Clinically assessed posttraumatic stress in patients with breast cancer during the first year after diagnosis in the prospective, longitudinal, controlled COGNICARES study.

OBJECTIVE: There is ongoing debate whether cancer qualifies as traumatic stressor. We investigated prevalence and course of posttraumatic stress in patients with early breast cancer (BC) during their first year after diagnosis and determined effects of mastectomy and chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with stage 0-III BC aged ≤65 years were evaluated with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV modules for acute and posttraumatic stress disorder (ASD and PTSD, respectively) before treatment, after chemotherapy, and 1 year after diagnosis. Matched controls were assessed at matched intervals. Effects of time, mastectomy, and chemotherapy on BC-related PTSD symptom severity were tested with linear mixed model analysis. RESULTS: Stress disorder (ASD or PTSD) related to BC was diagnosed in 6 (3.6%) of 166 patients before treatment and in 3 patients (2.0%) 1 year later. The rate of patients who experienced PTSD symptoms related to BC decreased from 82.5 to 57.3% (p < 0.001), and the mean of BC-related PTSD symptoms diminished from 3.1 to 1.7 (p < 0.001). Only university education significantly predicted the course of BC-related PTSD symptom severity (p = 0.009). In 60 controls, no diagnosis of stress disorder, a rate of 18% women experiencing PTSD symptoms, and a mean of 0.4 PTSD symptoms (p vs. patients <0.001) were found. CONCLUSIONS: Most newly diagnosed patients with BC experience PTSD symptoms, whereas full diagnoses of DSM-IV stress disorder are rare. Symptoms diminish somewhat within 1 year furthered by university education but independently from mastectomy and chemotherapy. Throughout the year after diagnosis, having BC entails markedly increased PTSD symptom burden. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Testing chemotherapy efficacy in HER2 negative breast cancer using patient-derived spheroids.

BACKGROUND: Targeted anti-HER2 therapy has greatly improved the prognosis for many breast cancer patients. However, treatment for HER2 negative disease is currently still selected from a multitude of untargeted chemotherapeutic treatment options. A predictive test was developed using patient-derived spheroids to identify the most effective therapy for patients with HER2 negative breast cancer of all stages, for clinically relevant subgroups, as well as individual patients. METHODS: Tumor samples from 120 HER2 negative patients obtained through biopsy or surgical excision were tested in the breast cancer spheroid model using scaffold-free cell culture. Similarly, spheroids were also generated from established HER2 negative breast cancer cell lines T-47D, MCF7, HCC1143, and HCC1937 to compare treatment efficacy of heterogeneous cell populations from patient tumor tissue with homogeneous cell lines. Spheroids were treated in vitro with guideline-recommended compounds. Treatment mediated impact on cell survival was subsequently quantified using an ATP assay. RESULTS: Differences were observed in the metabolic activity of the untreated spheroids, whereby cell lines consistently achieved higher values compared to tissue spheroids (p < 0.001). A higher number of cells per spheroid correlated with a higher basal metabolic activity in tissue-derived spheroids (p < 0.01), while the opposite was observed for cell line spheroids (p < 0.01). Recurrent tumors showed a higher mean vitality (p < 0.01) compared to primary tumors. Except for taxanes, treatment efficacy for most tested compounds differed significantly between breast cancer tissue spheroids and breast cancer cell lines. Overall a high variability in treatment response in vitro was seen in the tissue spheroids regardless of the tested substances. A greater response to anthracycline/docetaxel was observed for hormone receptor negative samples (p < 0.01). A higher response to 5-FU (p < 0.01) and anthracycline (p < 0.05) was seen in high grade tumors. Smaller tumor size and negative lymph node status were both associated with a higher treatment efficacy to anthracycline treatment combined with 5-FU (cT1/2 vs cT3/4, p = 0.035, cN+ vs cN-, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The tissue spheroid model reflects current guideline treatment recommendations for HER2 negative breast cancer, whereas tested cell lines did not. This model represents a unique diagnostic method to select the most effective therapy out of several equivalent treatment options.

Prospective cohort study using the breast cancer spheroid model as a predictor for response to neoadjuvant therapy--the SpheroNEO study.

