Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (30)
Has Fulltext
- yes (30)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (30)
Keywords
- breast cancer (16)
- Mammakarzinom (12)
- Behandlung (8)
- Metastasen (8)
- CDK4/6 (6)
- PD1/PDL1 (6)
- Prävention (6)
- Studien (6)
- prevention (6)
- treatment (6)
Institute
- Medizin (30)
Ziele: Das Ziel dieser offiziellen Leitlinie, die von der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG) und der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft (DKG) publiziert und koordiniert wurde, ist es, die Früherkennung, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms zu optimieren.
Methoden: Der Aktualisierungsprozess der S3-Leitlinie aus 2012 basierte zum einen auf der Adaptation identifizierter Quellleitlinien und zum anderen auf Evidenzübersichten, die nach Entwicklung von PICO-(Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome-)Fragen, systematischer Recherche in Literaturdatenbanken sowie Selektion und Bewertung der gefundenen Literatur angefertigt wurden. In den interdisziplinären Arbeitsgruppen wurden auf dieser Grundlage Vorschläge für Empfehlungen und Statements erarbeitet, die im Rahmen von strukturierten Konsensusverfahren modifiziert und graduiert wurden.
Empfehlungen: Der Teil 1 dieser Kurzversion der Leitlinie zeigt Empfehlungen zur Früherkennung, Diagnostik und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms: Der Stellenwert des Mammografie-Screenings wird in der aktualisierten Leitlinienversion bestätigt und bildet damit die Grundlage der Früherkennung. Neben den konventionellen Methoden der Karzinomdiagnostik wird die Computertomografie (CT) zum Staging bei höherem Rückfallrisiko empfohlen. Die Nachsorgekonzepte beinhalten Untersuchungsintervalle für die körperliche Untersuchung, Ultraschall und Mammografie, während weiterführende Gerätediagnostik und Tumormarkerbestimmungen bei der metastasierten Erkrankung Anwendung finden.
Purpose: The aim of this official guideline coordinated and published by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society (DKG) was to optimize the screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of breast cancer.
Methods: The process of updating the S3 guideline dating from 2012 was based on the adaptation of identified source guidelines which were combined with reviews of evidence compiled using PICO (Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome) questions and the results of a systematic search of literature databases and the selection and evaluation of the identified literature. The interdisciplinary working groups took the identified materials as their starting point to develop recommendations and statements which were modified and graded in a structured consensus procedure.
Recommendations: Part 1 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and follow-up care of breast cancer. The importance of mammography for screening is confirmed in this updated version of the guideline and forms the basis for all screening. In addition to the conventional methods used to diagnose breast cancer, computed tomography (CT) is recommended for staging in women with a higher risk of recurrence. The follow-up concept includes suggested intervals between physical, ultrasound and mammography examinations, additional high-tech diagnostic procedures, and the determination of tumor markers for the evaluation of metastatic disease.
Background: The integration of the non-cross-resistant chemotherapeutic agents capecitabine and vinorelbine into an intensified dose-dense sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing regimen in high-risk early breast cancer (EBC) could improve efficacy, but this combination was not examined in this context so far. Methods: Patients with stage II/IIIA EBC (four or more positive lymph nodes) received post-operative intensified dose-dense sequential epirubicin (150mg/m2 every 2 weeks) and paclitaxel (225mg/m2 every 2 weeks) with filgrastim and darbepoetin alfa, followed by capecitabine alone (dose levels 1 and 3) or with vinorelbine (dose levels 2 and 4). Capecitabine was given on days 1-14 every 21 days at 1000 or 1250 mg/m2 twice daily (dose levels 1/2 and 3/4, respectively). Vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 was given on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day course (dose levels 2 and 4). Results: Fifty-one patients were treated. There was one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) at dose level 1. At dose level 2 (capecitabine and vinorelbine), five of 10 patients experienced DLTs. Therefore evaluation of vinorelbine was abandoned and dose level 3 (capecitabine monotherapy) was expanded. Hand-foot syndrome and diarrhoea were dose limiting with capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily. At 35.2 months' median follow-up, the estimated 3-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 82% and 91%, respectively. Administration of capecitabine monotherapy after sequential dose-dense epirubicin and paclitaxel is feasible in node-positive EBC, while the combination of capecitabine and vinorelbine as used here caused more DLTs. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38983527.
