Journals / Turkish Journal of Cancer / 2003 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 3

T3NOMO breast cancer patients: A subgroup with favorable prognosis

Pages
144–149
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The 3-year overall (OS) and disease free survival rates (DFS) forTSNOMO patients with a median follow-up time of 38 months are 100% and 90%, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The true pathological T3NOMO breast cancer is a rare disease with surprisingly good survival rate.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this retrospective study we tried to evaluate the possible prognostic factors in pTSNOMO breast cancer patients and to compare them with pT3N1MO and pT1-2NOMO patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The 3-year overall (OS) and disease free survival rates (DFS) forTSNOMO patients with a median follow-up time of 38 months are 100% and 90%, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Seyir · Meme neoplazmları · Neoplazm evrelendirilmesi

Abstract

The true pathological T3NOMO breast cancer is a rare disease with surprisingly good survival rate. In this retrospective study we tried to evaluate the possible prognostic factors in pTSNOMO breast cancer patients and to compare them with pT3N1MO and pT1-2NOMO patients. Between December 1993 and December 1998, 444 patients without any distant métastases were treated at our department. A total of 194 patients were staged as pT3. Among them 40 were pTSNO and 154 were pT3N1. One hundred patients were staged as pT1-2NO. The 3-year overall (OS) and disease free survival rates (DFS) forTSNOMO patients with a median follow-up time of 38 months are 100% and 90%, respectively. There was no statistically significant DFS and OS difference between T1-2NO and T3NO patients. A significant DFS, distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) advantage was observed in T3NO subgroup when compared to T3N1 patients. Although not significant, there was a strong trend for OS in favor of T3NOMO patients as well (p=0.09). For T3 patients, the metastatic lymph node ratio (LNR: number of metastatic lymph nodes/total number of lymph nodes dissected) significantly affected both DFS and DMFS; how-ever there was no significant survival difference between 0% and 1-25% LNR groups both in terms of DFS and DMFS. These results suggest that T3NOMO breast cancer patients treated by postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy have a fairly good outcome comparable to T1-2NOMO patients. A subgroup of T3N1 patients with less than 25% lymph node involvement seems to behave similarly to T3NO patients.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜRKAYNAK, M., YILDIZ, F., ATAHAN, İ. L. (2003). T3NOMO breast cancer patients: A subgroup with favorable prognosis. Turkish Journal of Cancer, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 3, 144–149. https://ajindex.com/articles/368480

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Helintö M, Blomqvist C, Heikkila P, et al. Post-mastectomy radiotherapy in pT3N0M0 breast cancer: is it needed? Radiother Oncol 1999;52: 213-7
  2. Klefstrom P, Grohn P, Heinonen E, et al. Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in stage III breast cancer. Cancer 1987;60:936-42
  3. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b Trial. N Engl J Med 1997;337:949-55
  4. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3628-36
  5. Ragaz J, Spinelli JJ. Large breast cancer tumors and radiotherapy: biology vs. chronology. Radiother Oncol 1999;52:203-5
  6. Fracchia AA, Evans JF, Eisenberg BL. Stage III carcinoma of the breast. Ann Surg 1980;192:705-10
  7. Fisher B, Bauer M, Wickerham DL, et al. Relation of number of positive axillary nodes to the prognosis of patients with primary breast cancer. An NSABP update. Cancer 1983;52:1551-7
  8. Harris JR, Halphin-Murphy P, McNeese M, et al. Consensus statement on postmastectomy radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:989-90
  9. Pisansky TM, Ingle JN, Schaid DJ, et al. Patterns of tumor relapse following mastectomy and adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with axillary lymph node-positive breast cancer. Cancer 1993;72:1247-60
  10. Recht A, Gray R, Davidson NE, et al. Locoregional failure 10 years after mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy with or without tamoxifen without irradiation: experience of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1689-700
  11. Cartre CL, Allen C, Henson D. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status and survival in 27,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989;63:181-7
  12. Fisher B, Slack N, Katrch DL, et al. Ten year follow-up of patients with carcinoma of breast cancer in a co-operative clinical trial evaluating surgical adjuvant chemotherapy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1975;140:528-34
  13. Nemoto T, Vana J, Bedwani RN, et al. Management and survival of female breast cancer: Results of a national survey of the American College of Surgeons. Cancer 1980;45:2917- 24
  14. Olson JE, Neuberg D, Pandya KJ, et al. The role of radiotherapy in the management of operable locally advanced breast carcinoma. Results of a randomized trial by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Cancer 1997;79:1138-49.