Risk of second primary thyroid cancer in cancer survivors.

A risk factor for thyroid cancer (TC) may be a history of former cancer and cancer therapy. The precise risk of a second primary thyroid carcinoma has not yet been revealed. In this study, we evaluated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of second primary thyroid cancer (SPTC) with consideration of different conditions and further analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics and survival of these patients. The cohort was selected from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program between 1975 and 2019. The standardized incidence ratios, morbidity risk, clinicopathological features, and survival of second primary thyroid carcinoma were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance covariates. Kaplan-Meier method was performed to assess the survival outcomes. Overall, 7066 patients with SPTC and 83,113 patients with primary TC were identified. The SIR of TC in tumor patients was 1.51/10,000, statistically higher than the natural population (0.94/10,000, P < 0.05). The most significant tumors contributing to the increased SIRs of SPTC were acute lymphocytic leukemia (3.49/10,000), Hodgkin's lymphoma-nodal (3.29/10,000), salivary gland cancer (3.23/10,000), and kidney and renal pelvis cancer (3.05/10,000). The incidence of TC increased significantly in tumor patients who received radiotherapy/chemotherapy before age 35. The age at diagnosis of the SPTC was much older than the primary TC (64.01 vs. 49.55 years, p < 0.001). The SPTC had a higher percentage of histological grades 3/4 (23.14% vs. 15.19%, p < 0.001). Survival analyses demonstrated a worse prognosis for the SPTC group compared to the primary TC group. But after PSM, the survival outcomes of the two groups tended to be equivalent (P = 0.584). The SIRs of TC are higher in tumor patients. The most significant factors contributing to the increased risk of SPTC were some specific former tumors and acceptance of radiotherapy/ chemotherapy before age 35. There was no significant difference in survival between SPTC and primary TC.

Breast-conserving surgery is an appropriate procedure for centrally located breast cancer: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The evidence of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) applied in centrally located breast cancer (CLBC) is absent. This study aims to investigate the long-term survival of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) in centrally located breast cancer (CLBC) compared with mastectomy in CLBC and BCT in non-CLBC. METHODS: Two hundred ten thousand four hundred nine women with unilateral T1-2 breast cancer undergoing BCT or mastectomy were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were assessed via log-rank test. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline features, and the multivariable Cox model was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio [HR] and its 95% confidence interval [CI] for breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 91 months, the BCSS and OS rates in patients who received BCT were greater than those patients treated with mastectomy in the entire CLBC set. Multivariable Cox analyses showed that CLBC patients who received BCT had better BCSS (HR = 0.67, 95%CI: 0.55-0.80, p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.68-0.90, p = 0.001) than patients who received a mastectomy, but there were no significant differences of BCSS (HR = 0.65, 95%CI: 0.47-0.90, p = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.65-1.04, p = 0.110) after PSM. In patients treated with BCT, CLBC patients had a similar BCSS (HR = 0.99, 95%CI: 0.87-1.12, p = 0.850) but a worse OS (HR = 1.09, 95%CI: 1.01-1.18, p = 0.040) compared to that of the non-CLBC patient, but there was no significant difference both BCSS (HR = 1.05, 95%CI: 0.88-1.24, p = 0.614) and OS (HR = 1.08, 95%CI: 0.97-1.20, p = 0.168) after PSM. CONCLUSION: Our findings revealed that BCT should be an acceptable and preferable alternative to mastectomy for well-selected patients with CLBC.

Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for the prognosis of breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.

