Search

Introduction: Oncological second opinions are becoming increasingly important in the era of complex treatments and established certified cancer centers. Oncological guidelines with the highest levels of evidence are available, but these can only be effective to the extent that they are implemented. Therefore, we analyzed the effects of second opinions with regard to their agreement with first opinions and conformity with guidelines., Methods: In 164 patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer or gynecological malignancy who requested a second opinion, the first and second opinions, established at the interdisciplinary tumor conference, and conformity with the guidelines were evaluated., Results: The first opinion was not in agreement with the guidelines in 34.8% (15.2% diagnosis, 12.8% surgical therapy, 13.4% systemic therapy, and 5.5% radiotherapy), and the recommendations were optimized in the second opinion in 56.7% (28.7% diagnosis, 15.9% surgical therapy, 30.5% systemic therapy, and 8.5% radiotherapy)., Conclusions: Oncological second opinions showed significant effects and one-third of first opinions were not in conformity with the guidelines. In a significant proportion of cases, the existing treatment plan was changed or supplemented to allow modern and individualized treatment approaches., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Despite advancements in the treatment of primary and metastatic breast cancer, many patients lack a durable response to these treatments. Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2(HER2)-positive breast cancer who do not have a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) have a very poor prognosis. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have been identified as a predictive marker for pCR after NACT in TNBC and HER2-positive breast cancer. These patient populations could also be suitable for novel treatment strategies including neoepitope-based therapies. This work analyses the effect of TILs on the pCR in neoadjuvantly treated patients in the TILGen study and presents the procedures aimed at establishing neoepitope-based therapies in this study., Methods: Neoadjuvantly treated HER2-positive and TNBC patients were eligible for the presented analysis concerning the association between TILs and pCR. A total of 146 patients could be identified within the TILGen study. TILs were evaluated as percentage of stromal tumor tissue in core biopsies at primary diagnosis. The phenotype 'lymphocyte-predominant breast cancer' (LPBC) was associated with pCR by logistic regression adjusted for estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, HER2 status, age at diagnosis, and grading., Results: LPBC was seen in 24 (16.4%) patients. In this patient group, 66.7% achieved a pCR, while the pCR rate was 32.8% in patients with a low TIL count. The adjusted odds ratio was 6.60 (95% confidence interval 2.02-21.56; p < 0.01)., Conclusion: TILs are a strong predictor of pCR in TNBC and HER2-positive breast cancer patients. Implications for the use of this information including the effect on prognosis might help to identify patients most likely to benefit from a neoepitope-based therapy approach.

Breast cancer centres - certified in accordance with the criteria of the German Cancer Association and the German Mastology Association - are established throughout Germany. Although the setting up of centres and the subsequent need for certification are associated with a marked increase in costs, initial data show positive effects on quality. Certified centres are cost-effective from the point of view of health economics - they lead to improved quality in processes and results without creating any increase in costs for the funding bodies. However, the organization of the necessary structures, with interdisciplinary treatment, documentation and quality-assurance measures, requires considerable resources. Increasing consolidation of inpatient services is also involved, while shortening of the patients' hospitalization periods is leading to reduced remuneration from the funding bodies. The current cost deficits, which have resulted from the increased resources required, need to be recouped through additional charges. It will only be possible to maintain the high quality achieved if additional charges become available to cover the centres' added costs. Good data are increasingly becoming available as a basis for negotiations on charges - e.g., with regard to the quality of results and the National Cancer Plan - as well as clear support from patients.