Humor in radiological breast cancer screening: a way of improving patient service?

BACKGROUND Breast cancer screening is essential in detecting breast tumors, however, the examination is stressful. In this study we analyzed whether humor enhances patient satisfaction. METHODS In this prospective randomized study 226 patients undergoing routine breast cancer screening at a single center during October 2020 to July 2021 were included. One hundred thirty-two were eligible for the study. Group 1 (66 patients) received an examination with humorous intervention, group 2 (66 patients) had a standard breast examination. In the humor group, the regular business card was replaced by a self-painted, humorous business card, which was handed to the patient at the beginning of the examination. Afterwards, patients were interviewed with a standardized questionnaire. Scores between the two study groups were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher's exact test. P-values were adjusted with the Holm's method. Two-sided p-values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS One hundred thirty-two patients, 131 female and 1 male, (mean age 59 ± 10.6 years) remained in the final study cohort. Patients in the humor group remembered the radiologist's name better (85%/30%, P < .001), appreciated the final discussion with the radiologist more (4.67 ± 0.73-5;[5, 5] vs. 4.24 ± 1.1-5;[4, 5], P = .017), felt the radiologist was more empathetic (4.94 ± 0.24-5;[5, 5] vs.4.59 ± 0.64-5;[4, 5], P < .001), and rated him as a humorous doctor (4.91 ± 0.29-5;[5, 5] vs. 2.26 ± 1.43-1;[1, 4], P < .001). Additionally, patients in the humor group tended to experience less anxiety (p = 0.166) and felt the doctor was more competent (p = 0.094). CONCLUSION Humor during routine breast examinations may improve patient-radiologist relationship because the radiologist is considered more empathetic and competent, patients recall the radiologist's name more easily, and value the final discussion more. TRIAL REGISTRATION We have a general approval from our ethics committee because it is a retrospective survey, the patient lists for the doctors were anonymized and it is a qualitative study, since the clinical processes are part of the daily routine examinations and are used independently of the study. The patients have given their consent to this study and survey

Predicting for activity of second-line trastuzumab-based therapy in her2-positive advanced breast cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Her2-positive advanced breast cancer, the upfront use of trastuzumab is well established. Upon progression on first-line therapy, patients may be switched to lapatinib. Others however remain candidates for continued antibody treatment (treatment beyond progression). Here, we aimed to identify factors predicting for activity of second-line trastuzumab-based therapy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Ninety-seven patients treated with > 1 line of trastuzumab-containing therapy were available for this analysis. Her2-status was determined by immunohistochemistry and re-analyzed by FISH if a score of 2+ was gained. Time to progression (TTP) on second-line therapy was defined as primary study endpoint. TTP and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method. Multivariate analyses (Cox proportional hazards model, multinomial logistic regression) were applied in order to identify factors associated with TTP, response, OS, and incidence of brain metastases. <it>p </it>values < 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median TTP on second-line trastuzumab-based therapy was 7 months (95% CI 5.74-8.26), and 8 months (95% CI 6.25-9.74) on first-line, respectively (n.s.). In the multivariate models, none of the clinical or histopthological features could reliably predict for activity of second-line trastuzumab-based treatment. OS was 43 months suggesting improved survival in patients treated with trastuzumab in multiple-lines. A significant deterioration of cardiac function was observed in three patients; 40.2% developed brain metastases while on second-line trastuzumab or thereafter.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Trastuzumab beyond progression showed considerable activity. None of the variables investigated correlated with activity of second-line therapy. In order to predict for activity of second-line trastuzumab, it appears necessary to evaluate factors known to confer trastuzumab-resistance.</p

Cross-priming of cyclin B1, MUC-1 and survivin-specific CD8(+ )T cells by dendritic cells loaded with killed allogeneic breast cancer cells

INTRODUCTION: The ability of dendritic cells (DCs) to take up whole tumor cells and process their antigens for presentation to T cells ('cross-priming') is an important mechanism for induction of tumor specific immunity. METHODS: In vitro generated DCs were loaded with killed allogeneic breast cancer cells and offered to autologous naïve CD8(+ )T cells in 2-week and/or 3-week cultures. CD8(+ )T cell differentiation was measured by their capacity to secrete effector cytokines (interferon-γ) and kill breast cancer cells. Specificity was measured using peptides derived from defined breast cancer antigens. RESULTS: We found that DCs loaded with killed breast cancer cells can prime naïve CD8(+ )T cells to differentiate into effector cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). Importantly, these CTLs primed by DCs loaded with killed HLA-A*0201(- )breast cancer cells can kill HLA-A*0201(+ )breast cancer cells. Among the tumor specific CTLs, we found that CTLs specific for HLA-A2 restricted peptides derived from three well known shared breast tumor antigens, namely cyclin B1, MUC-1 and survivin. CONCLUSION: This ability of DCs loaded with killed allogeneic breast cancer cells to elicit multiantigen specific immunity supports their use as vaccines in patients with breast cancer

Uncertainties and controversies in axillary management of patients with breast cancer

The aims of this Oncoplastic Breast Consortium and European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists initiative were to identify uncertainties and controversies in axillary management of early breast cancer and to recommend appropriate strategies to address them. By use of Delphi methods, 15 questions were prioritized by more than 250 breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists from 60 countries. Subsequently, a global virtual consensus panel considered available data, ongoing studies and resource utilization. It agreed that research should no longer be prioritized for standardization of axillary imaging, de-escalation of axillary surgery in node-positive cancer and risk evaluation of modern surgery and radiotherapy. Instead, expert consensus recommendations for clinical practice should be based on current evidence and updated once results from ongoing studies become available. Research on de-escalation of radiotherapy and identification of the most relevant endpoints in axillary management should encompass a meta-analysis to identify knowledge gaps, followed by a Delphi process to prioritize and a consensus conference to refine recommendations for specific trial designs. Finally, treatment of residual nodal disease after surgery was recommended to be assessed in a prospective register

Oncoplastic breast consortium recommendations for mastectomy and whole breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation therapy

Aim: Demand for nipple-and skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recom-mendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BRPeer reviewe

Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy

Purpose Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion. Methods The panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology. Results Consensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference. Conclusions In case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques

Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Purpose Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion. Methods The panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology. Results Consensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference. Conclusions In case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques

Reply to 'the St Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2017: Te point of view of an international panel of experts in radiation oncology' by Kirova et al.

0SCOPUS: le.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe