Imaging male breast cancer

Male Breast Cancer: Imaging Considerations for Diagnosis and Surveillance

Male breast cancer accounts for less than 1% of all breast cancer cases. The important risk factors for the development of male breast cancer are family history, genetic mutations, obesity, liver disease, alcoholism, exogenous estrogen administration, and radiation exposure to the chest area. Despite its rarity, numerous studies have investigated the data on imaging considerations (mammogram, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)), but have addressed only certain aspects of male breast cancer. A comprehensive approach on the imaging characteristics, timing of imaging, prognostication based on imaging characteristics, and follow-up strategies in male breast cancer are still lacking. The purpose of this review article was to provide a comprehensive overview of the imaging findings, optimal timing to obtain imaging, and the appropriate follow-up strategies in male breast cancer survivors. This article also describes how imaging modalities can aid in determining prognosis. By addressing this knowledge gap, the article provides valuable insights for clinicians managing this uncommon yet clinically significant disease.

[Breast cancer in men]

Male breast cancer is an unknown field for many practitioners. Patients often see different doctors before the correct diagnosis is made - often too late. This article is intended to point out risk factors, initiation of diagnostics and therapy. In the dawning age of molecular medicine, we will also take a look at genetics.

Female-Type Presentation of Male Breast Cancer in Mammography and Its Clinical Implications

Introduction Male breast cancer is rare, accounting for about 1% of total breast cancer cases. In contrast to gynecomastia, which has a painful, soft, movable mass concentric to the nipple, the traditional presentation is a painless, hard, eccentric retro-areolar mass. However, when cancer occurs concurrently with significant gynecomastia, the mammographic pattern simulates female-type breast cancer, whereby there is a variable location and pattern of cancer. This study addresses the clinical and radiologic implications of this combination of gynecomastia and co-existing breast cancer. This combined presentation has not been highlighted thus far. Materials and method Following institutional approval, a retrospective study of male breast cancer was conducted over a 10-year period (2011-2021) in a single institution. Age, clinical presentation, risk factors, comorbidities, imaging results, and comprehensive pathology reports were all obtained from the picture archiving and communication system (PACS). Patients who did not have an initial imaging examination were eliminated from the study. Results There were 17 cases in all that were investigated. Nine of the men exhibited a classic presentation appearance, whereas eight had gynecomastia. The mean age was 58 years. The female-type presentation included multicentric cancers away from the nipple, diffuse parenchymal involvement, leukemia/lymphoma, and positive axillary lymphadenopathy without intramammary lesion, some of which had delayed investigation due to clinical suspicion of gynecomastia or breast swelling. All of the radiologic diagnoses were accurate. The pathology report in all except two cases was hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative. Conclusion Female-type presentation of male breast cancer is highlighted to prevent false clinical impressions and delayed radiologic investigation and treatment. Mammography readily identifies such cancers and should be requested at the initial clinical presentation of males with significant gynecomastia or risk factor.

Case Series Analysis of Male Breast Cancer

Male breast cancer is a rare disease, accounting for less than 1% of all cases of breast cancer. However, the incidence of male breast cancer is increasing. In this study, we systematically analyzed the cases of male breast cancer and evaluated the management of operable male breast cancer in daily clinical practice according to the international clinical guidelines. Data of male breast cancer characteristics and management were recorded from our electronic database. We present a case series of male breast cancer patients treated at our institution between 2013 and 2021 and summarize the recommendations on management of male patients with breast cancer. Twenty-six patients met the search criteria. The majority of tumors were hormone-receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative. Two tumors were derived from axillary accessory breast. All patients underwent mastectomy. Fifteen patients received adjuvant chemotherapy containing anthracycline or taxane. Ten patients received adjuvant radiotherapy for lymph node metastasis. Twenty-five patients received adjuvant endocrine therapy. None of patients received anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 therapy. During the median follow-up period of 37 months, one patient died of previous lung cancer recurrence and one patient developed lung metastases 2 years after breast surgery. No recurrence or distant metastasis occurred in the other twenty-four patients. The incidence of male breast cancer is low. In this study, we present twenty-six cases of male patients with operable breast cancer in our department. All of them received surgery and adjuvant treatment. Early diagnosis and combined therapy benefit male patients with breast cancer. Surgery together with adjuvant treatment can bring a good prognosis.

