Experiences of men with breast cancer: an exploratory focus group study

Management and care of men with breast cancer is based on that developed for women. Our study reports that men have specific issues regarding certain aspects of their breast cancer experience, including diagnosis, disclosure, support and gender-specific information, and offers suggestions for improved patient care

Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer

INTRODUCTION Breast cancer remains a significant scientific, clinical and societal challenge. This gap analysis has reviewed and critically assessed enduring issues and new challenges emerging from recent research, and proposes strategies for translating solutions into practice. METHODS More than 100 internationally recognised specialist breast cancer scientists, clinicians and healthcare professionals collaborated to address nine thematic areas: genetics, epigenetics and epidemiology; molecular pathology and cell biology; hormonal influences and endocrine therapy; imaging, detection and screening; current/novel therapies and biomarkers; drug resistance; metastasis, angiogenesis, circulating tumour cells, cancer 'stem' cells; risk and prevention; living with and managing breast cancer and its treatment. The groups developed summary papers through an iterative process which, following further appraisal from experts and patients, were melded into this summary account. RESULTS The 10 major gaps identified were: (1) understanding the functions and contextual interactions of genetic and epigenetic changes in normal breast development and during malignant transformation; (2) how to implement sustainable lifestyle changes (diet, exercise and weight) and chemopreventive strategies; (3) the need for tailored screening approaches including clinically actionable tests; (4) enhancing knowledge of molecular drivers behind breast cancer subtypes, progression and metastasis; (5) understanding the molecular mechanisms of tumour heterogeneity, dormancy, de novo or acquired resistance and how to target key nodes in these dynamic processes; (6) developing validated markers for chemosensitivity and radiosensitivity; (7) understanding the optimal duration, sequencing and rational combinations of treatment for improved personalised therapy; (8) validating multimodality imaging biomarkers for minimally invasive diagnosis and monitoring of responses in primary and metastatic disease; (9) developing interventions and support to improve the survivorship experience; (10) a continuing need for clinical material for translational research derived from normal breast, blood, primary, relapsed, metastatic and drug-resistant cancers with expert bioinformatics support to maximise its utility. The proposed infrastructural enablers include enhanced resources to support clinically relevant in vitro and in vivo tumour models; improved access to appropriate, fully annotated clinical samples; extended biomarker discovery, validation and standardisation; and facilitated cross-discipline working. CONCLUSIONS With resources to conduct further high-quality targeted research focusing on the gaps identified, increased knowledge translating into improved clinical care should be achievable within five years

GalNAc glycoprotein expression by breast cell lines, primary breast cancer and normal breast epithelial membrane

Over-expression of N-acetylgalactosamine glycoproteins as detected by binding of the lectin from Helix pomatia (HPA), is associated with metastatic competence and poor patient prognosis in a range of human adenocarcinomas. These glycoproteins remain poorly characterised, and their functional role has yet to be elucidated. This study describes characterisation of a range of human breast/breast cancer cell lines for the expression of the N-acetylgalactosaminylated glycoproteins of interest, and their comparison with normal breast epithelium and a range of clinical breast carcinoma samples. Confocal and light microscopy studies revealed cytochemical HPA-binding patterns consistent with a fundamental disruption in normal glycobiosynthetic pathways attending increasing metastatic potential. We report the most complete comparative analysis of HPA-binding ligands from cultured breast cells, clinical breast carcinoma samples and normal breast epithelium to date. Lectin blotting identified 11 major HPA-binding glycoprotein bands common to both clinical tumour samples and breast cell lines and 6 of these bands were also expressed by samples of normal breast epithelium, albeit at much lower levels. Moreover, very marked quantitative but not qualitative differences in levels of expression consistent with metastatic capability were noted. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaignhttp://www.bjcancer.co

Clinical Significance of Myocardial Injury in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Prospective, Multicenter, Cohort Study

\ua9 2024 The AuthorsBackground: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with troponin elevation have a higher prevalence of cardiac abnormalities than control individuals. However, the progression and impact of myocardial injury on COVID-19 survivors remain unclear. Objectives: This study sought to evaluate myocardial injury in COVID-19 survivors with troponin elevation with baseline and follow-up imaging and to assess medium-term outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective, longitudinal cohort study in 25 United Kingdom centers (June 2020 to March 2021). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with myocardial injury underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) scans within 28 days and 6 months postdischarge. Outcomes were tracked for 12 months, with quality of life surveys (EuroQol-5 Dimension and 36-Item Short Form surveys) taken at discharge and 6 months. Results: Of 342 participants (median age: 61.3 years; 71.1% male) with baseline CMR, 338 had a 12-month follow-up, 235 had a 6-month CMR, and 215 has baseline and follow-up quality of life surveys. Of 338 participants, within 12 months, 1.2% died; 1.8% had new myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, or coronary revascularization; 0.8% had new myopericarditis; and 3.3% had other cardiovascular events requiring hospitalization. At 6 months, there was a minor improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (1.8% \ub1 1.0%; P < 0.001), stable right ventricular ejection fraction (0.4% \ub1 0.8%; P = 0.50), no change in myocardial scar pattern or volume (P = 0.26), and no imaging evidence of continued myocardial inflammation. All pericardial effusions (26 of 26) resolved, and most pneumonitis resolved (95 of 101). EuroQol-5 Dimension scores indicated an overall improvement in quality of life (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Myocardial injury in severe hospitalized COVID-19 survivors is nonprogressive. Medium-term outcomes show a low incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events and improved quality of life. (COVID-19 Effects on the Heart; ISRCTN58667920

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome