Showing posts with label Treatment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Treatment. Show all posts

Wednesday, 25 May 2022

Breast Surgery Bulletin - May 2022

 

Effective Treatment of Chronic Mastectomy Pain with Intercostal Sensory Neurectomy

 

by Hart, Sarah E.; Agarwal, Shailesh; Hamill, Jennifer B.; Brown, David L.

 


Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: May 2022 - Volume 149 - Issue 5 - p 876e-880e

 

Chronic postmastectomy pain affects up to 40 percent of patients and leads to diminished quality of life and increased risk of opioid dependence. The cause of this pain is incompletely understood; however, one hypothesis is that direct injury to cutaneous intercostal nerves at the time of mastectomy and/or reconstruction leads to chronic pain. As a result, proximal neurectomy of the involved sensory nerve(s) has been suggested to be effective for these patients. The purpose of this study was to determine whether chronic pain in postmastectomy patients can be diagnosed reliably in an office setting and pain reduced by intercostal sensory neurectomy. The authors performed a retrospective review of seven patients with a history of breast surgery and chronic pain who underwent intercostal neurectomy combined with muscle or dermal wrapping of the proximal end of the resected nerve. All patients were diagnosed by history and physical examination, and suspected nerves were further identified with local anesthetic nerve blocks. An average of 3.14 neurectomies were performed per patient (range, one to six). There was a significant reduction in visual analogue scale pain scores following surgery, from 9 preoperatively to 1 postoperatively (p = 0.02). Eighty-six percent of patients were pain-free or “considerably improved” at their latest follow-up appointment (average, 6.14 months). It is concluded that intercostal sensory nerve injury at the time of mastectomy and/or reconstruction can lead to chronic mastectomy pain, which can be easily diagnosed and effectively treated with intercostal neurectomy. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Thursday, 10 February 2022

 


Moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

 

by Gustavo Nader Marta, Rachel Riera, Rafael Leite Pacheco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Martimbianco, Icro Meattini, Orit Kaidar-Person, Philip Poortmans 

 

The Breast: Published:February 02, 2022

 

Introduction

We provide a critical assessment regarding current evidence for the use of moderately hypofractionated irradiation for patients with breast cancer. The aim of the study was to summarize the available evidence regarding outcomes after moderately hypofractionated compared with conventional radiation doses in the post-operative treatment of patients with breast cancer.

Material and methods

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases were searched until March 25, 2021. All randomized phase 3 clinical trials that compared moderately hypofractionated with conventional radiation doses in the post-operative treatment of patients with breast cancer were selected. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement.

Results

Eight clinical trials satisfied the eligibility criteria and were the focus of the analysis. A total of 12,139 breast cancer patients was randomly assigned for moderately hypofractionated compared with conventional irradiation. Meta-analysis of the trials regarding local recurrence, loco-regional recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival outcomes did not demonstrate any significant difference between moderately hypofractionated irradiation and conventional radiation doses groups. The rate of severe side effects was low in both groups; acute and late side effects and cosmesis were similar or even tended to be lower after moderately hypofractionated than after conventional irradiation.

Conclusions

Moderately hypofractionated is at least as effective and safe as conventional radiation irradiation regimens and should be considered as a treatment option for most, if not all, breast cancer patients.

 

Wednesday, 5 January 2022

 

A scoping review of interactive and personalized web-based clinical tools to support treatment decision making in breast cancer

 

by Amy Zhao, Maya Larbi, Kristen Miller, Suzanne O'Neill, Jinani Jayasekera 

 

The Breast: VOLUME 61, P43-57, FEBRUARY 01, 2022 (Published: December 05, 2021)

 

The increasing attention on personalized breast cancer care has resulted in an explosion of new interactive, tailored, web-based clinical decision tools for guiding treatment decisions in clinical practice. The goal of this study was to review, compare, and discuss the clinical implications of current tools, and highlight future directions for tools aiming to improve personalized breast cancer care. We searched PubMed, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify web-based decision tools addressing breast cancer treatment decisions. There was a total of 17 articles associated with 21 unique tools supporting decisions related to surgery, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, bisphosphonates, HER2-targeted therapy, and chemotherapy. The quality of the tools was assessed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard instrument. Overall, the tools considered clinical (e.g., age) and tumor characteristics (e.g., grade) to provide personalized outcomes (e.g., survival) associated with various treatment options. Fewer tools provided the adverse effects of the selected treatment. Only one tool was field-tested with patients, and none were tested with healthcare providers. Future studies need to assess the feasibility, usability, acceptability, as well as the effects of personalized web-based decision tools on communication and decision making from the patient and clinician perspectives.