Profile of Male Breast Cancer in Makkah Region of Saudi Arabia: A 4-Year Retrospective Analysis of Radiology and Histopathology

Background

Mammography is a method widely used for the diagnosis of breast disorders in women and may help detect breast cancer in its early stages. Male breast cancer often remains undiagnosed or is poorly controlled until serious complications arise; therefore, the use of screening methods is needed to help with early diagnosis.

Methods

From a total of 1,667 registered mammography cases screened, 17 male breast disease cases were included in this study. Mammography and ultrasound data were analyzed by Statistical Package of Social Sciences v.22 (SPSS). Diagnosis was made following biopsy in suspicious cases, and histopathological and immunological findings of all such patients were obtained for final diagnosis.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 35 years (range, 14-70 years); 17.6% of the cases were aged 37 yrs, and 2 cases were aged 51 and 52 yrs. Of the 17 cases, 11 had breast lesions, and skin thickening was observed in only 1 case. The different patterns of lesions detected were asymmetry of the parenchyma, mastitis, and hamartoma (n = 1 each), malignant lesions (n = 2), and gynecomastia (n = 6). According to the BI-RADS categorization, 8 cases were benign, one case was probably benign, and 2 cases were likely malignant. In the 2 cases with malignant lesions, pathological diagnosis was made after hematoxylin and eosin and immunocytochemistry examination as invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of no special type (NST), grade II and grade III.

Conclusions

Most breast lesions in this study population were benign, while IDC was the most common malignancy encountered. Mammography is currently the most accurate and cost-effective method for detecting breast lesions. The findings of our study may help increase awareness of male breast cancer and encourage Saudi men at risk to perform self-breast exam and undergo routine breast screening.

A systematic literature review of the management, oncological outcomes and psychosocial implications of male breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Although male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers, it has significant oncological, survival and psychosocial implications for patients. The aim of this study is to assess the latest literature in the diagnosis, management, oncological outcomes, and psychosocial impact of MBC.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines (Moher et al., 2009) [1] to explore the management of MBC, with particular focus on investigative imaging, surgical management, oncological outcomes, survival, genetic screening and psychosocial effects. Electronic databases were searched for randomised control trials, cohort studies and case series involving more than 10 patients. Imaging and surgical techniques, local and distant disease recurrence, survival, genetic screening and psychosocial implications in the setting of MBC were assessed.

RESULTS

The search criteria identified 199 articles, of which 59 met the inclusion criteria. This included 39,529 patients, with a mean age of 64.5 years (55-71), and a mean follow-up of 66.3 months (26.2-115). Mastectomy remains the most frequently used surgical technique, with an average of 89.6%. Loco-regional and distant recurrence rate was 10.1% and 21.4% respectively. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 and 10 years was 66.8% and 54.5% respectively. Disease-specific survival (DSS) at 5 and 10 years was 87.1% and 67.1% respectively. Overall survival (OS) at 5 and 10 years was 72.7% and 50.7% respectively. Genetic screening was conducted in 38.6% of patients of which 4.8% and 15.8% were found to be BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers respectively. Psychosocial studies were conducted mainly using questionnaire and interview-based methodology focusing primarily on awareness of breast cancer in men, support available and impact on gender identity.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that men present with later stage disease with subsequent impact on survival outcomes. There remains a paucity of high-level evidence and prospective studies are required. There is a need for increasing awareness amongst the public and health care professionals in order to improve outcomes and reduce stigma associated with MBC.