INTRODUCTION: Many researchers used machine learning (ML) to predict the prognosis of breast cancer (BC) patients and noticed that the ML model had good individualized prediction performance. OBJECTIVE: The cohort study was intended to establish a reliable data analysis model by comparing the performance of 10 common ML algorithms and the the traditional American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, and used this model in Web application development to provide a good individualized prediction for others. METHODS: This study included 63145 BC patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. RESULTS: Through the performance of the 10 ML algorithms and 7th AJCC stage in the optimal test set, we found that in terms of 5-year overall survival, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) had the highest area under the curve (AUC) value (0.831) and F1-score (0.608), and both sensitivity (0.737) and specificity (0.772) were relatively high. Besides, MARS showed a highest AUC value (0.831, 95%confidence interval: 0.820-0.842) in comparison to the other ML algorithms and 7th AJCC stage (all P < 0.05). MARS, the best performing model, was selected for web application development (https://w12251393.shinyapps.io/app2/). CONCLUSIONS: The comparative study of multiple forecasting models utilizing a large data noted that MARS based model achieved a much better performance compared to other ML algorithms and 7th AJCC stage in individualized estimation of survival of BC patients, which was very likely to be the next step towards precision medicine.

Comparison of survival outcomes between axillary conservation and axillary lymph node dissections in N1 early breast cancer: a propensity-matched SEER analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) is an alternative to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for breast cancer surgery. But the criteria of SLND only for patients with limited disease in the sentinel node is disputed. METHODS: From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, 2000-2015, we identified 97,296 early breast cancer females with 1-3 axillary lymph nodes macro-metastasis. Of them, 1-5 (axillary conservation group), 6-9, and ≥ 10 (ALND group) axillary lymph nodes were dissected in 28,639, 16,838, and 51,819 patients, respectively. According to the criteria of the ACOSOG Z0011 trial, two historical cohort studies of patients who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy were conducted and the survival outcomes between ALND and axillary conservation were compared. RESULTS: Overall, dissection of 6-9 regional lymph nodes resulted in the worst prognosis. After propensity-matched analysis, it was found that patients in the axillary conservation group had worse survival than the ALND group in overall survival. No significant difference in prognosis between the group undergoing lumpectomy was found both in OS and BCSS. Subgroup analysis revealed that Grade 3, T2, two lymph nodes positive, or Her2 positive were the main causes of worse survival in the axillary conservation group. CONCLUSION: Not all patients with N1 early breast cancer suit axillary conservation. Axillary conservation was sufficient in patients who were treated with lumpectomy. ALND cannot be omitted in patients who were ineligible for the Z0011 and undergoing mastectomy with the following characteristics: T2, Grade 3, two positive lymph nodes, and Her2 positive, which may be better complemented to the Z0011 trial. Hence, under different surgical methods, the clinical precision treatment of ALND or axillary preservation is essential.

Adjuvant radiation therapy for older women with early-stage breast cancer: a propensity-matched SEER analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to evaluate the effect of adjuvant radiation therapy on the survival prognosis of older women with early-stage breast cancer under different surgical treatments. METHODS: We collected patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Elderly female patients (≥ 70 years) with stage I-IIB diagnosed with invasive carcinoma in 1988-2017 were included. After propensity score matching (PSM), the prognosis of patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy was calculated separately. The effects of radiotherapy on the survival of three special population groups (breast-conserving surgery + T1N0M0 + ER positive, mastectomy + T3N0M0 and mastectomy + T1-2N1M0) were analyzed selectively. RESULTS: Of 106,553 older women with early-stage breast cancer were identified. 48,630 patients had received radiotherapy, while 57,923 patients had not. After PSM, older women undergoing breast-conserving surgery benefited significantly from radiotherapy (both OS and BCSS p < 0.001), for patients with T1N0M0 and ER-positive breast cancer (both OS and BCSS p < 0.001). In the subgroup of T1-2N1M0 breast cancer treated by mastectomy, patients undergoing radiotherapy had a worse survival as well (OS p < 0.001; BCSS p = 0.0907). While in the subgroup of T3N0M0 breast cancer treated by mastectomy, survival analyses showed no statistical differences between patients receiving radiation or not (OS p = 0.1778, BCSS p = 0.6957). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated the clinical effects of radiation on older women who received different surgical treatments. Our study suggested that radiotherapy should be omitted in older women undergoing mastectomy + T3N0M0 or T1-2N1M0 and radiotherapy could be considered in women with T1N0M0 + ER-positive undergoing breast-conserving surgery.