BACKGROUND: Aim of this prospective study was to predict response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients using an in vitro breast cancer spheroid model. METHODS: Three-dimensional spheroids were directly generated from fresh breast tumor biopsies of 78 patients eligible for neoadjuvant therapy. Cell survival was measured after in vitro exposure to the equivalent therapeutic agents in the breast cancer spheroid model. Treatment results in vitro were correlated with pathological complete response (pCR, i.e. ypT0 ypN0) determined at surgery. RESULTS: A mean cell survival of 21.8 % was found in the breast cancer spheroid model for 22 patients with pCR versus 63.8 % in 56 patients without pCR (P = .001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve to predict pCR was 0.86 (95 % CI: 0.77 to 0.96) for cell survival in vitro compared to 0.80 (95 % CI: 0.70 to 0.90) for a combined model of conventional factors (hormone- and HER2 receptor, and age). A cutoff at 35 % cell survival for the spheroid model was proposed. Out of the 32 patients with values below this threshold, 21 patients (65.6 %) and one patient (2.2 %) with a cell survival greater than 35 % achieved pCR respectively; (sensitivity 95.5 % (95 % CI: 0.86 to 1.00); specificity 80.4 % (95 % CI: 0.70 to 0.91)). Extent of residual disease positively correlated with increased cell survival (P = .021). CONCLUSION: The breast cancer spheroid model proved to be a highly sensitive and specific predictor for pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The optimum timing of sentinel-lymph-node biopsy for breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is uncertain. The SENTINA (SENTinel NeoAdjuvant) study was designed to evaluate a specific algorithm for timing of a standardised sentinel-lymph-node biopsy procedure in patients who undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: SENTINA is a four-arm, prospective, multicentre cohort study undertaken at 103 institutions in Germany and Austria. Women with breast cancer who were scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled into the study. Patients with clinically node-negative disease (cN0) underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm A). If the sentinel node was positive (pN1), a second sentinel-lymph-node biopsy procedure was done after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm B). Women with clinically node-positive disease (cN+) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Those who converted to clinically node-negative disease after chemotherapy (ycN0; arm C) were treated with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy and axillary dissection. Only patients whose clinical nodal status remained positive (ycN1) underwent axillary dissection without sentinel-lymph-node biopsy (arm D). The primary endpoint was accuracy (false-negative rate) of sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients who converted from cN1 to ycN0 disease during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm C). Secondary endpoints included comparison of the detection rate of sentinel-lymph-node biopsy before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and also the false-negative rate and detection rate of sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after removal of the sentinel lymph node. Analyses were done according to treatment received (per protocol). FINDINGS: Of 1737 patients who received treatment, 1022 women underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arms A and B), with a detection rate of 99.1% (95% CI 98.3-99.6; 1013 of 1022). In patients who converted after neoadjuvant chemotherapy from cN+ to ycN0 (arm C), the detection rate was 80.1% (95% CI 76.6-83.2; 474 of 592) and false-negative rate was 14.2% (95% CI 9.9-19.4; 32 of 226). The false-negative rate was 24.3% (17 of 70) for women who had one node removed and 18.5% (10 of 54) for those who had two sentinel nodes removed (arm C). In patients who had a second sentinel-lymph-node biopsy procedure after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm B), the detection rate was 60.8% (95% CI 55.6-65.9; 219 of 360) and the false-negative rate was 51.6% (95% CI 38.7-64.2; 33 of 64). INTERPRETATION: Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy is a reliable diagnostic method before neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After systemic treatment or early sentinel-lymph-node biopsy, the procedure has a lower detection rate and a higher false-negative rate compared with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy done before neoadjuvant chemotherapy. These limitations should be considered if biopsy is planned after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. FUNDING: Brustkrebs Deutschland, German Society for Senology, German Breast Group.

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2024.

Introduction: Each year the interdisciplinary AGO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie, German Gynecological Oncology Group) Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer. Methods: The updated evidence-based treatment recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer have been released in March 2024. Results and Conclusion: This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2024.

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2024 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer.

Shared decision-making in metastatic breast cancer: discrepancy between the expected prolongation of life and treatment efficacy between patients and physicians, and influencing factors.

Treatment decisions in oncology are based on a balance between the efficacy of therapy and its side effects. Patients with metastases and patients with a limited prognosis are a particular challenge, since communication about the disease situation and the expected therapeutic benefit is difficult not only for patients, but also for physicians. The aim of this study was therefore to compare the benefits expected of therapy by patients and physicians. Questionnaires were sent to 9,000 breast cancer patients and to 6,938 physicians. The questionnaires described 10 cases of breast cancer in the metastatic setting. The patients and physicians were asked to state the treatment benefit they would require to decide for the therapy options chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, antibody therapy, radiotherapy, and bisphosphonates. Additionally, the participants provided data on patient and physician characteristics. Expected treatment benefits were compared between patients and physicians, and influencing factors that modified the expected benefit were identified. Patients expected much greater benefits from the therapies offered than the physicians. For all treatment modalities, about 50 % or more of patients expected more than a 12-month increase in overall survival from all therapies. Among the doctors, this proportion ranged from 7 to 30 %. Among patients, previous experience of side effects and having young children in the family were the strongest influencing factors. Among the doctors, age and level of education had a strong influence on the expected prognostic improvement to indicate a therapy option. As expectations of treatment differ greatly between patients and doctors, a structured approach to solving this conflict is required. There appear to be some indicators that might help address the problem, such as the physicians' level of training and experience and the patients' specific social circumstances.

