A case of pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy diagnosed by transbronchial lung biopsy and treated with chemotherapy and long-term oxygen and anticoagulation therapies.

A 41-year-old woman, who underwent breast resection for cancer of the right breast and adjuvant chemotherapy 2 years ago, was admitted to our hospital due to shortness of breath upon exertion. High-resolution computed tomography of the chest showed small nodular opacities in the peribronchiolar area in both lungs, as well as mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy. A transbronchial lung biopsy revealed breast cancer metastasis and pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM). Treatment of PTTM is rarely reported due to the difficulty of antemortem diagnosis; however, the patient was effectively treated with chemotherapy and oxygen and anticoagulation therapies for 3 months.

A prospective study of bone tumor response assessment in metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In our previous study, new MD Anderson (MDA) bone tumor response criteria (based on computed tomography [CT], plain radiography [XR], and skeletal scintigraphy [SS]) predicted progression-free survival (PFS) better than did World Health Organization (WHO) bone tumor response criteria (plain radiography [XR] and SS) among patients with breast cancer and bone-only metastases. In this pilot study, we tested whether MDA criteria could reveal bone metastasis response earlier than WHO criteria in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer with osseous and measurable nonosseous metastases. METHODS: We prospectively analyzed bone metastasis response using each imaging modality and set of bone response criteria to distinguish progressive disease (PD) from non-PD and their association with PFS and overall survival (OS). We also compared the response of osseous metastases assessed by both criteria with the response of nonosseous measurable lesions. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 26.7 months (range, 6.1-53.3 months) in 29 patients. PFS rates differed at 6 months based on the classification of PD or non-PD using either set of criteria (MDA, P = .002; WHO, P = .014), but these rates, as well as OS, did not differ at 3 months. Response in osseous metastases by either set of criteria did not correlate with the response in nonosseous metastases. CONCLUSION: MDA and WHO criteria predicted PFS of patients with osseous metastases at 6 months but not at an earlier time point. We plan a well-powered study to determine the role of MDA criteria in predicting bone tumor response by incorporating 18-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F) positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/CT to see if findings using this modality are earlier than those with WHO criteria.

Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer: techniques and recommendations for diagnosis.

Bone is the most common site of distant metastases from breast carcinoma. The presence of bone metastases affects a patient's prognosis, quality of life, and the planning of their treatment. We discuss recent innovations in bone imaging and present algorithms, based on the strengths and weaknesses of each technique, to facilitate the most successful and cost-effective choice of imaging studies for the detection of osseous metastases. Skeletal scintigraphy (bone scan) is very sensitive in the detection of osseous metastases and is recommended as the first imaging study in patients who are asymptomatic. Radiographs are recommended for the assessment of abnormal radionuclide uptake or the risk of pathological fracture and as initial imaging studies in patients with bone pain. MRI or PET-CT can be considered for cases of abnormal radionuclide uptake that are not addressed by radiography. Osseous metastases can lead to emergent situations, such as spinal-cord compression or impending fracture of a weight-bearing bone, and imaging guidelines are essential for early detection and initiation of appropriate therapy. The imaging method used in non-emergent situations, such as assessment of the ribs, sternum, pelvis, hips, and joints, should be guided by the strengths and limitations of each technique.

[New period of systemic treatment for breast cancer].

The systemic adjuvant treatment for breast cancer is showing remarkable progress with targeted therapy, such as Trastuzumab, in addition to cytotoxic chemotherapy. The timing of adjuvant chemotherapy is also shifting from post surgery to pre surgery. In terms of adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormonal receptor positive breast cancer, Aromatase inhibitor now is established as a standard treatment for postmenopausal patients. LH-RH analog is also standard for premenopausal patients with Tamoxifen. Further, longer survival might be expected with the new combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy and Trastuzumab for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients. Because the trend of systemic treatment for breast cancer patients is to focus on maintaining patients' quality of life, targeted therapy with Trastuzumab and/or new upcoming drugs (e. g., Bevacizumab, Lapatinib, Sunitinib), might be the mainstream systemic therapy. In this section, we discuss standard and new systemic therapy for primary, locally advanced, and metastatic breast cancer patients.

Determining the morphological features of breast cancer and predicting the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy via diagnostic breast imaging.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has recently become common therapy for breast cancer. This work studied whether or not the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be predicted from morphological features of breast cancer in initial diagnostic imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 186 cases who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy at this hospital in 2006 were studied. Morphological features were classified into four categories. One is a type of invasive carcinoma that tends to grow along the mammary ducts (type A1), another is a type of expansively growing invasive carcinoma that is relatively well-defined (type A2), a third is a type of irregularly shaped mass that retracts surrounding tissue (type A3), and the fourth is a mixed type. Thus, the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on carcinomas of the four types were compared on the basis of image and pathological findings. Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were classified into three categories of enlarged mass, pCR, and other, with the latter indicating no change or shrinkage. RESULTS: Of the 186 total cases, 72 were classified as type A1, 31 as type A2, 52 as type A3, and 31 as a mixed type. Seven of 31 cases of type A2 (22.6%) were cases of an enlarged mass, revealing a high percentage of such cases. Dividing cases into type A2 and other types and looking at the proportion of cases of an enlarged mass thus indicated a significantly higher tendency. pCR was achieved in 6 of 31 cases with type A2 (19.4%). Here, also, the proportion of type A2 cases was significantly higher. CONCLUSION: Morphological features prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can contribute to determining the effects of the therapy. Expansively growing well-defined masses contain lesions at both extremes, tending to enlarge in some instances or instead allowing pCR, so the course of therapy must be carefully followed when performing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer.

Bone is the most common site to which breast cancer metastasizes. Imaging-by skeletal scintigraphy, plain radiography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging-is an essential part, and positron emission tomography or single-photon emission computed tomography have a potential of evaluating bone metastases, but no consensus exists as to the best modality for diagnosing the lesion and for assessing its response to treatment. Imaging bone metastases is problematic because the lesions can be osteolytic, osteoblastic, or mixed, and imaging modalities are based on either direct anatomic visualization of the bone or tumor or indirect measurements of bone or tumor metabolism. Although bone metastases can be treated, their response to treatment is considered "unmeasurable" according to existing response criteria. Therefore, the process by which oncologists and radiologists diagnose and monitor the response of bone metastases needs revision, and the current inability to assess the response of bone metastases excludes patients with breast cancer and bone disease from participating in clinical trials of new treatments for breast cancer. In this review of the MEDLINE literature, we discuss the pros and cons of each modality for diagnosing bone metastases and for assessing their response to treatment and we present a practical approach for diagnosis and assessment of bone metastasis.