2011;31(9) （J South Med Univ）

Original Article

Clinicopathological characteristics of male breast cancer:analysis of 25 cases at a single institution

XIA Qing, SHI Yan-xia, LIU Dong-geng, JIANG Wen-qi

Department of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, China

Abstract: Objective To investigate general and clinicopathological characteristics of male breast cancer and analyzed the factorsaffecting the outcomes of the patients based on the data from a single institution. Methods Twenty-five male breast cancer patientstreated at Sun Yet-sen University Cancer Center between January 1, 2000 and April 30, 2011 were included into the study. Thepatients were followed up for 1 to 90 months with a median follow-up of 51 months. The general and clinicopathologicalcharacteristics including family history, age, smoking, alcohol drinking, site of tumor, location of tumor, histological type, estrogenreceptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2), Ki-67, vascular endothelial growthfactor (VEGF), P53 expression, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy, adjuvantendocrine therapy, tumor size, lymph node status, distant metastasis and TNM stage were investigated by univariate analysis toevaluate the impact of these factors on patient survival. Results The 5-year survival rate was 66.5% in these patients. Neoadjuvantchemotherapy, tumor size, lymph node status, distant metastasis and TNM stage were significant predictors for the overall survival.Patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy tended to have a better overall survival, though this was not supported statistically (P=0.086). However, patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a poorer overall survival than those without it (P=0.000). Patients instages I and II had better overall survival than those in stages III and IV (P=0.000). Conclusion The 5-year survival rate was 66.5%in these male breast cancer patients. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, tumor size, lymph node status, distant metastasis and TNM stageare significant predictors of the overall patient survival.Key words: breast cancer; male breast cancer; univariate analysis; prognosis

Introduction

Breast cancer in men is rare and only accounts forapproximately 1% of all breast cancers［1］. Even with asignificant raise in the incidence of male breast cancerover the last 25 years, it still remains a rare clinicalentity, and the therapy is mainly based on what is knownfrom female breast cancer. Despite the fact thatrandomized controlled prospective trials are not possibledue to the low incidence, data obtained fromretrospective analyses have clearly demonstrated thatmale breast cancer is not exactly the same entity asfemale breast cancer ［2］. Male breast cancer patientstended to have higher estrogen receptor (ER) andprogesterone receptor (PR) expressions ［2-3］ and therelationship of ER with the overall survival is uncertain［4-5］. The age of diagnosis is also older in male breastcancer patients than in female patients［2］. Male breastcancer exhibits more frequent lymph node involvement,presenting with a more advanced stage upon diagnosisand often showing a predominant proportion of invasiveductal carcinoma［2, 6］. Reports of male breast cancercases in China are scarce. In this study, we conducted a

long-term, longitudinal, follow-up study to investigatethe general and clinicopathological characteristics ofmale breast cancer in a cohort of Chinese patients andanalyze the factors that potentially affected the prognosisof the disease.Materials and Methods

Patients

This respective study was conducted among 25male breast cancer patients treated in our hospitalbetween January 1, 2000 and April 30, 2011. Thegeneral and clinicopathological characteristics analyzedincluded family history, age, smoking, alcohol drinking,site of tumor, location of tumor, histological type, ERand PR status, human epidermal growth factor receptor2 (HER-2), Ki-67, vascular endothelial growth factor(VEGF), P53 expression, neoadjuvant chemotherapy,surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy,adjuvant endocrine therapy, tumor size, lymph nodeinvolvement, distant metastasis and TNM stage. TheAmerican Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC, 6thedition) TNM classification system was used for stagingof the tumors. The histopathologic diagnosis wasestablished in line with the criteria postulated by theWorld Health Organization Classification of Tumors(IARC 2003 version).Follow-up study

Received: 2011-06-13 Accepted: 2011-07-13Supported by a Special Fund for National Eleventh Five-year Plan KeySci-tech Project of New Drug Development (2008ZX09312-002) and bythe Outstanding Young Researcher Program of Sun Yat-sen Cancer Center.Corresponding authors: LIU Dong-geng, Tel/Fax: 020-87343352, E-mail:liudg@sysucc.org.cn; JIANG Wen-qi, Tel/Fax: 020-87343352, E-mail:wqjiang@yahoo.com.