Male Breast Cancer: From Molecular Genetics to Clinical Management

MBC is a rare disease accounting for almost 1% of all cancers in men and less than 1% of breast cancer. Emerging data on the genetic drivers of predisposition for MBC are available and different risk factors have been associated with its pathogenesis. Genetic alterations, such as pathogenetic variants in BRCA1/2 and other moderate-/low-penetrance genes, along with non-genetic risk factors, have been recognized as pathogenic factors for MBC. Preventive and therapeutic implications could be related to the detection of alterations in predisposing genes, especially BRCA1/2, and to the identification of oncogenic drivers different from FBC. However, approved treatments for MBC remain the same as FBC. Cancer genetic counseling has to be considered in the diagnostic work-up of MBC with or without positive oncological family history. Here, we review the literature, reporting recent data about this malignancy with a specific focus on epidemiology, and genetic and non-genetic risk factors. We introduce the perspective of cancer genetic counseling for MBC patients and their healthy at-risk family members, with a focus on different hereditary cancer syndromes.

The ins and outs of male breast and anterior chest wall lesions from childhood to adulthood

Physiological and pathological processes arising from the breast and anterior chest wall may share similar clinical presentations because of the small volume of male breasts. Therefore, imaging is frequently required to localise and characterise the lesion and guide biopsy when radiological findings are equivocal or suspicious. Mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and ultrasound are the mainstays of breast imaging work-up. Other imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron-emission tomography (PET) can sometimes augment the investigation and aid treatment planning. This article reviews the key imaging features of a wide spectrum of benign and malignant conditions that involve the male breast and anterior chest wall across various age groups. Familiarisation with the salient radiological findings is essential for reaching an accurate diagnosis and optimising management.

Raman analysis of microcalcifications in male breast cancer

Microcalcifications (MCs) are important disease markers for breast cancer. Many studies were conducted on their characterization in female breast cancer (FBC), but no information is available on their composition in male breast cancer (MBC). Raman spectroscopy (RS) is a molecular spectroscopy that can rapidly explore the biochemical composition of MCs without requiring any staining protocol. In this study, we optimized an algorithm to identify the mineral components present in MCs from Raman images. The algorithm was then used to study and compare MCs identified on breast cancer pieces from male and female patients. In total, we analyzed 41 MCs from 5 invasive MBC patients and 149 MCs from 13 invasive FBC patients. Results show that hydroxyapatite is the most abundant type of calcium both in MBC and FBC. However, some differences in the amount and distribution of calcium minerals are present between the two groups. Besides, we observed that MCs in MBC have a higher amount of organic material (collagen) than FBC. To the best of our knowledge, this study provides the first overview of the composition of MCs present in MBC patients; and suggests that these patients have specific features that differentiate them from the previously studied FBC. Our result support thus the need for studies designed explicitly to the understanding of MBC.

Outcomes of male patients attending the symptomatic breast unit: adherence to local and national imaging guidelines and effectiveness of clinical examination and imaging in detecting male breast cancer

AIM

To review outcomes of male patients attending the breast unit, evaluate effectiveness of imaging and examination in detecting breast cancer and review adherence to guidelines for male breast imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was undertaken of male patients attending Cambridge Breast Unit from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2019. Patient electronic records and imaging were reviewed to establish demographics, clinical findings, imaging, biopsy, and pathology outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 1,362 male patients attending the breast unit, 1,028 (75%) had imaging performed. Biopsy was performed in 41 men (3%), with 14 cancers diagnosed (1%). Clinical examination showed 42.7% sensitivity, 99.6% specificity, 54.6% positive predictive value (PPV) and 99.4% negative predictive value (NPV) for detection of cancer. Mammogram demonstrated 84.6% sensitivity, 99.4% specificity, 69.8% PPV, and 99.8% NPV for detection of malignancy. Ultrasound demonstrated 78.6% sensitivity, 98.9% specificity, 73.3% PPV and 99.2% NPV for detection of cancer. Forty-one percent of patients <40 years and 51% < 50 years were imaged, who according to local and Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) guidelines did not require imaging based on age and clinical score.

