Disseminated tumor cells of breast cancer patients: a strong prognostic factor for distant and local relapse.

PURPOSE: Clinical significance of disseminated tumor cells (DTC) in bone marrow of early breast cancer patients has been reported, but improvements in detection methods are needed. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Bone marrow aspirates from 621 patients with stage I to III breast cancer were screened for cytokeratin-positive (CK+) cells. CK+ cells were categorized into DTC only if they had specific morphologic features of tumor cells. Bone marrow status and clinical and pathologic variables of the patients were correlated with clinical outcome after a median follow-up of 56 months. RESULTS: DTC and non-DTC CK+ cells were detected in 15% and 34% of patients, respectively, with no correlation with clinical and pathologic variables. On univariate analysis, DTC detection was associated with a poorer distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS; P = 0.0013) and overall survival (OS; P = 0.005). Moreover, DTC detection was also associated with local relapse-free survival (P = 0.0009). On multivariate analysis, DTC detection was an independent prognostic factor for DMFS, local relapse-free survival, and OS. There was no significant interaction between DTC detection and hormonal receptors status (P = 0.34). Non-DTC CK+ cells had no clinical significance. CONCLUSION: DTC detection is a powerful prognostic marker for DMFS and OS in early breast cancer patients and can be individualized from irrelevant non-DTC CK+ cells by morphologic criteria. Biologically, despite high rates of systemic adjuvant therapy and locoregional irradiation in this series, DTC detection remains a prognostic factor of distant and, more strikingly, of local relapse, in favor of resistance to treatment of locally or distant disseminated cancer cells in DTC-positive patients.

Pilot evaluation of a French interdisciplinary supportive care department.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: This pilot study was designed to evaluate the impact of management by the Interdisciplinary Supportive Care Department for Cancer Patients (Département Interdisciplinaire de Soins de Support pour le Patient en Oncologie-DISSPO) at the Institut Curie in Paris, France on patient quality of life and satisfaction with care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients hospitalised for cancer treatment and referred to DISSPO during their hospitalisation were invited to complete the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and patient satisfaction (EORTC IN-PATSAT32) questionnaires during the week following their initial management by DISSPO (T0) and 2 months later (T1). These patients were compared with control patients matched for age, gender, ward and period of hospitalisation in terms of quality of life and satisfaction with care. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred fourteen (77%) DISSPO patients at T0 and 72 (48%) patients at T1 and 102 (89%) control patients at T0 and 66 (57%) at T1 returned their completed questionnaires. Baseline characteristics of DISSPO patients and control patients were significantly different in terms of duration of the current hospitalisation, interval between the date of diagnosis of the cancer and inclusion in the study (both longer for DISSPO patients) and Karnofsky performance status (lower for DISSPO patients). For the 43 pairs of patients who completed the questionnaires at the two time points, significant independent positive effects of management by DISSPO and age (less than or equal to 60 years) were demonstrated for patient satisfaction in relation to the availability of the nursing and paramedical team. In particular, patients over the age of 60 not managed by DISSPO presented a significant reduction of patient satisfaction scores over the 2 months compared to age-matched patients managed by DISSPO. CONCLUSIONS: Management of cancer patients by an interdisciplinary supportive care department appears to have a positive impact on patient satisfaction in relation to availability of the nursing and paramedical team. These results need to be confirmed in a larger study.

Selecting patients for exclusive permanent implant prostate brachytherapy: the experience of the Paris Institut Curie/Cochin Hospital/Necker Hospital group on 809 patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze overall and relapse-free survival in a cohort of 809 patients, 34% of whom corresponded to a higher-risk group than American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) criteria. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 1999 and September 2004, 809 patients were treated with permanent loose 125 iodine seed implantation (IsoSeed Bebig, Eckert and Ziegler) by the Paris Institut Curie, Cochin Hospital, and Necker Hospital group. Of these 809 patients, 533 (65.9%) corresponded exactly to ABS criteria. Two hundred and seventy-six patients (34.1%) had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 10 and 15, or a Gleason score of 7, or both (non-ABS group). RESULTS: Overall 5-year survival was 98%, with no difference between the ABS group and the non-ABS patient subgroups (p = 0.62).Five-year relapse-free survival was 97% in the ABS group; it was significantly lower (p = 0.001) in the non-ABS group but remained satisfactory at 94%. On subgroup analysis, the results appeared to be better for the subgroup of patients with PSA 10-15 than for the subgroup with a Gleason score of 7. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that selected patients in the intermediate-risk group of localized prostate cancers can be safely proposed as recipients of permanent implant brachytherapy as monotherapy.