Triple-negative apocrine carcinoma: A rare pathologic subtype with a better prognosis than other triple-negative breast cancers.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: Apocrine adenocarcinoma is a rare subtype of breast cancer. We sought to compare the characteristics and survival of patients diagnosed with triple-negative apocrine adenocarcinoma to those of patients diagnosed with triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma. Utilizing data from the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2013, 70 524 eligible female patients with triple-negative breast cancer were identified including 566 patients with apocrine adenocarcinomas and 69 958 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma. Descriptive statistics for each variable were reported. A comparison of each covariate between the study cohorts was assessed in univariate and multivariate analysis. Cox proportional models were used to calculate hazard ratios. Additionally, the propensity score matching method was implemented to reduce treatment selection bias. RESULTS: Patients with triple-negative apocrine tumors were more likely to be older, Caucasian, and have smaller, moderately to well-differentiated tumors. Multivariable analysis noted a significantly improved survival for patients with triple-negative apocrine carcinoma (TNAC) vs triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma (TNBC) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65 [95% confidence interval [CI] [0.53-0.81], P = 0 < .001). Propensity score matching analysis confirmed a significant difference in overall survival for patients with TNAC in comparison to TNBC (HR 0.79 [95% CI [0.63-1.00], P = .05). DISCUSSION: Triple-negative apocrine adenocarcinomas have a modestly improved long-term survival when compared with triple-negative invasive ductal cancers.

Choice of motorcycle helmet makes a difference: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Although many states mandate that motorcyclists wear helmets, their laws do not indicate which type of helmet should be used. In addition, there are no prospective studies in the literature evaluating patterns of injuries as they relate to helmet type. The hypothesis in this study was that full-face helmets (FFHs) reduce craniofacial injuries associated with motorcycle collisions when compared with other helmet types. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted at a Level I trauma center to evaluate the efficacy of helmet types relative to craniofacial injuries. Data included patient demographics, helmet types, injuries, and outcomes. The incidences of facial fractures, skull fractures, and traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) were compared in patients wearing FFHs versus other helmet types (OH) during motorcycle crashes. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2012, 151 patients of motorcycle crashes (135 males, 16 female; mean age, 38.4 years; range, 19-74 years) whose helmet types were identified by health care providers were entered into the study. The distribution of helmets was 84 FFH and 67 OH (39 half and 28 modular). Facial fractures were present in 7% of the patients wearing FFH (95% confidence interval, 0.015-0.125) versus 27% (95% confidence interval, 0.164-0.376) of those wearing OH (p = 0.004). In addition skull fractures were present in 1% of the patients wearing FFH versus 8% in those wearing OH (p < 0.05). While there was a trend for patients wearing FFH to have a lower incidence of TBI (13% vs. 25% in those wearing OH), this was not statistically significant (p = 0.053). There were no differences in Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of stay, or mortality between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Victims of motorcycle crashes who are wearing FFH have a significant reduction in facial and skull fractures when compared with those wearing OH. Further studies will be needed to assess whether FFH will significantly decrease the incidence of TBI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.