CONCLUSION

Male patients account for a small proportion of referrals to the breast unit but generate significant workload. Imaging protocols, incorporating clinical score and age cut-off at 40 years remains robust for detecting malignancy. Clinician awareness of the imaging protocol, and close liaison with radiologists is essential to minimise additional radiology workload.

An Approach Based on Mammographic Imaging and Radiomics for Distinguishing Male Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Preliminary Study

Purpose

To develop and validate an imaging-radiomics model for the diagnosis of male benign and malignant breast lesions.

Methods

Ninety male patients who underwent preoperative mammography from January 2011 to December 2018 were enrolled in this study (63 in the training cohort and 27 in the validation cohort). The region of interest was segmented into a mediolateral oblique view, and 104 radiomics features were extracted. The minimum redundancy and maximum relevance (mRMR) and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) methods were used to exclude radiomics features to establish the radiomics score (rad-score). Mammographic features were evaluated by two radiologists. Univariate logistic regression was used to select for imaging features, and multivariate logistic regression was used to construct an imaging model. An imaging-radiomics model was eventually established, and a nomogram was developed based on the imaging-radiomics model. Area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were applied to assess the clinical value.

Results

The AUC based on the imaging model in the validation cohort was 0.760, the sensitivity was 0.750, and the specificity was 0.727. The AUC, sensitivity and specificity based on the radiomics in the validation cohort were 0.820, 0.750, and 0.867, respectively. The imaging-radiomics model was better than the imaging and radiomics models; the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of the imaging-radiomics model in the validation cohort were 0.870, 0.824, and 0.900, respectively.

Conclusion

The imaging-radiomics model created by the imaging characteristics and radiomics features exhibited a favorable discriminatory ability for male breast cancer.

Clinical Indications for Mammography in Men and Correlation With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to examine the correlation between presenting clinical symptoms and imaging findings in men with breast cancer.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Four hundred twenty-nine male patients who presented for mammography at one institution between January 2004 and December 2014 were retrospectively evaluated. Of the 429 patients, 291 presented with clinical symptoms for diagnostic mammography. The presenting clinical symptoms in 291 patients were recorded and correlated with imaging and histopathologic findings.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-one male patients were included. Some presented with multiple symptoms, for a total of 318 clinical symptoms. One hundred and ninety (65%) men presented with palpable abnormalities, 44 (15%) with nonfocal pain, 31 (11%) with breast swelling, 14 (5%) with breast enlargement, 13 (4%) with focal pain, 7 (2%) with skin changes, 6 (2%) with nipple discharge/changes and 13 (4%) with other symptoms (itching, throbbing and breast heaviness). A total of 290 patients underwent mammography and 176 underwent sonography. Forty-one malignancies were diagnosed, of which 24 (59%) were invasive ductal carcinoma. Nipple changes/discharge had a 100% positive predictive value for malignancy while breast pain showed a 0% positive predictive value. Fifty-two patients showed either a mass or a focal asymmetry on mammography, of which 38 (73%) were malignant. Three patients (1%) without a mass or focal asymmetry were diagnosed with malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Correlating clinical symptoms and imaging findings can help with timely and accurate diagnosis of breast cancer in men. Nipple discharge/changes and skin changes with palpable abnormalities and mammographic findings of masses and focal asymmetries were associated with breast cancer. Pain, breast enlargement, and breast swelling were unlikely to be associated with malignancy.

Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant male breast lesions in mammography

PURPOSE

To investigate the mammographic characteristics in discriminating benign and malignant male breast lesions.