Simple Summary: The incidence of brain metastases from breast cancer is increasing and the treatment is still a major challenge. Several scores have been developed in order to estimate the prognosis of patients with brain metastases by objective criteria. Here, we validated all three published graded-prognostic-assessment (GPA)-scores in a subcohort of 882 breast cancer patients with brain metastases in the Brain Metastases in the German Breast Cancer (BMBC) registry. Although all three available GPA-scores were associated with OS, they all show limitations mainly in predicting short-term (below 3 months) survival but also in long-term (above 12 months) survival. We discuss the test performances of all scores in our work and provide evidence how physicians should use them as a tool to select patients for different treatment options.
Abstract: Several scores have been developed in order to estimate the prognosis of patients with brain metastases (BM) by objective criteria. The aim of this analysis was to validate all three published graded-prognostic-assessment (GPA)-scores in a subcohort of 882 breast cancer (BC) patients with BM in the Brain Metastases in the German Breast Cancer (BMBC) registry. The median age at diagnosis of BM was 57 years. All in all, 22.3% of patients (n = 197) had triple-negative, 33.4% (n = 295) luminal A like, 25.1% (n = 221) luminal B/HER2-enriched like and 19.2% (n = 169) HER2 positive like BC. Age ≥60 years, evidence of extracranial metastases (ECM), higher number of BM, triple-negative subtype and low Karnofsky-Performance-Status (KPS) were all associated with worse overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis (p < 0.001 each). All three GPA-scores were associated with OS. The breast-GPA showed the highest probability of classifying patients with survival above 12 months in the best prognostic group (specificity 68.7% compared with 48.1% for the updated breast-GPA and 21.8% for the original GPA). Sensitivities for predicting 3 months survival were very low for all scores. In this analysis, all GPA-scores showed only moderate diagnostic accuracy in predicting the OS of BC patients with BM.
Characteristics and clinical outcome of breast cancer patients with asymptomatic brain metastases
(2020)
Simple Summary: The prognosis for patients with breast cancer that has spread to the brain is poor, and survival for these women hasn’t improved over the last few decades. We do not currently test for asymptomatic brain metastases in breast cancer patients, although this does happen in some other types of cancer. In this study we wanted to find out more about breast cancer that has spread to the brain and in particular to see whether there might be any advantage to spotting brain metastases before the development of neurological symptoms. Overall, our results suggest that women could be better off if their brain metastases are diagnosed before they begin to cause symptoms. We now need to carry out a clinical trial to see what happens if we screen high-risk breast cancer patients for brain metastases. This will verify whether doing so could increase survival, symptom control or quality of life.
Abstract: Background: Brain metastases (BM) have become a major challenge in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods: The aim of this analysis was to characterize patients with asymptomatic BM (n = 580) in the overall cohort of 2589 patients with BM from our Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer Network Germany (BMBC) registry. Results: Compared to symptomatic patients, asymptomatic patients were slightly younger at diagnosis (median age: 55.5 vs. 57.0 years, p = 0.01), had a better performance status at diagnosis (Karnofsky index 80–100%: 68.4% vs. 57%, p < 0.001), a lower number of BM (>1 BM: 56% vs. 70%, p = 0.027), and a slightly smaller diameter of BM (median: 1.5 vs. 2.2 cm, p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients were more likely to have extracranial metastases (86.7% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.003) but were less likely to have leptomeningeal metastasis (6.3% vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients underwent less intensive BM therapy but had a longer median overall survival (statistically significant for a cohort of HER2-positive patients) compared to symptomatic patients (10.4 vs. 6.9 months, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These analyses show a trend that asymptomatic patients have less severe metastatic brain disease and despite less intensive local BM therapy still have a better outcome (statistically significant for a cohort of HER2-positive patients) than patients who present with symptomatic BM, although a lead time bias of the earlier diagnosis cannot be ruled out. Our analysis is of clinical relevance in the context of potential trials examining the benefit of early detection and treatment of BM.
