Search

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in females globally. However, we know relatively little about trends in males. This study describes United Kingdom (UK) secular trends in breast cancer from 2000 to 2021 for both sexes. We describe a population-based cohort study using UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD and Aurum databases. There were 5,848,436 eligible females and 5,539,681 males aged 18+ years, with ≥ one year of prior data availability in the study period. We estimated crude breast cancer incidence rates (IR), prevalence and survival probability at one-, five- and 10-years after diagnosis using the Kaplan–Meier method. Analyses were further stratified by age. Crude IR of breast cancer from 2000 to 2021 was 194.4 per 100,000 person-years for females and 1.16 for males. Crude prevalence in 2021 was 2.1% for females and 0.009% for males. Both sexes have seen around a 2.5-fold increase in prevalence across time. Incidence increased with age for both sexes, peaking in females aged 60–69 years and males 90+. There was a drop in incidence for females aged 70–79 years. From 2003–2019, incidence increased > twofold in younger females (aged 18–29: IR 2.12 in 2003 vs. 4.58 in 2018); decreased in females aged 50–69 years; and further declined from 2015 onwards in females aged 70–89 years. Survival probability for females after one-, five-, and ten-years after diagnosis was 95.1%, 80.2%, and 68.4%, and for males 92.9%, 69.0%, and 51.3%. Survival probability at one-year increased by 2.08% points, and survival at five years increased by 5.39% from 2000–2004 to 2015–2019 for females, particularly those aged 50–70 years. For males, there were no clear time-trends for short-term and long-term survival probability. Changes in incidence of breast cancer in females largely reflect the success of screening programmes, as rates rise and fall in synchronicity with ages of eligibility for such programmes. Overall survival from breast cancer for females has improved from 2000 to 2021, again reflecting the success of screening programmes, early diagnosis, and improvements in treatments. Male breast cancer patients have worse survival outcomes compared to females, highlighting the need to develop male-specific diagnosis and treatment strategies to improve long-term survival in line with females. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Currently there are no specific guidelines for the post-operative follow-up of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC). We aimed to evaluate the pattern, location and timing of recurrence after surgery for non-metastatic chRCC and establish predictors of recurrence and cancer-specific death. Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive surgically treated non-metastatic chRCC cases from the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust (UK, 2015–2019) and the international collaborative database RECUR (15 institutes, 2006–2011). Kaplan–Meier curves were plotted. The association between variables of interest and outcomes were analysed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models with shared frailty for data source. Results: 295 patients were identified. Median follow-up was 58 months. The five and ten-year recurrence-free survival rates were 94.3% and 89.2%. Seventeen patients (5.7%) developed recurrent disease, 13 (76.5%) with distant metastases. 54% of metastatic disease diagnoses involved a single organ, most commonly the bone. Early recurrence (< 24 months) was observed in 8 cases, all staged ≥ pT2b. 30 deaths occurred, of which 11 were attributed to chRCC. Sarcomatoid differentiation was rare (n = 4) but associated with recurrence and cancer-specific death on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, UICC/AJCC T-stage ≥ pT2b, presence of coagulative necrosis, and positive surgical margins were predictors of recurrence and cancer-specific death. Conclusion: Recurrence and death after surgically resected chRCC are rare. For completely excised lesions ≤ pT2a without coagulative necrosis or sarcomatoid features, prognosis is excellent. These patients should be reassured and follow-up intensity curtailed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]