Tuesday, 6 April 2021

First- and second-line treatment strategies for hormone-receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a real-world study

 

First- and second-line treatment strategies for hormone-receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a real-world study

by Debora Basile, Lorenzo Gerratana, Carla Corvaja, Giacomo Pelizzari, Giorgia Franceschin, Elisa Bertoli, Lorenza Palmero, Diego Zara, Martina Alberti, Silvia Buriolla, Lucia Da Ros, Marta Bonotto, Mauro Mansutti, Simon Spazzapan, Marika Cinausero, Alessandro Marco Minisini, Gianpiero Fasola, Fabio Puglisi 

The Breast: VOLUME 57, P104-112, JUNE 01, 2021 (Published: March 11, 2021)

Background

Endocrine therapy (ET) plus cyclin-dependent-kinases 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) represents the standard treatment for luminal-metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, prospective head-to-head comparisons are still lacking for 1st line (L) options, and it is still crucial to define the best strategy between 1st and 2nd L.

Materials and methods

717 consecutive luminal-MBC pts treated between 2008 and 2020 were analyzed at the Oncology Department of Aviano and Udine, Italy. Differences about survival outcomes (OS, PFS and PPS) were tested by log-rank test. The attrition rate (AR) between 1st and 2ndL was calculated.

Results

At 1stL, pts were treated with ET (49%), chemotherapy (CT) (31%) and ET-CDKi (20%) while, at 2ndL, 33% received ET, 33% CT and 8% ET-CDKi. Overall AR was 10%, 7% for CT, 8% for ET and 17% for ET-CDKi. By multivariate analysis, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i showed a better mPFS1 and OS. Moreover, 2ndL ET-CDK4/6i demonstrated better mPFS2 compared to ET and CT. Notably, 1stL ET-CDKi resulted in higher mPFS than 2ndL ET-CDKi. Intriguingly, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i was associated with worse mPPS compared to CT and ET. Secondarily, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by CT had worse OS compared to 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by ET. Notably, none of baseline characteristics at 2ndL influenced 2ndL treatment choice (ET vs. CT) after ET-CDKi.

Conclusion

Our real-world data demonstrated that ET-CDKi represents the best option for 1stL luminal-MBC compared to ET and CT. Also, the present study pointed out that 2ndL ET, potentially combined with other molecules, could be a feasible option after CDK4/6i failure, postponing CT on later lines.

Thursday, 23 January 2020

[Articles] Atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel as first-line treatment for unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (IMpassion130): updated efficacy results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial



by Peter Schmid, Hope S Rugo, Sylvia Adams, Andreas Schneeweiss, Carlos H Barrios, Hiroji Iwata, Véronique Diéras, Volkmar Henschel, Luciana Molinero, Stephen Y Chui, Vidya Maiya, Amreen Husain, Eric P Winer, Sherene Loi, Leisha A Emens, IMpassion130 Investigators

The Lancet Oncology: ARTICLES| VOLUME 21, ISSUE 1, P44-59, JANUARY 01, 2020

Consistent with the first interim analysis, this second interim overall survival analysis of IMpassion130 indicates no significant difference in overall survival between the treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population but suggests a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive disease. However, this positive result could not be formally tested due to the prespecified statistical testing hierarchy. For patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel is an important therapeutic option in a disease with high unmet need.

Tuesday, 18 October 2016

Finding the balance between over- and under-treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

Finding the balance between over- and under-treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

Groen EJ et al

The Breast: Article in Press

With the widespread adoption of population-based breast cancer screening, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has come to represent 20–25% of all breast neoplastic lesions diagnosed. Current treatment aims at preventing invasive breast cancer, but the majority of DCIS lesions will never progress to invasive disease. Still, DCIS is treated by surgical excision, followed by radiotherapy as part of breast conserving treatment, and/or endocrine therapy. This implies over-treatment of the majority of DCIS, as less than 1% of DCIS patients will go on to develop invasive breast cancer annually.

Tuesday, 21 October 2008

Are Community Hospitals Undertreating Breast Cancer?

Link to journal

Gutierrez, Juan C. ; Hurley, Judith D. ; Housri, Nadine ; Perez, Eduardo A. et al
Are Many Community Hospitals Undertreating Breast Cancer?: Lessons From 24,834 Patients
Annals of Surgery. 248(2):154-162, August 2008.
Abstract
Objective: To compare treatment patterns and long-term outcomes between teaching and community hospitals treating patients with infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC).Methods: All IDCs from the Florida Cancer Data System from 1994 to 2000 were examined.Results: Overall, 24,834 operative cases of IDC were identified. Teaching hospitals treated 11.3% of patients with a larger proportion of stage III and IV disease (39.8% vs. 33.0%). Five- and 10-year overall survival rates at teaching hospitals were 84% and 72%, compared with 81% and 69% at high-volume community hospitals and 77% and 63% at low-volume hospitals (P < p =" 0.008)." ratio =" 0.763," ratio =" 0.903,">