Jun Yamamura1, Norikazu Masuda2, Hiroyuki Yasojima2, Makiko Mizutani2, Keiko Kuriyama3, Shoji Nakamori2, Mitsugu Sekimoto2, Masayuki Mano4, Eiichi Tanaka5, Masahiro Nonaka6. 1. Department of Surgery, Sakai City Medical Center, Osaka, Japan; Department of Surgery and Breast Oncology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. 2. Department of Surgery and Breast Oncology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. 3. Radiology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. 4. Pathology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. 5. Radiation Oncology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. 6. Neurosurgery, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of breast cancer patients with brain metastasis (BM) is extremely poor, and the survival after development of BM is very short. We aimed to investigate clinicopathological factors related to significant effects on the prognosis after BM development. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 75 early breast cancer patients who received the standard of care and subsequently developed BM. RESULTS: Breast cancer subtype was one of the significant predictors for prognosis after BM diagnosis. Luminal HER2 patients had the most favorable prognosis after BM diagnosis (p = 0.011). Favorable performance status (PS) at BM diagnosis (p < 0.001) and a single metastatic brain tumor (p = 0.032) were significantly associated with good prognosis after BM diagnosis. Metastatic time courses of the patients was found not to be significantly associated with survival after BM diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate analysis indicated that luminal HER2 cancer, favorable PS at BM diagnosis, and a single metastatic brain tumor were the independent prognostic factors for survival after BM development, making a decisive influence on local or systemic control. CONCLUSION: Appropriate treatments for tumor subtypes and to improve the general condition of patients would result in improved outcomes for the patients with BM.
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of breast cancerpatients with brain metastasis (BM) is extremely poor, and the survival after development of BM is very short. We aimed to investigate clinicopathological factors related to significant effects on the prognosis after BM development. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 75 early breast cancerpatients who received the standard of care and subsequently developed BM. RESULTS:Breast cancer subtype was one of the significant predictors for prognosis after BM diagnosis. Luminal HER2patients had the most favorable prognosis after BM diagnosis (p = 0.011). Favorable performance status (PS) at BM diagnosis (p < 0.001) and a single metastatic brain tumor (p = 0.032) were significantly associated with good prognosis after BM diagnosis. Metastatic time courses of the patients was found not to be significantly associated with survival after BM diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate analysis indicated that luminal HER2 cancer, favorable PS at BM diagnosis, and a single metastatic brain tumor were the independent prognostic factors for survival after BM development, making a decisive influence on local or systemic control. CONCLUSION: Appropriate treatments for tumor subtypes and to improve the general condition of patients would result in improved outcomes for the patients with BM.
Entities:
Keywords:
Brain metastases; Breast cancer; Prognostic factor; Survival
Authors: F Heitz; J Rochon; P Harter; H-J Lueck; A Fisseler-Eckhoff; J Barinoff; A Traut; F Lorenz-Salehi; A du Bois Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-11-08 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: B C Pestalozzi; D Zahrieh; K N Price; S B Holmberg; J Lindtner; J Collins; D Crivellari; M F Fey; E Murray; O Pagani; E Simoncini; M Castiglione-Gertsch; R D Gelber; A S Coates; A Goldhirsch Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2006-04-07 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Nils D Arvold; Kevin S Oh; Andrzej Niemierko; Alphonse G Taghian; Nancy U Lin; Rita F Abi-Raad; Meera Sreedhara; Jay R Harris; Brian M Alexander Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Y H Park; M J Park; S H Ji; S Y Yi; D H Lim; D H Nam; J-I Lee; W Park; D H Choi; S J Huh; J S Ahn; W K Kang; K Park; Y-H Im Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Cheng-Hung Tai; Cheng-Chia Wu; Mark E Hwang; Anurag Saraf; Christopher Grubb; Ashish Jani; Matthew E Lapa; Jacquelyn I S Andrews; Steven R Isaacson; Adam M Sonabend; Sameer A Sheth; Guy M McKhann; Michael B Sisti; Jeffrey N Bruce; Simon K Cheng; Eileen P Connolly; Tony Jc Wang Journal: CNS Oncol Date: 2018-02-02