Introduction: Current prognostic gene expression profiles for breast cancer mainly reflect proliferation status and are most useful in ER-positive cancers. Triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) are clinically heterogeneous and prognostic markers and biology-based therapies are needed to better treat this disease.
Methods: We assembled Affymetrix gene expression data for 579 TNBC and performed unsupervised analysis to define metagenes that distinguish molecular subsets within TNBC. We used n = 394 cases for discovery and n = 185 cases for validation. Sixteen metagenes emerged that identified basal-like, apocrine and claudin-low molecular subtypes, or reflected various non-neoplastic cell populations, including immune cells, blood, adipocytes, stroma, angiogenesis and inflammation within the cancer. The expressions of these metagenes were correlated with survival and multivariate analysis was performed, including routine clinical and pathological variables.
Results: Seventy-three percent of TNBC displayed basal-like molecular subtype that correlated with high histological grade and younger age. Survival of basal-like TNBC was not different from non basal-like TNBC. High expression of immune cell metagenes was associated with good and high expression of inflammation and angiogenesis-related metagenes were associated with poor prognosis. A ratio of high B-cell and low IL-8 metagenes identified 32% of TNBC with good prognosis (hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61; P < 0.001) and was the only significant predictor in multivariate analysis including routine clinicopathological variables.
Conclusions: We describe a ratio of high B-cell presence and low IL-8 activity as a powerful new prognostic marker for TNBC. Inhibition of the IL-8 pathway also represents an attractive novel therapeutic target for this disease.
Introduction: We examined if a combination of proliferation markers and estrogen receptor (ER) activity could predict early versus late relapses in ER-positive breast cancer and inform the choice and length of adjuvant endocrine therapy.
Methods: Baseline affymetrix gene-expression profiles from ER-positive patients who received no systemic therapy (n = 559), adjuvant tamoxifen for 5 years (cohort-1: n = 683, cohort-2: n = 282) and from 58 patients treated with neoadjuvant letrozole for 3 months (gene-expression available at baseline, 14 and 90 days) were analyzed. A proliferation score based on the expression of mitotic kinases (MKS) and an ER-related score (ERS) adopted from Oncotype DX® were calculated. The same analysis was performed using the Genomic Grade Index as proliferation marker and the luminal gene score from the PAM50 classifier as measure of estrogen-related genes. Median values were used to define low and high marker groups and four combinations were created. Relapses were grouped into time cohorts of 0-2.5, 0-5, 5-10 years.
Results: In the overall 10 years period, the proportional hazards assumption was violated for several biomarker groups indicating time-dependent effects. In tamoxifen-treated patients Low-MKS/Low-ERS cancers had continuously increasing risk of relapse that was higher after 5 years than Low-MKS/High-ERS cancers [0 to 10 year, HR 3.36; p = 0.013]. High-MKS/High-ERS cancers had low risk of early relapse [0-2.5 years HR 0.13; p = 0.0006], but high risk of late relapse which was higher than in the High-MKS/Low-ERS group [after 5 years HR 3.86; p = 0.007]. The High-MKS/Low-ERS subset had most of the early relapses [0 to 2.5 years, HR 6.53; p < 0.0001] especially in node negative tumors and showed minimal response to neoadjuvant letrozole. These findings were qualitatively confirmed in a smaller independent cohort of tamoxifen-treated patients. Using different biomarkers provided similar results.
Conclusions: Early relapses are highest in highly proliferative/low-ERS cancers, in particular in node negative tumors. Relapses occurring after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen are highest among the highly-proliferative/high-ERS tumors although their risk of recurrence is modest in the first 5 years on tamoxifen. These tumors could be the best candidates for extended endocrine therapy.