METHODS

Male patients with breast lesions detected by preoperative mammography were enrolled in this study from Jan 2011 to Dec 2018. All lesions were confirmed by biopsy and classified into benign group or malignant group. Imaging features included lesions location, lesion type, lesion density, lesion eccentricity, accompanying signs(calcification, nipple retraction, thickened skin and enlarged lymph nodes) were recorded and analysed by statistical methods. The AUC was calculated to assess their diagnostic performance in distinguishing benign and malignant lesions. This model was further validated by 0.632 bootstrap.

RESULTS

A total of 93 men(median age: 60, range 32-81 years) were enrolled, 43 patients in the benign group and 50 patients in the malignant group. In the univariate logistic analysis, age, lesion location, lesion type, lesion density, lesion eccentricity, calcification, nipple retraction and skin thickening were significantly different (p < 0.05). When the lesion showed a mass in mammography, those with a circumscribed margin were likely malignant (p < 0.05). In the multivariate logistic analysis, non-retro-areola lesions (OR: 6.900, 95 % CI: 1.413∼33.691, p < 0.05), eccentric lesions (OR: 14.566, 95 % CI: 2.800∼75.777, p < 0.05), high-density lesions (OR: 11.052, 95 % CI: 2.235∼54.666, p < 0.05), calcification (OR: 12.715 95 % CI: 1.316∼122.848, p < 0.05) and nipple retraction (OR: 24.681, 95 % CI: 2.853∼213.542 p < 0.05) were associated with breast cancer. Those variables were used to build logistic model and the AUC of the imaging model was 0.904. The imaging model was verified by 0.632 bootstrap resampling, and the AUC after 0.632 bootstrap was 0.892.

CONCLUSION

Mammographic characteristics could contribute to distinguishing malignant and benign male breast lesions, and the imaging model showed excellent diagnostic performance, which may help to guide clinical decision-making.

Current state of surgical management for male breast cancer

Management guidelines for male breast cancer have long been extrapolated from those for female breast cancer, which are based on large, randomised-controlled trials. While there are no randomised-controlled trials for male breast cancer management mainly due to the rarity of the disease, the only type of evidence available comes from retrospective studies, subject to selection biases and small sample sizes. Male breast cancer, while similar to female breast cancer in many respects, has some important differences that can affect management choices. Most cancers are oestrogen and progesterone receptor positive, and usually more advanced at presentation than female breast cancer. This is likely due to less breast parenchyma in male patients and delay to diagnosis. The classical management option for male patients with breast cancer is mastectomy, due to small tumour-to-breast ratio and often central position of the tumour. Breast conserving surgery is still useful in selected cases and has similar outcomes when compared to mastectomies in these patients. For patients with clinically negative lymph nodes, sentinel lymph node biopsy offers the same prognosis as axillary lymph node dissection, but with less associated morbidity. Endocrine therapy is of particular use, due to high levels of receptor positivity. Adjuvant endocrine therapy seems to significantly improve overall survival of male patients with breast cancer and while no prospective evidence exists for neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, there is hope that this is a useful management option as well. Radiotherapy is also useful in an adjuvant setting, particularly when combined with endocrine therapy. Better identification of patients, less delay from presentation to diagnosis and more collaborative efforts are key in improving the management, prognosis and outcomes of patients with male breast cancer.

Male accessory breast cancer on the abdominal wall: a case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Accessory breast cancer is very rare, particularly in men. Male accessory breast cancer on the abdominal wall has not been documented in the scientific literature so far. We describe a case of male accessory breast cancer on the abdominal wall.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe a male patient suffering a swelling and erosive, enlarged, and hardened abdominal wall mass with pain due to abdominal wall accessory breast cancer. The patient had no obvious disease history, and the initial clinical symptom was a small mass on the abdominal wall. B-ultrasound revealed a solid subcutaneous nodule in the right abdomen with a size of ~2.8 × 2.5 × 1.5 cm. The abdominal wall tumor resection was performed with local anesthesia. Pathological testing revealed a grade II infiltrating ductal carcinoma derived from the accessory mammary gland (right abdominal wall) with neuroendocrine characteristics, showing ER (100% strong positive), PR (100% strong positive), HER-2 (-), ki67 (40% positive), Syn (+), CgA (+), and GCDFP15 (+).

