Search

Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide, with a great diversity in outcomes among individual patients. The ability to accurately predict a breast cancer outcome is important to patients, physicians, researchers, and policy makers. Many models have been developed and tested in different settings. We systematically reviewed the prognostic models developed and/or validated for patients with breast cancer.Methods: We conducted a systematic search in four electronic databases and some oncology websites, and a manual search in the bibliographies of the included studies. We identified original studies that were published prior to 1st January 2017, and presented the development and/or validation of models based mainly on clinico-pathological factors to predict mortality and/or recurrence in female breast cancer patients.Results: From the 96 articles selected from 4095 citations found, we identified 58 models, which predicted mortality (n = 28), recurrence (n = 23), or both (n = 7). The most frequently used predictors were nodal status (n = 49), tumour size (n = 42), tumour grade (n = 29), age at diagnosis (n = 24), and oestrogen receptor status (n = 21). Models were developed in Europe (n = 25), Asia (n = 13), North America (n = 12), and Australia (n = 1) between 1982 and 2016. Models were validated in the development cohorts (n = 43) and/or independent populations (n = 17), by comparing the predicted outcomes with the observed outcomes (n = 55) and/or with the outcomes estimated by other models (n = 32), or the outcomes estimated by individual prognostic factors (n = 8). The most commonly used methods were: Cox proportional hazards regression for model development (n = 32); the absolute differences between the predicted and observed outcomes (n = 30) for calibration; and C-index/AUC (n = 44) for discrimination. Overall, the models performed well in the development cohorts but less accurately in some independent populations, particularly in patients with high risk and young and elderly patients. An exception is the Nottingham Prognostic Index, which retains its predicting ability in most independent populations.Conclusions: Many prognostic models have been developed for breast cancer, but only a few have been validated widely in different settings. Importantly, their performance was suboptimal in independent populations, particularly in patients with high risk and in young and elderly patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objectives: Breast cancer is the second cause of death in women in Europe and North America. The mortality of this disease can be reduced with effective therapy and regular follow up to detect early recurrence. Tumor markers are sensitive in detecting recurrent or residual disease but imaging is required to customize the therapeutic option. Rising tumor markers and negative conventional imaging (US, X-mammography, CT and MR) poses a management problem. Our aim is to assess the role of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the management of post-therapy patients with rising markers but negative conventional imaging. Materials and methods: In the period from January 2008 to September 2009, 89 female patients with breast cancer who developed post-therapy rising markers (serum Ca 15-3 levels=64.8±16.3U/mL) but negative clinical examination and conventional imaging were investigated with 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Results: Tumor deposits were detected in 40/89 patients in chest wall, internal mammary nodes, lungs, liver and skeleton. The mean SUVmax value calculated in these lesions was 6.6±1.7 (range 3.1–12.8). In 23/40 patients solitary small lesion were amenable to radical therapy. In 7 out of these 23 patients a complete disease remission lasting more than 1 year was observed. Conclusions: 18F-FDG-PET/CT may have a potential role in asymptomatic patients with rising markers and negative conventional imaging. Our findings agree with other studies in promoting regular investigations such as tumor markers and 18F-FDG-PET/CT rather than awaiting the developments of physical symptoms as suggested by current guidelines since the timely detection of early recurrence may have a major impact on therapy and survival. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: In general, rates of breast cancer are lower in low-income and middle-income countries (LMCs) than they are in more industrialised countries of North America and Europe. This lower incidence means that screening programmes aimed at early detection in asymptomatic women would have a lower yield—ie, substantially more women would need to be examined to find a true case of breast cancer. Because the average age of breast cancer is generally younger in LMCs, it has been suggested that breast-cancer screening programmes begin at an earlier age in these settings. However, the younger average age of breast cancer is mainly driven by the age distribution of the population, and fewer older women with breast cancer, rather than by higher age-specific incidence rates in younger women. Resources in LMCs might be better used to raise awareness and encourage more women with palpable breast lumps to seek and receive treatment in a timely manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]