Background: Current prognostic gene signatures for breast cancer mainly reflect proliferation status and have limited value in triple-negative (TNBC) cancers. The identification of prognostic signatures from TNBC cohorts was limited in the past due to small sample sizes.
Methodology/Principal Findings: We assembled all currently publically available TNBC gene expression datasets generated on Affymetrix gene chips. Inter-laboratory variation was minimized by filtering methods for both samples and genes. Supervised analysis was performed to identify prognostic signatures from 394 cases which were subsequently tested on an independent validation cohort (n = 261 cases).
Conclusions/Significance: Using two distinct false discovery rate thresholds, 25% and <3.5%, a larger (n = 264 probesets) and a smaller (n = 26 probesets) prognostic gene sets were identified and used as prognostic predictors. Most of these genes were positively associated with poor prognosis and correlated to metagenes for inflammation and angiogenesis. No correlation to other previously published prognostic signatures (recurrence score, genomic grade index, 70-gene signature, wound response signature, 7-gene immune response module, stroma derived prognostic predictor, and a medullary like signature) was observed. In multivariate analyses in the validation cohort the two signatures showed hazard ratios of 4.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71–9.48; P = 0.001) and 4.08 (95% CI 1.79–9.28; P = 0.001), respectively. The 10-year event-free survival was 70% for the good risk and 20% for the high risk group. The 26-gene signatures had modest predictive value (AUC = 0.588) to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, however, the combination of a B-cell metagene with the prognostic signatures increased its response predictive value. We identified a 264-gene prognostic signature for TNBC which is unrelated to previously known prognostic signatures.
Heterogenous subtypes of breast cancer need to be analyzed separately. Pooling of datasets can provide reasonable sample sizes but dataset bias is an important concern. We assembled a combined dataset of 579 Affymetrix microarrays from triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) series GSE31519. We developed a method for selecting comparable datasets and to control for the amount of dataset bias of individual probesets.
Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent female cancer and preferentially metastasizes to bone. The transcription factor TGFB-induced factor homeobox 1 (TGIF) is involved in bone metabolism. However, it is not yet known whether TGIF is associated with BC bone metastasis or patient outcome and thus of potential interest. Methods: TGIF expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in 1197 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples from BC patients treated in the GAIN (German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-Positive) study with two adjuvant dose-dense schedules of chemotherapy with or without bisphosphonate ibandronate. TGIF expression was categorized into negative/low and moderate/strong staining. Endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and time to primary bone metastasis as first site of relapse (TTPBM). Results: We found associations of higher TGIF protein expression with smaller tumor size (p= 0.015), well differentiated phenotype (p< 0.001) and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive BC (p< 0.001). Patients with higher TGIF expression levels showed a significantly longer disease-free (DFS: HR 0.75 [95%CI 0.59–0.95], log-rank p=0.019) and overall survival (OS: HR 0.69 [95%CI 0.50–0.94], log-rank p= 0.019), but no association with TTPBM (HR 0.77 [95%CI 0.51–1.16]; p= 0.213). Univariate analysis in molecular subgroups emphasized that elevated TGIF expression was prognostic for both DFS and OS in ER-positive BC patients (DFS: HR 0.68 [95%CI 0.51–0.91]; log-rank p= 0.009, interaction p= 0.130; OS: HR 0.60 [95%CI 0.41–0.88], log-rank p= 0.008, interaction p= 0.107) and in the HER2-negative subgroup (DFS:HR 0.67 [95%CI 0.50–0.88], log-rank p= 0.004, interaction p= 0.034; OS: HR 0.57 [95%CI 0.40–0.81], log-rank p= 0.002, interaction p= 0.015). Conclusions: Our results suggest that moderate to high TGIF expression is a common feature of breast cancer cells and that this is not associated with bone metastases as first site of relapse. However, a reduced expression is linked to tumor progression, especially in HER2-negative breast cancer.