A retrospective investigation of women's experience with breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

PURPOSE: A diagnosis of breast cancer is often accompanied by the fear of loss of previous body image and attractiveness. Hence, many patients opt for reconstructive surgery. This study evaluated the effects of different types of reconstructive surgery after mastectomy on the functional and psychological adjustment of patients. METHODS: In a cohort study, patients, who had breast reconstruction after mastectomy by means of four different allogenic or autologues techniques between 1999-2006 were retrospectively interviewed in person or by telephone. The questions addressed complication rates, physical complaints, functional impairments, body image outcomes, sexuality and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 139 patients, 89 (64.7 %) completed the survey. 32 (35.9 %) patients experienced one or more postoperative complications like seroma, hematoma, infections or necrosis. 16 (20 %) and 13 (16 %) patients reported strong and moderate adverse effects on sexuality, respectively. 62 (70 %) patients indicated that they were actively included in the decision making process. Patient ratings of good or bad medical advice were associated with complication rates (p = 0.008). Patients, who evaluated their first preoperative counseling positively, reported higher consent rates when a re-reconstruction became necessary (p ≤ 0.001). Satisfaction with the functional outcome after reconstruction and satisfaction with the cosmetic result was highly correlated (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant association of patient satisfaction with postoperative complications and the decision for a re-reconstruction was demonstrated. Furthermore, our results emphasize the importance of detailed preoperative counseling for women's adjustment to reconstructive surgery.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2023.

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2023 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2023.

Background: Each year the interdisciplinary Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO), German Gynecological Oncology Group Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer. Summary: The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation for early and metastatic breast cancer has been released in March 2023. Key Messages: This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.

Shared decision-making in breast cancer: discrepancy between the treatment efficacy required by patients and by physicians.

Several factors can influence individual perceptions of the expected benefit of recommended adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. This study investigated differences between patients and physicians with regard to the required efficacy of treatment and the factors influencing patients' and physicians' willingness to accept different therapeutic options. A total of 9,000 questionnaires were distributed to patients with breast cancer, and 6,938 questionnaires were distributed to physicians treating breast cancer patients. The patients were asked for personal information and about their medical history and experiences during treatment. The physicians were asked about personal information and their specialty and work environment. The treatment efficacy required by the two groups was assessed using six virtual cases of breast cancer and the treatment regimens proposed, with specific benefits and side effects. A total of 2,155 patients and 527 physicians responded to the questionnaire (return rates of 23.9 and 7.6 %). Significantly different ratings between patients and physicians with regard to the expected benefit of certain treatment options were observed. The differences were noted not only for chemotherapy but also for antihormonal and antibody treatments. Whereas physicians had a quite realistic view of the expected treatment benefits, the patients' expectations were varied. Approximately one-fifth of the patients were willing to accept treatment regimens even with marginal anticipated benefits, whereas one-third required unrealistic treatment benefits. Several influencing factors that were significantly associated with the quality rating of treatment regimens in the groups of breast cancer patients and physicians were also identified. In contrast to physicians, many breast cancer patients required treatment benefits beyond what was realistically possible, although a large group of patients were also satisfied with minimal benefits. Individual factors were also identified in both groups that significantly influence thresholds for accepting adjuvant treatment, independently of risk estimates and therapy guidelines.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2022.

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2022 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2022.

Introduction: The AGO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie, German Gynecological Oncology Group) Task Force on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer as an interdisciplinary team consists of specialists from gynecological oncology, pathology, diagnostic radiology, medical oncology, and radiation oncology with a special focus on breast cancer. Methods: The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation 2022 for early breast cancer (EBC) and metastatic breast cancer of the AGO Task Force has been released. Results and Conclusion: This paper captures the update of EBC.

AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of Breast Cancer: Update 2022.

