RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Evidence demonstrates that physical exercise confers several psycho-physical benefits on patients with cancer. This study aims to investigate the role of oncologists in exercise promotion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire to patients with cancer. The questionnaire enclosed demographic, health, and exercise variables. The exercise-related questions included in the study used the Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire to measure the amount of physical exercise. In addition, the survey gathered information on whether exercise was discussed with patients, and whether oncologists followed the assess, advise, reinforce, and refer (AARR) process regarding exercise. The survey also asked if patients preferred that exercise be discussed during their consultations. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were applied. RESULTS: With a response rate of 75%, a total of 549 patients completed the survey. Regarding the exercise discussion, 38% of patients stated that their oncologist initiated an exercise discussion, 14% started the discussion themselves, and 48% said that the issue was not considered. Overall, 35% of patients reported that the oncologist assessed their exercise level, 22% and 42% received advice or reinforcement to increase their exercise, respectively, and 10% were referred to a dedicated service. Regarding preferences, 72% of patients thought that the oncologists should initiate an exercise discussion, 2% that only patients should start the discussion, and 26% thought that the issue should not be discussed. Similarly, 74% of patients are willing to receive the exercise assessment, 59% and 75% the advice and reinforcement to increase their exercise, and 46% to be referred to an exercise service. CONCLUSIONS: Although exercise promotion rates are low, patients are willing to receive exercise information. Dedicated strategies should be developed to support oncologists in promoting exercise to their patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Breast carcinoma with extensive peritumoral vascular invasion (ePVI-BC) is a cancer with massive vascular invasion (>10) detected in more than one slide. This neoplasm shows clinic-pathological affinity with inflammatory breast carcinoma (IBC). In this paper we evaluate their biological relationship through the study of surrogate markers (ß-catenin and NFAT5) of Canonical (cWnt) and non-canonical (nWnt) Wnt pathways activation. METHODS: By immunoistochemistry, we investigate ß-catenin and NFAT5 in 39 IBC, 74 ePVI-BC and 84 control cases (CG-BC). RESULTS: cWnt was activated in 100 % of ePVI-BC, in 64 % of IBC and 10 % of CG-BC. nWnt was activated in 20 % of ePVI-BC, 50 % of IBC and 1% of CG-BC. The prognosis of carcinomas with nWnt activated was poor similar to IBC. The statistical analysis evidences as both the pathways are synergistic in malignant progression and survival time. ß-catenin show an important association with prognostic factors and NFAT5 shows a relevant prognostic role on OS (p = 1.5*10-6) and DFS (P = 1,2*10-4). nWnt is associated with a worse prognosis independently of cWnt. cWnt is associated with adverse prognosis (DFS p = 0.0469; OS p = 0.004891) but its prognostic role is indifferent in carcinoma with nWnt activated. CONCLUSIONS: Canonical Wnt pathway is involved in malignant progression with dominant role for vascular invasion whereas non canonical Wnt pathway plays an important role on survival time including the capacity to identify carcinomas with IBC-like prognosis. Furthermore ePVI may represent a "prodromal form of IBC" as demonstrated by its clinicopathological and biological similarity with IBC.
