to regulate protein translation and interactions. This review is a compendium of recent advancements in understanding the role of miRs in cancer signaling and focuses on the role of miRs as novel regulators of the signaling pathway in the TME.
MicroRNAs (miRs) significantly contribute to the regulation of gene expression, by virtue of their ability to interact with a broad, yet specific set of target genes. MiRs are produced and released by almost every cell type and play an important role in horizontal gene regulation in the tumor microenvironment (TME). In the TME, both tumor and stroma cells cross-communicate via diverse factors including miRs, which are taking central stage as a therapeutic target of anti-tumor therapy. One of the immune escape strategies adopted by tumor cells is to release miRs as a Trojan horse to hijack circulating or tumor-localized monocytes/macrophages to tune them for pro-tumoral functions. On the other hand, macrophage-derived miRs exert anti-tumor functions. The transfer of miRs from host to recipient cells depends on the supramolecular structure and composition of miR carriers, which determine the distinct uptake mechanism by recipient cells. In this review, we provide a recent update on the miR-mediated crosstalk between tumor cells and macrophages and their mode of uptake in the TME.