CONCLUSION

Nonaxillary accessory breast cancer in males is very rare, with no obvious clinical manifestations, and could be easily ignored. This disease requires great attention from clinicians.

Magnetic resonance imaging findings of high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the male breast: A case report

Ductal carcinoma in situ in men is incredibly rare and detection by conventional mammography and ultrasound is often challenging. We report an unusual case of a 50-year-old male, with no family history of breast cancer, who presented with an 8-year history of left-sided breast pain and recurrent bloody nipple discharge without any significant suspicious imaging features in mammography and targeted high-resolution ultrasound. Breast magnetic resonance imaging was performed as an adjunct modality. Magnetic resonance imaging findings revealed a suspicious retroareolar non-mass abnormality of segmental, linear and dendritic pattern, which was highly suspicious for a ductal carcinoma in situ. Stereotactic guided biopsy and subsequent mastectomy were consistent with pure high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the left breast. Overall, this case highlights the challenges in diagnosing ductal carcinoma in situ in men and demonstrates the importance for further investigating clinical suspicions of the male breast.

Diagnosis and Management of Gynecomastia for Urologists

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our aim is to review the steps of diagnosis and management of gynecomastia with a special focus on treatment of gynecomastia associated with androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies investigating tamoxifen and radiation therapy for both therapy and prophylaxis of bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia are reviewed. Gynecomastia is a common clinical problem, affecting between one and two thirds of middle-aged men. Diagnosis is typically made by history and physical exam. Common causes include chronic medical conditions and medications; however, unexplained gynecomastia should prompt laboratory work-up, followed by appropriate imaging studies to evaluate for hormone producing cancers. For patients taking bicalutamide for treatment of prostate cancer, tamoxifen or radiation therapy for gynecomastia are excellent options.

Ultrasonographic assessment of male breast diseases

Although rare and accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancers, the incidence of breast cancer in men has increased by 26% over the past few decades. Very little has been reported on the sonographic appearance of benign and malignant male breast conditions. The aim of this study was to describe the ultrasonographic features of male breast disease and the value of ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease. Between December 2006 and October 2014, ultrasound examinations were performed in 560 male patients presenting with enlargement of, pain in, and/or a lump in the breast. One hundred and thirty-six patients (24.3%) underwent surgical excision, and 424 patients (75.7%) were diagnosed by ultrasound. Their ultrasonographic features were retrospectively evaluated. The final diagnoses were gynecomastia (n = 537), primary breast cancer (n = 9), lipoma (n = 7), chronic mastitis (n = 6), and fibroadenoma (n = 1). Of the 560 lesions, 356 (63.6%) were classified as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 2, 191 (34.1%) were classified as BI-RADS category 3, and 13 (2.3%) were classified as BI-RADS 4 or 5. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of the detection of malignant breast masses according to ultrasound were 100%, 99.3%, 69.2%, 100%, and 97.7% respectively. The sonographic patterns of gynecomastia were nodular (n = 131, 24.4%), dendritic (n = 50, 9.3%), and diffuse glandular (n = 356, 66.3%). Color Doppler flow imaging revealed hypervascularity in five of these malignant masses, moderate vascularity in two of the masses, and mild vascularity in the remaining two masses. Other diseases included in the study are also described. Ultrasonography (US) is useful in the diagnosis of male breast diseases, especially in differentiating cancer from benign lesions.