··1469

（J South Med Univ） Vol.31

All the patients were followed at 3-month intervalsduring the first year, 6-month intervals in the secondyear, and once a year thereafter. The overall survival(OS) was defined as the time from diagnosis to death, orwas censored at the last known living data. Patientfollow-up was completed by April 30, 2011.Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses of the data were performedusing SPSS 13.0 software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA).The relationship among various clinicopathologicalfactors and among different groups were analyzed usingChi-square tests, likelihood ratio, and linear-by-linearassociation as appropriate. The non-parametricWilcoxon Signed Ranks test and Kruskal-Wallis testwere used to evaluate the significance of the differencesof the mean ranks. Kaplan-Meier method was used todetermine the survival curves and the log-rank test wasused to investigate the differences between the lifetables. A two-tailed P<0.05 was considered statisticallysignificant.Results

General characteristics of patients

The general characteristics of the patients weresummarized in Tab.1. Of the 25 patients, 12 had afamily history of cancer including breast cancer (4cases) and other cancers (8 cases). The mean age atdiagnosis was 61 years, ranging from 32 to 80 years.Thirteen patients (52%) were diagnosed at an age olderthan 61 years and 12 (48% ) at younger ages. Thirteen(52% ) patients reported a history of smoking and 6(24%) had a history of alcohol drinking.

Clinicopathological characteristics of the tumor

As shown in Tab.2, cancer occurred in the leftbreast in 13 (52% ) cases and in the right breast in 12(48% ) cases. Six of the 16 patients with known tumor

location had cancer in the retroareolar area. The mostfrequent histological type was invasive ductal carcinoma(n=23), and only one case had mucinous carcinoma andanother had an unknown type. Among the 19 patientsavailable for hormone receptors assays, 16 were positivefor both ER and PR and only 2 were positive for HER-2.The data of Ki-67, VEGF and P53 were available in 16,17 and 16 patients, of whom 12 (75%), 10 (58.8%) and13 (81.2% ) were positive, respectively. Three patientsreceived neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 1 patient hadadjuvant radiotherapy. Thirteen patients receivedadjuvant chemotherapy and 7 received adjuvantendocrine therapy. The main chemotherapy regimen wasCAF/CEF (8 patients, with a median of 4 cycles), andother strategies included TAC, CMF, and AT. Onepatient underwent radiotherapy covering the primarylesion on the chest wall and the regional lymph nodes(supraclavicular, subaxillary and/or internal mammarylymph nodes). The drugs for endocrine therapy weretamoxifen and toremifen. Twenty patients underwenttotal mastectomy and 1 had lumpectomy. Thepercentage of T1 and T2 tumor size was 80%, with 50%of the patients had positive lymph nodes and 14.3% haddistant metastasis. According to the TNM stagingsystem, 4 (19.0%), 8 (38.1%), 6 (28.6%), and 3 (14.3%)patients were in stages I, II, III and IV, respectively.Nine patients had local recurrence at 1 to 80 monthsafter the treatment (median 33 months). Three patientswere found to have distant metastasis at 0 to 14 months,occurring in the bones in 1 case, in the liver in 1 case,and in the distant lymph nodes in 1 case.Univariate analysis

The results of univariate analysis are summarizedin Tab.3. The median follow-up was 51 months (range 1to 90 months). Eight patients died and the 5-year OSrate was 66.5%. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, tumor size,lymph node status, distant metastasis and TNM stagewere significant predictors for OS. Although it was notsignificantly different, patients with adjuvant endocrinetherapy tended to have better OS (P=0.086). However,patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had poorer OSthan those without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.000)(Fig.1). Patients in stage I and II had better OS thanthose in stage III and IV (P=0.000) (Fig.2).Discussion

Due to the low incidence rate, studies of malebreast cancer remained scarce in China. In Westerncountries, male breast cancer was presented mostly inthe 60s of the patients［7-9］, which was consistent with ourdata. A smoking history was not found to associate withthe occurrence of male breast cancer［8］, nor was alcoholdrinking, which was contrary to the findings of Guénel etal［10］. Our study showed that the predominant histologicaltype was invasive ductal carcinoma, and no case wasfound to have invasive lobular type, similar to the resultsof previous studies ［11-12］. The positivity rates of ER

