Treatment Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Male Patients With Stage IV Breast Cancer: A Population-based Study

Outcomes of the patients with metastatic male breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The goal of this research is to investigate the clinical characteristics and prognosis of men with metastatic breast cancer (mMBC).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the data of 28 patients was conducted. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to assess overall survival (OS) and prognostic variables.

RESULTS

At the time of diagnosis, the median age was 57 years (range 26-86). The most prevalent pathological subtype was invasive ductal carcinoma (92.6%). HER2 positivity was 21.6% in patients, with estrogen and progesterone receptor positivity at 96.4% and 71.4%, respectively. Bone-75%, lung-39.3%, brain-21.4%, and adrenal gland-10.7% were the most prevalent metastatic sites. Trastuzumab-based chemotherapy was given to six patients. During the study period, 14 patients (or half) died. All patients had a median OS of 42.6 months (range: 21.6-63.7). The OS rates after 1, 3, and 5 years were 95.7%, 54.2%, and 36.6%, respectively. The number of metastatic locations (P = 0.045), brain metastasis (P = 0.033), and a history of regular alcohol intake (P = 0.008) were all shown to be statistically significant factors affecting OS in univariate analysis. However, multivariate analysis did not support the findings. In addition, we discovered that trastuzumab-based therapy and de-novo metastatic disease had no effect on OS for mMBC.

CONCLUSIONS

The data on mMBC is restricted because of its rarity. The prognosis of mMBC was shown to be poor in this investigation. Despite the small number of patients, we discovered that in univariate analysis, having brain metastases, the number of metastatic locations, and a history of alcohol intake may be prognostic factors.

Metastatic breast cancer: Who benefits from surgery?

BACKGROUND

We sought to identify characteristics of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who may benefit most from primary tumor resection.

METHODS

Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to categorize non-surgical patients with de novo MBC in the NCDB (2010-2015) into 3 groups (I/II/III) based on 3-year overall survival (OS). After bootstrapping (BS), group-level profiles were applied, and the association of surgery with OS was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

All patients benefitted from surgery (median OS, surgery vs no surgery): 72.7 vs 42.9 months, 47.3 vs 30.4 months, 23.8 vs 14.4 months (all p < 0.001) in BS-groups I, II, and III, respectively. After adjustment, surgery remained associated with improved OS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.50-0.55). The effect of surgery on OS differed quantitatively across groups.

CONCLUSION

Prognostic groups may inform the degree of benefit from surgery, with the greatest benefit seen in those with the most favorable survival.

Hemogram index parameters in the evaluation of male breast cancer and inflammatory response: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to investigate the hemogram index parameters and their clinical significance in the evaluation of the inflammatory response of patients with male breast cancer, who are rarely observed in the literature.

METHODS

In total, 22 (n=22) healthy male and 28 (n=28) male breast cancer patients without synchronous/metachronous tumors were included in this study. They were grouped as the healthy male control group (Group 1) and the male breast cancer patient group (Group 2). The male breast cancer was divided into two subgroups, namely, early stage [(stage: 0/I/II) (Group 2A)] and late stage [(stage: III/IV) (Group 2B)], and their hemogram index parameters were compared.

RESULTS

A significant (p>0.05) increase was observed in neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and·platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) values in the late stage (Group 2B: stage III/IV) compared to the early stage (Group 2A: stage 0/I/II) and healthy control (Group 1) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In male breast cancer patients, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and platelet/lymphocyte ratio values were significantly higher as the stage of cancer increased. These readily available simple tests can be used to evaluate the host's inflammatory response in male breast cancer.

Benefits of Trimodality Therapy Compared with Systemic Therapy Alone in Male Patients with Stage IV Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Male breast cancer (MBC) represents <1% of all breast cancer (BC) diagnoses. Recent publications in female stage IV BC have shown that surgical intervention has a survival benefit. This study aims to determine the impact of surgical intervention in men with stage IV BC and known estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify 539 stage IV MBC patients with known ER/PR status from 2004 to 2017. Chi-square tests examined subgroup differences between the treatment modalities received. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models examined factors associated with survival.

