GMJ Medicine
eISSN : 2626-3041
Embase
Biosis Previews
description
Volume 1, Issue 1 (2022)
GMJM 2022, 1(1): 15-18 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2022/09/8 | Accepted: 2022/11/2 | Published: 2022/11/2
Received: 2022/09/8 | Accepted: 2022/11/2 | Published: 2022/11/2
How to cite this article
Mahdavi F, Eghdam Zamiri R. Clinical Features of Breast Cancer in Elderly Women. GMJM 2022; 1 (1) :15-18
URL: http://gmedicine.de/article-2-197-en.html
URL: http://gmedicine.de/article-2-197-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Authors
F. Mahdavi *1, R. Eghdam Zamiri1
1- Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract (310 Views)
Aims: About one-third of breast cancer patients occur over 70 years old. Aging leads to the modification of a number of different drugs in the treatment of breast cancer, which provides the basis for incomplete treatment of these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical features of breast cancer in elderly women.
Instrument & Methods: This descriptive study was conducted in 2020 by reviewing the clinical records of all women with breast cancer over the age of 70 over a ten-year period ending in 2020 with a clinical record of 183 patients. Demographic information, type of tumor pathology, clinical stage of the tumor, status of hormone receptors and tumor HER2 protein, type of surgery, type of adjuvant treatment was extracted from the files and used.
Findings: In 88 non-metastatic patients, there were 90 lymph nodes positive, of which 33 (37.5%) had no estrogen receptor and 55 (62.5%) had estrogen receptor. The most systemic treatment in patients with estrogen receptor-free tumor was chemotherapy (81.8%) and in patients with estrogen receptor tumor, chemotherapy plus hormone therapy (58.2%). there were 40 non-metastatic lymph node-negative patients, of which 9 (22.5%) had no estrogen receptor and 31 (77.5%) had estrogen receptor. The most systemic treatment received in patients without estrogen receptor was only chemotherapy (77.8%) and in patients with estrogen receptor tumor was only hormone therapy (54%).
Conclusion: The most common stage of the breast cancer in over 70 years old women is type IIB.
Instrument & Methods: This descriptive study was conducted in 2020 by reviewing the clinical records of all women with breast cancer over the age of 70 over a ten-year period ending in 2020 with a clinical record of 183 patients. Demographic information, type of tumor pathology, clinical stage of the tumor, status of hormone receptors and tumor HER2 protein, type of surgery, type of adjuvant treatment was extracted from the files and used.
Findings: In 88 non-metastatic patients, there were 90 lymph nodes positive, of which 33 (37.5%) had no estrogen receptor and 55 (62.5%) had estrogen receptor. The most systemic treatment in patients with estrogen receptor-free tumor was chemotherapy (81.8%) and in patients with estrogen receptor tumor, chemotherapy plus hormone therapy (58.2%). there were 40 non-metastatic lymph node-negative patients, of which 9 (22.5%) had no estrogen receptor and 31 (77.5%) had estrogen receptor. The most systemic treatment received in patients without estrogen receptor was only chemotherapy (77.8%) and in patients with estrogen receptor tumor was only hormone therapy (54%).
Conclusion: The most common stage of the breast cancer in over 70 years old women is type IIB.
Keywords:
References
1. Gould DJ, Macias LH, Saeg F, Dauwe P, Hammoudeh Z, Stevens WG. Seroma rates are not increased when combining liposuction with progressive tension suture abdominoplasty: A retrospective cohort study of 619 patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2018;38(7):763-9. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/asj/sjx235]
2. Gallagher S, Soleimani T, Wang C, Tholpady S, Jones C, Sando W. Safety and utility of the drainless abdominoplasty in the post-bariatric surgery patient. Ann Plast Surg. 2018;80(2):96-9. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/SAP.0000000000001291]
3. Rosen AD, Gutowski KA, Hartman T. Reduced seroma risk in drainless abdominoplasty using running barbed sutures: A 10-year, multicenter retrospective analysis. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40(5):531-7. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/asj/sjz238]
4. Dutot MC, Serror K, Al Ameri O, Chaouat M, Mimoun M, Boccara D. Improving safety after abdominoplasty: A retrospective review of 1128 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(2):355-62. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004572]
5. Vieira BL, Chow I, Sinno S, Dorfman RG, Hanwright P, Gutowski KA. Is there a limit? a risk assessment model of liposuction and lipoaspirate volume on complications in abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(4):892-901. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004212]
6. Bromley M, Marrou W, Charles-de-Sa L. Evaluation of the number of progressive tension sutures needed to prevent seroma in abdominoplasty with drains: A single-blind, prospective, comparative, randomized clinical trial. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2018;42(6):1600-8. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s00266-018-1227-6]
7. Macias LH, Kwon E, Gould DJ, Spring MA, Stevens WG. Decrease in seroma rate after adopting progressive tension sutures without drains: A single surgery center experience of 451 abdominoplasties over 7 years. Aesthet Surg J. 2016;36(9):1029-35. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/asj/sjw040]
8. Khanbabayi Gol M. Effect of massage therapy with and without elastic bandaging on pain, edema, and shoulder dysfunction after modified radical mastectomy: A clinical trial. Int J Women Health Reprod Sci. 2019;8(1):73-8. [Link] [DOI:10.15296/ijwhr.2020.10]
9. Hoyos A, Perez ME, Guarin DE, Montenegro A. A report of 736 high-definition lipoabdominoplasties performed in conjunction with circumferential VASER liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(3):662-75. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004705]
10. Hauck T, Schmitz M, Horch RE, Arkudas A, Boos AM, Cai A. Operating on the edge? body contouring procedures in patients with body mass index greater 35. Obes Surg. 2019;29(5):1563-70. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11695-018-03697-0]
11. Giordano S, Uusalo P, Oranges CM, di Summa PG, Lankinen P. Local anesthetic pain catheters to reduce opioid use in massive weight loss patients undergoing abdominoplasty: A comparative study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2020;73(4):770-6. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.bjps.2019.11.003]
12. Valença-Filipe R, Martins A, Silva A, Vásconez LO, Amarante J, Costa-Ferreira A. Dissection technique for abdominoplasty: A prospective study on scalpel versus diathermocoagulation (Coagulation mode). Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3(1):e299. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000222]
13. Hunecke P, Toll M, Mann O, Izbicki JR, Blessmann M, Grupp K. Clinical outcome of patients undergoing abdominoplasty after massive weight loss. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2019;15(8):1362-6. [Linkvv] [DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2019.06.001]
14. Pilone V, Tramontano S, Cutolo C, Vitiello A, Brongo S. Abdominoplasty after bariatric surgery: Comparison of three different techniques. Minerva Chir. 2020;75(1):37-42. [Link] [DOI:10.23736/S0026-4733.19.08045-3]
15. Mayer HF. The suprapubic dermoadipose flap for aesthetic reshaping of the postpregnancy abdomen. Aesthetic Surg J. 2018;38(6):635-43. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/asj/sjx175]
16. Swedenhammar E, Stark B, Hållstrand AH, Ehrström M, Gahm J. Surgical training and standardised management guidelines improved the 30-day complication rate after abdominoplasty for massive weight loss. World J Surg. 2018;42(6):1647-54. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s00268-017-4341-8]