Variable

Family history

Breast cancer

Other cancer

No cancer

Age (year)

<61

≥61

Smoking

Yes

No

Alcohol drinking

Yes

No

n

4

8

13

12

13

13

12

6

19

Percentage (%)

16

32

52

48

52

52

48

24

76

Tab.1 General characteristics of the patients withmale breast cancer

··1470

Clinicopathological characteristics of male breast cancerNo.9

(84.2% ) and PR (84.2% ) were significantly higher inmale breast cancer patients than in female patients［13］.We also investigated the expression of such cell cycleproteins as p53 and Ki-67. Mutations in the P53 tumorsuppressor gene are the most commonly observedoncogenic abnormalities in human malignancies ［14-15］.P53 expression has been detected in 0%-54% ofpatients with male breast cancer byimmunohistochemistry ［16-17］. The significance of P53mutation in male breast cancer is unclear［18］. In ourpatients, 13 (81.2% ) were positive for P53, a ratesignificantly higher than that reported previously,though it did not seem to associate with the OS. Ki-67nuclear antigen is associated with cell proliferation andhas been recognized as a proliferation marker in breastcancer［19］. Twelve patients were Ki-67-positive in ourseries, but no significant correlations were foundbetween Ki-67 expression and the prognosis of thepatients, suggesting that Ki-67 did not play a dominantrole in the survival of male breast cancer patients.VEGF is a primary stimulant of angiogenesis to increasevascular permeability and promote metastasis［20］, but wedid not find a correlation between VEGF positivity andprognosis in our series. Three patients with neoadjuvantchemotherapy had poorer OS than those without, but allthe patients receiving the therapy were in advanced

stages (2 in stage IV and 1 in stage IIIC).Several studies have demonstrated the benefits ofadjuvant chemotherapy［21］ and radiotherapy［22］, but ourresult did not provide any statistical support of thisnotion possibly due to the small sample size. Althoughadjuvant hormonal therapy and chemotherapy haveproven benefits in a subgroup of female breast cancerpatients, the value of adjuvant chemotherapy in malebreast cancer is less clear［3］. Our results indicated thatadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with theprognosis, while patients receiving adjuvant endocrinetherapy tended to have a better OS (P=0.086), thoughnot statistically so. TNM stage is an important prognosticfactor affecting the outcomes of patients with malignanttumors, and male breast cancer is not an exception. Thepresent study showed that the tumor size, lymph nodeinvolvement and TNM stage were significantlycorrelated to the clinical outcomes of the patients. The5-year survival rate was 66.5% in our series, which washigher than that reported by Chung et al (57% ) twodecades ago［23］, possibly due to technical improvement inthe early detection over the 20 years, advancedcomprehensive treatment and close follow-up.Considering the small sample size in the currentstudy, multivariate analysis was not done to explore theindependent effects of the prognostic factors. Future

Variable

Site of tumor

Left

Right

Location of tumor

Retroareolar

Other quadrant

Histological type

Invasive ductal carcinoma

Non-invasive ductal carcinoma

ER

Negative

Positive

PR

Negative

Positive

HER-2

Negative

Positive

Ki-67

Negative

Positive

VEGF

Negative

Positive

P53

Negative

Positive

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Yes

No

n

13

12

6

10

23

1

3

16

3

16

17

2

4

12

7

10

3

13

3

22

Percentage (%)

52

48

37.5

62.5

95.8

4.2

84.2

15.8

84.2

15.8

89.5

10.5

25.0

75.0

41.2

58.8

18.8

81.2

12.0

88.0

Variable

Surgery

Total mastectomy

Lumpectomy

No surgery

Adjuvant chemotherapy

Yes

No

Adjuvant radiotherapy

Yes

No

Adjuvant endocrine therapy

Yes

No

Tumor size

T1

T2

T3

T4

Lymph node status

N0

N1

N2

N3

Distant metastasis

M0

M1

TNM stage

I

II

III

IV

n

20

1

4

13

12

1

24

9

16

8

8

1

3

10

3

3

4

18

3

4

8

6

3

Percentage (%)

