Feasibility of Umbilical Cord Blood Collection in Neonates at Risk of Brain Damage-A Step Toward Autologous Cell Therapy for a High-risk Population.

Evidence for umbilical cord blood (UCB) cell therapies as a potential intervention for neurological diseases is emerging. To date, most existing trials worked with allogenic cells, as the collection of autologous UCB from high-risk patients is challenging. In obstetric emergencies the collection cannot be planned. In preterm infants, late cord clamping and anatomic conditions may reduce the availability. The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility of UCB collection in neonates at increased risk of brain damage. Infants from four high-risk groups were included: newborns with perinatal hypoxemia, gestational age (GA) ≤30 + 0 weeks and/or birthweight <1,500 g, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), or monochorionic twins with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). Feasibility of collection, quantity and quality of obtained UCB [total nucleated cell count (TNC), volume, sterility, and cell viability], and neonatal outcome were assessed. UCB collection was successful in 141 of 177 enrolled patients (hypoxemia n = 10; GA ≤30 + 0 weeks n = 54; IUGR n = 71; TTTS n = 6). Twenty-six cases were missed. The amount of missed cases per month declined over the time. Volume of collected UCB ranged widely (median: 24.5 ml, range: 5.0-102 ml) and contained a median of 0.77 × 108 TNC (range: 0.01-13.0 × 108). TNC and UCB volume correlated significantly with GA. A total of 10.7% (19/177) of included neonates developed brain lesions. To conclude, collection of UCB in neonates at high risk of brain damage is feasible with a multidisciplinary approach and intensive training. High prevalence of brain damage makes UCB collection worthwhile. Collected autologous UCB from mature neonates harbors a sufficient cell count for potential therapy. However, quality and quantity of obtained UCB are critical for potential therapy in preterm infants. Therefore, for extremely preterm infants alternative cell sources such as UCB tissue should be investigated for autologous treatment options because of the low yield of UCB.

Influences of adjuvant treatments in hormone receptor positive breast cancer on receptor conversion in recurrent breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: To examine influences on the receptor status of a local cohort of patients with recurrent breast cancer after primary diagnosis of hormone receptor positive breast cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 2078 female patients with primary hormone receptor positive breast cancer treated at the university hospital of Wuerzburg between 2000 and 2013. Main focus was on discordance in receptor status in recurrent disease. RESULTS: 196 patients with the primary diagnosis of hormone receptor positive breast cancer developed recurrent disease. 29.1% of patients revealed discordance in estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) or HER2 receptor (ER+ to -: 33.3%; PgR+ to -: 59.6%; HER2+ to -: 8.8%; HER2- to +: 17.5%). Aggressive tumor biology such as low grading or involvement of axillary lymph nodes showed increased risk of receptor conversion in relapse. Premenopausal patients with adjuvant application of tamoxifen and the application of chemotherapy had a significantly lower risk for the development of ER negative recurrent disease. Receptor changes to ER and PgR negativity in recurrent disease showed a trend to worse overall survival (OS). CONCLUSIONS: Histological analysis of recurrent disease is indispensable, since one-third of patients with hormone receptor positive breast cancer develop change in the receptor status.

Guidelines are advantageous, though not essential for improved survival among breast cancer patients.

The purpose of this retrospective multicenter study was to resolve the pseudo-paradox that the clinical outcome of women affected by breast cancer has improved during the last 20 years irrespective of whether they were treated in accordance with clinical guidelines or not. This retrospective German multicenter study included 9061 patients with primary breast cancer recruited from 1991 to 2009. We formed subgroups for the time intervals 1991-2000 (TI1) and 2001-2009 (TI2). In these subgroups, the risk of recurrence (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients whose treatment was either 100% guideline-conforming or, respectively, non-guideline-conforming. The clinical outcome of all patients significantly improved in TI2 compared to TI1 [RFS: p < 0.001, HR = 0.57, 95% CI (0.49-0.67); OS: p < 0.001, HR = 0.76, 95% (CI 0.66-0.87)]. OS and RFS of guideline non-adherent patients also improved in TI2 compared to TI. Comparing risk profiles, determined by Nottingham Prognostic Score reveals a significant (p = 0.001) enhancement in the time cohort TI2. Furthermore, the percentage of guideline-conforming systemic therapy (endocrine therapy and chemotherapy) significantly increased (p < 0.001) in the time cohort TI2 to TI for the non-adherent group. The general improvement of clinical outcome of patients during the last 20 years is also valid in the subgroup of women who received treatments, which deviated from the guidelines. The shift in risk profiles as well as medical advances are major reasons for this improvement. Nevertheless, patients with 100% guideline-conforming therapy always had a better outcome compared to patients with guideline non-adherent therapy.