The recommendations of the AGO Breast Committee on the surgical therapy of breast cancer were last updated in March 2022 (www.ago-online.de). Since surgical therapy is one of several partial steps in the treatment of breast cancer, extensive diagnostic and oncological expertise of a breast surgeon and good interdisciplinary cooperation with diagnostic radiologists is of great importance. The most important changes concern localization techniques, resection margins, axillary management in the neoadjuvant setting and the evaluation of the meshes in reconstructive surgery. Based on meta-analyses of randomized studies, the level of recommendation of an intraoperative breast ultrasound for the localization of non-palpable lesions was elevated to "++". Thus, the technique is considered to be equivalent to wire localization, provided that it is a lesion which can be well represented by sonography, the surgeon has extensive experience in breast ultrasound and has access to a suitable ultrasound device during the operation. In invasive breast cancer, the aim is to reach negative resection margins ("no tumor on ink"), regardless of whether an extensive intraductal component is present or not. Oncoplastic operations can also replace a mastectomy in selected cases due to the large number of existing techniques, and are equivalent to segmental resection in terms of oncological safety at comparable rates of complications. Sentinel node excision is recommended for patients with cN0 status receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy after completion of chemotherapy. Minimally invasive biopsy is recommended for initially suspect lymph nodes. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, patients with initially 1 - 3 suspicious lymph nodes and a good response (ycN0) can receive the targeted axillary dissection and the axillary dissection as equivalent options.

Kinetics of CEA and CA15-3 correlate with treatment response in patients undergoing chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

The aim of this retrospective analysis is to determine the correlation between tumour marker kinetics (TMK) like carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and/or cancer antigen (CA) 15-3 and imaging concerning effectiveness of chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. TMK (CEA, AxSYM, Abbott; CA15-3, Elecsys, Roche) were evaluated in MBC patients (n=77) at the beginning of chemotherapy (pre-treatment value=A), after 20-30 days (first intermediate value=B), after 40-60 days (second intermediate value=C) and at the time the effectiveness of chemotherapy was evaluated with imaging (D). Response to treatment was assessed by standard WHO criteria criteria. For the assessment of biochemical progression and response, four criteria based on TMK were established. The first criterion of progression required that there was an increase ≥ 25% after 40-60 days (C) and the slope per day from B to C exceeds the slope from A to B. The second criterion of progression required that, at the time of staging, the value be ≥ 25% of the pre-treatment value (A), and also, increasing values from C until staging (D) were required. The first criterion of response required that the second intermediate value (C) be decreased by ≥ 25% compared to A (pre-treatment value) and C be lower than B (first intermediate value). The second criterion of response required that D be ≤ 25% of B and D be lower than C. Fifty-four (70%) patients showed a correlation between TMK and imaging results during chemotherapy. In 10 (13%) patients, no correlation was obtained, and in 13 (17%) patients, no biochemical statement was possible because of divergent TMK. In summary, after 1 month, no statement about treatment response was possible by using TMK. The effectiveness or ineffectiveness of treatment could be determined correctly in 40% of patients after 2 months and in 70% of patients after approximately 3 months. The data presented support the hypothesis that TMK are clinically relevant tools to monitor treatment response. Further improvements on their sensitivity can be probably achieved by a prospective study design and by combining with other biomarkers like CA-125 and HER2 shed antigen.

Germline BRCA1/2 mutations and severe haematological toxicities in patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1 and BRCA2 play a central role in DNA repair. Therefore, patients harbouring germline (g) BRCA1/2 mutations (m) treated with chemotherapy might be at higher risk of haematological toxicities. METHODS: Patients from German Breast Group (GBG) and Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie-breast group studies with early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and known gBRCA1/2m status treated with anthracycline-taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy were analysed. Primary objective was the rate of neutropenia grade (G)III-IV in cycle 1 (C1). Secondary objectives included effects on overall and other haematological toxicities GIII-IV in C1, cumulative haematological toxicity across all cycles, relative total dose intensity, and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor prophylaxis. Haematological toxicities under taxanes, carboplatin, and cyclophosphamide were explored. RESULTS: Two hundred nine of 1171 (17.8%) evaluated patients had gBRCA1/2m. In C1, 37.4% gBRCA1/2m versus 35.7% wild-type patients had neutropenia GIII-IV (P = 0.683). For C1, gBRCA1/2m predicted neither for neutropenia GIII-IV (odds ratio [OR]: 1.26, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.87-1.82, P = 0.226) nor for other haematological toxicities GIII-IV (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.64-1.31, P = 0.625) in multivariable regression models. Analyses of cumulative toxicities across all cycles yielded similar results except thrombocytopaenia GIII-IV, which was increased in gBRCA1m patients. In patients treated with taxanes, the rate of haematological toxicities GIII-IV was higher in gBRCA1/2m compared with wild-type (59.5% versus 43.1%; p < 0.001). No difference was seen under cyclophosphamide or platinum-containing chemotherapies. CONCLUSIONS: gBRCA1/2m was not associated with higher risk of overall severe haematological toxicities in the first cycle or cumulatively across all cycles under standard chemotherapy for TNBC. Under taxane, patients with gBRCA1/2m might have a higher risk of haematological toxicities GIII-IV, requiring further research.

AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update.

For many decades, the standard procedure to treat breast cancer included complete dissection of the axillary lymph nodes. The aim was to determine histological node status, which was then used as the basis for adjuvant therapy, and to ensure locoregional tumour control. In addition to the debate on how to optimise the therapeutic strategies of systemic treatment and radiotherapy, the current discussion focuses on improving surgical procedures to treat breast cancer. As neoadjuvant chemotherapy is becoming increasingly important, the surgical procedures used to treat breast cancer, whether they are breast surgery or axillary dissection, are changing. Based on the currently available data, carrying out SLNE prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended. In contrast, surgical axillary management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered the procedure of choice for axillary staging and can range from SLNE to TAD and ALND. To reduce the rate of false negatives during surgical staging of the axilla in pN+ CNB stage before NACT and ycN0 after NACT, targeted axillary dissection (TAD), the removal of > 2 SLNs (SLNE, no untargeted axillary sampling), immunohistochemistry to detect isolated tumour cells and micro-metastases, and marking positive lymph nodes before NACT should be the standard approach. This most recent update on surgical axillary management describes the significance of isolated tumour cells and micro-metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the clinical consequences of low volume residual disease diagnosed using SLNE and TAD and provides an overview of this year's AGO recommendations for surgical management of the axilla during primary surgery and in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Correction: AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1499-8431.].

Two different sides of 'chemobrain': determinants and nondeterminants of self-perceived cognitive dysfunction in a prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: Complaints of cognitive dysfunction are frequent among cancer patients. Many studies have identified neuropsychological compromise associated with cancer and cancer therapy; however, the neuropsychological compromise was not related to self-reported cognitive dysfunction. In this prospective study, the authors examined if confounding factors masked an underlying association of self-perceived cognitive function with actual cognitive performance. Determinants of self-perceived cognitive dysfunction were investigated. METHODS: Self-perceived cognitive function and cognitive performance were assessed before treatment, at the end of treatment, and 1 year after baseline in 101 breast cancer patients randomized to standard versus intensified chemotherapy. Linear mixed-effects models were applied to test the relationships of performance on neuropsychological tests, patient characteristics, and treatment variables to self-reported cognitive function. Change of cognitive performance was tested as a predictor of change in self-reports. RESULTS: Self-perceived cognitive function deteriorated during chemotherapy and had partially recovered 1 year after diagnosis. The personality trait negative affectivity, current depression, and chemotherapy regimen were consistently related to cognitive self-reports. No significant associations with performance in any of the 12 cognitive tests emerged. Change of cognitive performance was not reflected in self-reports of cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: Neuropsychological compromise and self-perceived cognitive dysfunction are independent phenomena in cancer patients. Generally, cancer-associated neuropsychological compromise is not noticed by affected patients, but negative affectivity and treatment burden induce pessimistic self-appraisals of cognitive functioning regardless of the presence of neuropsychological compromise. Clinicians should consider this when determining adequate therapy for patients who complain of 'chemobrain'.

Therapy Algorithms for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early and Advanced Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In order to offer optimal treatment approaches based on available evidence, the Commission Breast of the Working Group Gynecologic Oncology (AGO) of the German Cancer Society developed therapy algorithms for eight complex treatment situations in primary and advanced breast cancer. SUMMARY: Therapy algorithms for the following complex treatment situations are outlined in this paper: (neo)adjuvant therapy of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer; axillary surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy; adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients; adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients; hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: strategies; HR-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: endocrine-based first-line treatment; HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: first to third-line; metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. KEY MESSAGES: The therapy options shown in these algorithms are based on the current AGO recommendations updated in January 2020 but cannot represent all evidence-based treatment options. Prior therapies, performance status, comorbidities, patient preference, etc. must be taken into account for the actual treatment choice. Therefore, in individual cases, other evidence-based treatment options not listed here may also be appropriate and justified.