80.0

4.0

16.0

52.0

48.0

4.0

96.0

36.0

64.0

40.0

40.0

5.0

15.0

50.0

15.0

15.0

20.0

85.7

14.3

19.0

38.1

28.6

14.3

Tab.2 Clinicopathological characteristics of the patients with male breast cancer

··1471

（J South Med Univ） Vol.31

research of the complex behavior of male breast cancerinvolving a larger sample size with longer follow-up mayprovide important new insights into both the biologicaland clinical factors of this rare malignancy.References

Variable*

Family history

Breast cancer

Other cancer

No cancer

Age (year)

< 61

≥61

Smoking

Yes

No

Alcohol drinking

Yes

No

Site of tumor

Left

Right

Location of tumor

Retroareolar

Other quadrant

ER

Negative

Positive

PR

Negative

Positive

HER-2

Negative

Positive

Ki-67

Negative

Positive

VEGF

Negative

Positive

n

4

8

13

12

13

13

12

6

19

13

12

6

10

3

16

3

16

17

2

4

12

7

10

P

0.506

0.420

0.846

0.910

0.686

0.971

0.522

0.342

0.081

0.780

0.537

Variable

P53

Negative

Positive

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Yes

No

Surgery

Total mastectomy+lumpectomy

No surgery

Adjuvant chemotherapy

Yes

No

Adjuvant radiotherapy

Yes

No

Adjuvant endocrine therapy

Yes

No

Tumor size

T1+T2

T3+T4

Lymph node status

N0+N1

N2+N3

Distant metastasis

M0

M1

TNM stage

I+II

III+IV

n

3

13

3

22

21

4

13

12

1

24

9

16

16

4

13

7

18

3

12

9

P

0.859

0.000

0.105

0.528

0.191

0.086

0.045

0.001

0.000

0.000

*Twenty-three cases had invasive ductal carcinoma, 1 had mucinous carcinoma and 1 had an unknown type, thus the histological type can

not be analyzed.

Tab.3 Univariate analysis for the overall survival in all the patients

Without neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Without neoadjuvant chemotherapy

P=0.000

Time since diagnosis (months)0 20 40 60 80 100

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Ove

rall

surv

ival

(pro

babi

lity

)

Fig.1 Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival byneoadjuvant chemotherapy.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time since diagnosis (months)

P=0.000

Stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ

Stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Ove

rall

surv

ival

(pro

babi

lity

)

Fig.2 Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival by

TNM stage.

··1472

·基础研究·共价结合血管内皮生长因子促进内皮祖细胞在去细胞瓣上的粘

附和增殖

周建良 1，邹明晖 1，陈义初 1，卢翠芬 2，史嘉玮 1，董念国 1

1华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院心血管外科，湖北 武汉 430022；2湖北大学化学化工学院，湖北 武汉

430062

摘要：目的 对去细胞主动脉瓣进行聚乙二醇（PEG）交联和血管内皮生长因子（VEGF）共价结合，以改善去细胞主动脉瓣

生物学性能。方法 枝化状聚乙二醇末端的丙烯酰基与引入到去细胞主动脉瓣上的巯基，通过迈克尔加成反应完成对去

细胞主动脉瓣的PEG交联；通过PEG交联去细胞主动脉瓣上的未饱和丙烯酰基与VEGF中半胱氨酸残基上的巯基发生

另一个迈克尔加成反应，对去细胞主动脉瓣进行VEGF共价结合，酶联免疫吸附试验和免疫荧光测定VEGF修饰效果；在

去细胞主动脉瓣、PEG交联去细胞主动脉瓣和VEGF共价结合的 PEG交联去细胞主动脉瓣上种植内皮祖细胞，培养10 d

后行瓣膜上DNA含量测定、苏木素-伊红染色和扫描电镜。结果 免疫荧光和ELISA检测显示：每片PEG交联去细胞主

动脉瓣最大结合（908.94±0.27）pg VEGF；与去细胞主动脉瓣和PEG交联去细胞主动脉瓣相比，VEGF共价结合的 PEG交

联去细胞主动脉瓣明显促进内皮祖细胞的黏附和增殖，并且可在瓣膜表面形成一层连续的单细胞层。结论 借助PEG，

VEGF能有效地共价结合去细胞主动脉瓣，促进细胞的粘附和增殖，有利于组织工程心脏瓣膜的构建。

关键词：去细胞主动脉瓣；聚乙二醇；迈克尔加成反应；血管内皮生长因子；内皮祖细胞

中图分类号：R329.26 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1672-4254（2011）09-1474-06

