Treatments for breast cancer in men: late effects and impact on quality of life.

PURPOSE: Male breast cancer accounts for approximately 1% of all breast cancer diagnoses. Unfortunately, a lack of information exists regarding late effects of breast cancer treatment in men. METHODS: An online survey directed towards male breast cancer patients was distributed via social medial and emails from June to July 2022. Participants were asked about their disease characteristics, treatments and side effects from the disease or treatment. Patients and treatment variables were reported via descriptive statistics. Univariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate associations between different treatment variables and outcomes expressed by odds ratio. RESULTS: A total of 127 responses were analyzed. Median age of the participants was 64 years (range 56-71 years). A total of 91 participants (71.7%) revealed they experienced late effects secondary to their cancer or cancer treatment. The most concerning physical and psychological symptoms reported were fatigue and fear of recurrence respectively. Axillary lymph node dissection was associated with swollen arm and with difficulty in arm or shoulder movement. Systemic chemotherapy was related to bothersome hair loss and changes on interest in sex; and endocrine therapy was associated with feeling less masculine. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that men suffer several late effects from treatments for breast cancer. Lymphedema, difficulty with arm and shoulder movement, sexual dysfunction and hair loss should be discussed with males as it can be distressing for some patients and decrease their quality of life.

Race, Age, Gender, and Insurance Status: A Comparative Analysis of Access to and Quality of Gastrointestinal Cancer Care.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomics, demographics, and insurance status play roles in healthcare access. Considering the limited resources available, understanding the relative impact of disparities helps prioritize programs designed to overcome them. This study evaluates gastrointestinal cancer care disparity by comparing the impact of different patient factors across oncologic care metrices. METHODS: A multi-institutional prospectively maintained cancer database was reviewed retrospectively for gastrointestinal cancers (esophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, colorectal, and hepato-pancreato-biliary) from 2007 to 2017 to assess quality of care provided. Quality of care was defined by clinical course following national guidelines for the respective cancer. This included surgical intervention, chemotherapy, palliative care, and minimal delay to treatment/diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders and identify factors associated with quality of care. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared using log-rank test. RESULTS: One thousand seventy-two patients were identified. Survival improved in patients with private insurance compared to government-funded options [median overall survival (mOS) 57.8 vs. 21.2 months; P < .001]. Private insurance also correlated with earlier stage at diagnosis [stages I-II = 50.9% vs. 37.5%, stages III-IV = 37.7% vs. 49.1%, P < .001], increased chemotherapy use [44.2% vs. 37.1%, P < .001], and more surgical intervention [62.4% vs. 48.8%, P < .001]. Outcomes were inferior for Black Americans, including trend towards lower rate of surgical treatment [42% vs. 54%, P = .058] and worse survival in private insurance carriers [mOS 7.8 vs. 57.8 months, P = .021] and those with early stage disease [mOS 39.2 vs. 81.5 months, P = .045] compared to White counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Insurance status has the strongest impact on the quality of gastrointestinal oncologic care with negative synergistic negative effect of race for Black Americans. While governmental programs aim to improve equality of care, there remains significant disparity compared to private insurance. Moreover, private insurance doesn't correct disparity for Black Americans, suggesting the need to address racial imbalances in cancer care.

Western population-based study of oncologic surgical quality and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: While studies have reported improved morbidity of laparoscopic (LG) compared with open gastrectomy (OG), it remains unclear whether comparable oncologic outcomes can be achieved. This study aims at comparing not only short-term outcomes, including 30- and 90-day mortality, but also survival of LG vs OG. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was searched for adult patients with histologically proven gastric cancer and complete information regarding M0 disease, tumor size, differentiation grade, T stage, nodal status, comorbidities, type of hospital, hospital stay, type of surgery, oncological treatment and survival data were included. Logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze margin status, 30- and 90-day mortality, and 30-day re-admission rate. Linear regression was performed for length of hospital stay and lymph node yield. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed to evaluate median survival. Cox multivariable regression models were created to correct for confounders and identify factors affecting survival. RESULTS: A query of the National Cancer Database identified 13,538 patients with complete dataset. A significant regression equation favoring LG for lymph node yield, hospital stay, and unplanned re-admission rate was identified. There was no significant effect of surgical approach on R1 margin rate, 30-day mortality, or 90-day mortality. Median survival was comparable between LG and OG (44.8 vs 40.2 months, p = 0.804). CONCLUSION: LG offers a safe surgical approach to gastric cancer with shorter hospital stay and lower re-admission rates than OG, and also similar and sometimes improved operative oncologic quality parameters (margin, lymph node yield). More importantly, this Western series demonstrates that equivalent long-term outcomes of LG vs. OG are being achieved.

Preoperative Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer Improves Survival and R0 Rate Even in Early Stage I.

BACKGROUND: While preoperative chemotherapy for patients with stage II-III pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is frequently practiced, its impact on very early PDAC (stage I) remains unclear today. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing pancreatectomy for PDAC between 2010 and 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Early-stage patients (IA-IB) with complete oncologic and clinical information and more than 30-day survival were included. The effect of preoperative chemotherapy on margin status was assessed with binary logistic regression. Following correction for confounders, the effect of therapy sequencing was assessed via comparison of preoperative, postoperative, perioperative (pre- and post-operative) chemotherapy, and surgery only using Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 4785 patients, 688 (14.4%) were stage IA, and 4197 (87.7%) IB. The rate of preoperative chemotherapy was only 8.8%. Rate of margin positivity was lower for preoperative chemotherapy (12.3% vs 19.7%). After correcting for confounders, the risk of a positive margin was lower in preoperative chemotherapy (odd ratio [OR] 0.703, p = 0.042). Cox regression showed a significant overall survival advantage for preoperative (hazard ratio [HR] 0.784, p = 0.002), postoperative (HR 0.618, p < 0.001), and perioperative (HR 0.601, p < 0.001) chemotherapy compared with surgery alone. There was no significant difference in survival between chemotherapy groups but a trend towards optimal survival for preoperative chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Despite preoperative chemotherapy vs surgery alone resulting in improved R0 rates and overall survival even in stage I PDAC, it is rarely practiced. The results presented here suggest that preoperative chemotherapy should be strongly considered in all patients with resectable PDAC, including very early PDAC.