Male Breast: Clinical and Imaging Evaluations of Benign and Malignant Entities with Histologic Correlation

Breast cancer is an uncommon disease in men. As a result, the diagnosis may not initially be considered. Understanding the common benign and malignant entities affecting the male breast is critical for timely and accurate diagnosis in the primary care setting. Most patients present with a palpable breast mass or pain. The usual etiology is gynecomastia, the most common breast condition in males, but breast cancer must always be excluded through careful imaging evaluation when physical examination findings are suspicious or inconclusive. Imaging of the male breast generally relies on mammography and ultrasound, with mammography employed as the initial imaging modality of choice and ultrasound when a mass is detected or suspected. Here we describe the normal male breast anatomy and present an evaluation algorithm for the male patient with breast signs or symptoms. The most common benign and malignant entities are described.

Male Breast Cancer

Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease, accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancer diagnoses worldwide. Although breast carcinomas share certain characteristics in both genders, there are notable differences. Most studies on men with breast cancer are very small. Thus, most data on male breast cancer are derived from studies on females. However, when a number of these small studies are grouped together, we can learn more from them. This review emphasizes the incidence, etiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, pathology, survival, and prognostic factors related to MBC.

New approaches in the management of male breast cancer

Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare condition that accounts for 0.1% of all male cancers. Our current evidence base for treatment is derived from female breast cancer (FBC) patients. Risk factors for MBC include age, genetic predisposition, race, sex hormone exposure, and environmental factors. Most patients present later and with more advanced disease than comparable FBC patients. Tumors are likely to be estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positive, with the most common histologic type being invasive ductal carcinoma. Triple assessment remains the criterion standard for diagnosis. Primary MBC is mostly managed initially by simple mastectomy, with the option of breast conserving surgery, which carries an increased risk of recurrence. Sentinel node biopsy is recommended as the initial procedure for staging the axilla. Reconstructive surgery focuses on achieving primary skin closure, and radiotherapy largely follows treatment protocols validated in FBC. We recommend chemotherapy for men with more advanced disease, in particular, those with estrogen receptor negative histology. MBC responds well to endocrine therapy, although it is associated with significant adverse effects. Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are promising but raise concerns due to their failure to prevent estrogen synthesis in the testes. Fulvestrant remains unproven as a therapy, and data on trastuzumab is equivocal with HER2 receptor expression and functionality unclear in MBC. In metastatic disease, drug-based hormonal manipulation remains a first-line therapy, followed by systemic chemotherapy for hormone-refractory disease. Prognosis for MBC has improved over the past 30 years, with survival affected by disease staging, histologic classification, and comorbidity.

Male breast cancer: risk factors, biology, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship

BACKGROUND

The causes, optimal treatments, and medical/psychosocial sequelae of breast cancer in men are poorly understood.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the English language literature was conducted to identify studies relevant to male breast cancer between 1987 and 2012 and including at least 20 patients. Searches were carried out on PubMed using the title terms 'male breast cancer' or 'male breast carcinoma'.

RESULTS

Relevant published data regarding risk factors, biological characteristics, presentation and prognosis, appropriate evaluation and treatment, and survivorship issues in male breast cancer patients are presented. BRCA2 mutations, age, conditions that alter the estrogen/androgen ratio, and radiation are proven risk factors. Disease biology is distinct in men, but diagnostic approaches and treatments for men are generally extrapolated from those in women due to inadequate research in men. Survivorship issues in men may include sexual and hormonal side-effects of endocrine therapies as well as unique psychosocial impacts of the disease.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to address gaps in knowledge pertaining to care of male breast cancer patients and survivors.

Asymptomatic Incidental Ductal Carcinoma in situ in a Male Breast Presenting with Contralateral Gynecomastia

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in males is rare and usually presents with symptoms on the affected side, such as, palpable mass or bloody nipple discharge. Even as DCIS has been reported in conjunction with gynecomastia in the same breast, we report an unusual case of a 62-year-old Caucasian male, with no family history of breast cancer, who presented with symptomatic side gynecomastia, and was incidentally found to have DCIS in a completely asymptomatic left breast. To the best of our knowledge, this case is the first report in literature of asymptomatic, incidentally discovered DCIS in a male patient.