RESULTS

The Kaplan-Meier estimation showed that ER-positive (ER+) and PR-positive (PR+) patients who received surgery, systemic therapy, and radiation (Trimodality) or systemic therapy and surgery (ST+Surg) had improved survival compared with systemic therapy alone (ST) [ER+, p < 0.003; PR+, p < 0.033]. For ER+ patients, the 5-year OS rates by treatment were: Trimodality, 40%; ST+Surg, 27%; and ST, 20%. For PR+ patients, the 5-year OS rates were: Trimodality, 39%; ST+Surg, 24%; and ST, 20%. The Cox proportional hazard model revealed a survival advantage in patients who received Trimodality compared with ST (hazard ratio 0.622; p < 0.002). The timing of systemic therapy in relation to surgery was not found to be significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Trimodality therapy has a survival benefit in stage IV MBC patients with known ER+ status than in male patients who receive systemic therapy alone.

The effect of chemotherapy on survival in patients with nonmetastatic male breast cancer: A population-based observational study

BACKGROUND

Male breast cancer is a rare malignant disease, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers. The treatment of male breast cancer is mainly extrapolated from the enormous literature and clinical experience in women. The objective of the current study was to assess the relationship between adjuvant chemotherapy and survival in a large population-based cohort of patients with early-stage male breast cancer.

METHODS

Men with invasive stage I to stage III breast cancer were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer database from 1990 to 2014. The effect of chemotherapy on survival was determined using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

Of 2713 male patients enrolled, 1817 (66.9%) did not receive chemotherapy. Age, T classification, N classification, tumor grade, and progesterone receptor (PR) status were found to be strong predictors of chemotherapy administration. Chemotherapy was associated with a significant 26% reduction in all-cause mortality (P < .001) and a marginally significant 21% reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality (P = .085). For men with PR-negative breast cancer, use of chemotherapy was associated with improved breast cancer-specific survival (hazards ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.28-0.91 [P = .023]) and overall survival (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37-0.77 [P = .001]). However, chemotherapy did not improve the breast cancer-specific survival for all men with PR-positive tumors (P = .959); it was associated with improved overall survival (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.92 [P = .004]) for men with PR-positive stage II and stage III breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy should be considered for men with PR-negative, nonmetastatic breast cancer and PR-positive, stage II and stage III breast cancer.

Management and outcome of male metastatic breast cancer in the national multicenter observational research program Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME)

Background and Aims:

Because of its low prevalence, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in males is managed based on clinical experience with women. Using a real-life database, we aim to provide a comprehensive analysis of male MBC characteristics, management and outcome.

Methods:

The Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics Data Platform collected data for all men and women ⩾18 years with MBC in 18 participating French Comprehensive Cancer Centers from January 2008 to November 2016. Demographic, clinical, and pathological characteristics were retrieved, as was treatment modality. Men were matched 1:1 to women with similar characteristics.

Results:

Of 16,701 evaluable patients, 149 (0.89%) men were identified. These men were older (median age 69 years) and predominantly had hormone receptor HR+/HER2– disease (78.3%). Median overall survival (OS) was 41.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI: 26.9–49.7)] and similar to women. Median progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line therapy was 9.3 months [95% CI (7.4–11.5)]. In the HR+/HER2– subpopulation, endocrine therapy (ET) alone was the frontline treatment for 43% of patients, including antiestrogens (n = 19), aromatase inhibitors (n = 15) with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs (n = 3), and various sequential treatments. Median PFS achieved by frontline ET alone was similar in men [9.8 months, 95% CI (6.9–17.4)] and in women [13 months, 95% CI (8.4–30.9)] (p = 0.80). PFS was similar for HR+/HER2– men receiving upfront ET or chemotherapy: 9.8 months [95% CI (6.9–17.4)] versus 9.5 months [95% CI (7.4–11.7)] (p = 0.22), respectively.

Conclusion:

MBC management in men and women leads to similar outcomes, especially in HR+/HER2– patients for whom ET should also be a cornerstone. Unsolved questions remain and successfully recruiting trials for men are still lacking.