METHODS: Two hundred cases of breast cancer were evaluated at Advanced Medical and Dental Institute and Hospital Kepala Batas from 2002 to 2007. HER-2/neu status was confirmed in breast cancer tissues by immunohistochemistry. Immunohistochemical expression of HER-2/neu was evaluated according to the published scoring guidelines of the 'Hercep Test' (Dako, Carpinteria, CA). Data were analysed to identify any association between HER-2/neu and clinico-pathologic parameters.
RESULTS: HER-2/neu over expression was found in 63 (31.5%) tumours out of 200. When assessed for various age groups no significant association was found. However, a high percentage (75%) of over-expression was noted in the 81-85 years age group. No association was found with different racial groups (Malay, Chinese and Indians), with lymph node status or with grade of tumour. However a positive association was observed with oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor expression.
CONCLUSION: There was no association between HER-2/neu over expression and age, race, lymph node status or tumor grade. However a positive association was found with oestrogen and progesterone receptor status.
METHODS: We studied 522 patients who underwent mastectomy between 1998 and 2002 and followed them up until 2008. We defined PMLRR as recurrence to the axilla, supraclavicular nodes and or chest wall. ILR was defined as PMLRR occurring as an isolated event. Prognostic factors for locoregional recurrence were determined using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.
RESULTS: The overall PMLRR rate was 16.4%. ILR developed in 42 of 522 patients (8.0%). Within this subgroup, 25 (59.5%) remained disease free after treatment while 17 (40.5%) suffered disease progression. Univariate analyses identified race, age, size, stage, margin involvement, lymph node involvement, grade, lymphovascular invasion and ER status as probable prognostic factors for ILR. Cox regression resulted in only stage III disease and margin involvement as independent prognostic factors. The hazard of ILR was 2.5 times higher when the margins were involved compared to when they were clear (aHRR 2.5; 95% CI 1.3 to 5.0). Similarly, compared with stage I those with Stage II (aHRR 2.1; 95%CI 0.6 to 6.8) and stage III (aHRR 4.6; 95%CI 1.4 to 15.9) had worse prognosis for ILR.
CONCLUSION: Margin involvement and stage III disease were identified to be independent prognostic factors for ILR. Close follow-up of high risk patients and prompt treatment of locoregional recurrence were recommended.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at two outpatient chemotherapy centers. A total of 546 patients completed the questionnaires on CAM use. QOL was evaluated based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core quality of life (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific quality of life (QLQ-BR23) questionnaires.
RESULTS: A total of 70.7% of patients were identified as CAM users. There was no significant difference in global health status scores and in all five subscales of the QLQ C30 functional scales between CAM users and non-CAM users. On the QLQ-C30 symptom scales, CAM users (44.96±3.89) had significantly (p = 0.01) higher mean scores for financial difficulties than non-CAM users (36.29±4.81). On the QLQ-BR23 functional scales, CAM users reported significantly higher mean scores for sexual enjoyment (6.01±12.84 vs. 4.64±12.76, p = 0.04) than non-CAM users. On the QLQ-BR23 symptom scales, CAM users reported higher systemic therapy side effects (41.34±2.01 vs. 37.22±2.48, p = 0.04) and breast symptoms (15.76±2.13 vs. 11.08±2.62, p = 0.02) than non-CAM users. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the use of CAM modality was not significantly associated with higher global health status scores (p = 0.71).
CONCLUSION: While the findings indicated that there was no significant difference between users and non-users of CAM in terms of QOL, CAM may be used by health professionals as a surrogate to monitor patients with higher systemic therapy side effects and breast symptoms. Furthermore, given that CAM users reported higher financial burdens (which may have contributed to increased distress), patients should be encouraged to discuss the potential benefits and/or disadvantages of using CAM with their healthcare providers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 450 women newly diagnosed with Stage 1 to 3 invasive breast cancer in a single centre from July 2013 to Dec 2014 were included in this study. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between Ki-67 (positive defined as 14% and above) and age, ethnicity, grade, mitotic index, ER, PR, HER2, lymph node status and size. All analyses were performed using SPSS Version 22.
RESULTS: In univariable analysis, Ki -67 index was associated with younger age, higher grade, ER and PR negativity, HER2 positivity, high mitotic index and positive lymph nodes. However on multivariable analysis only tumour size, grade, PR and HER2 remained significant. Out of 102 stage 1 patients who had ER positive/PR positive/HER2 negative tumours and non-grade 3, only 5 (4.9%) had a positive Ki-67 index and may have been offered chemotherapy. However, it is interesting to note that none of these patients received chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Information on Ki67 would have potentially changed management in an insignificant proportion of patients with stage 1 breast cancer.