PEG-mediated covalent binding of VEGF to decellularized aortic valves promotesadhesion and proliferation of endothelial progenitor cells

ZHOU Jian-liang1, ZOU Ming-hui1, CHEN Yi-chu1, LU Cui-fen2, SHI Jia-wei1, DONG Nian-guo1

1Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,Wuhan 430022, China; 2College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China

Abstract: Objective To improve the biological properties of decellularized aortic valves by polyethylene glycol(PEG)-mediated covalent incorporation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Methods PEG crosslinking ofdecellularized aortic valves were completed via a Michael-type addition reaction, followed by covalent incorporationof VEGF through another Michael-type addition reaction between the unsaturated propylene acyl of PEG and thethiol groups on cysteine residues of VEGF. The effect of VEGF incorporation was evaluated by enzyme-linkedimmunosorbent assay (ELISA) and immune fluorescence assay. The endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) were seededon decellularized aortic valves with or without these modifications, and after 10 days of culture, the valves wereexamined for DNA content and by hematoxylin-eosin staining and scanning electron microscopy. Results Immunefluorescence and ELISA showed that the maximal VEGF incorporation on the decellularized aortic valve reached908.94 ± 0.27 pg. Compared with the unmodified valves and the valves with PEG crosslinking, decellularized aorticvalves with covalent incorporation of VEGF significantly promoted the adhesion and proliferation of EPCs, whichformed a confluent cell monolayer on the valve surface. Conclusions PEG-mediated covalent incorporation of VEGFin the decellularized aortic valves improves the adhesion and proliferation of the seeded EPCs to facilitate theconstruction of tissue-engineered heart valves.Key words: decellularized aortic valves; polyethylene glycol; Michael-type addition reaction; vascular endothelialgrowth factor; endothelial progenitor cells

组织工程心脏瓣膜（TEHV）因其优良的组织相容

性、耐久性及可生长性，明显优于目前临床上使用的机

械瓣和生物瓣，已经成为心脏瓣膜外科领域研究的重要

方向；去细胞瓣天然支架组织结构接近生理瓣膜、获取

较易，是最合适的TEHV支架材料，但是天然瓣膜经去

细胞处理后，部分ECM成分和某些生物信号分子丢失，

从而影响种子细胞的粘附和增殖；若对去细胞瓣进行改

收稿日期：2011-06-21

基金项目：十一五国家“重大新药创制”科技重大专项（2008ZX09312-002）和中山大学肿瘤防治中心优才计划项目

作者简介：夏 青，在读博士研究生，E-mail: xiaqing@sysucc.org.cn

通讯作者：刘东耕，副主任医师，副教授，硕士导师，E-mail: liudg@sysucc.org.cn；姜文奇，主任医师，教授，博士生导师，E-mail: wqjiang@yahoo.com

No.9 Clinicopathological characteristics of male breast cancer

［1］ Fentiman IS, Fourquet A, Hortobagyi GN: Male breast cancer［J］.Lancet, 2006, 367(9510): 595-604.

［2］ Anderson WF, Althuis MD, Brinton LA, et al. Is male breast cancersimilar or different than female breast cancer［J］? Breast Cancer ResTreat, 2004, 83(1): 77-86.

［3］ Giordano SH, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi GN. Breast cancer in men［J］.Ann Intern Med, 2002, 137(8): 678-87.

［4］Donegan WL, Redlich PN. Breast cancer in men［J］. Surg Clin N Am,1996, 76(2): 343-63.

［5］Goss PE, Reid C, Pintilie M, et al. Male breast carcinoma: a review of229 patients who presented to the Princess Margaret Hospital during40 years: 1955-1996［J］. Cancer, 1999, 85(3): 629-39.

［6］Malani AK. Male breast cancer: a different disease than female breastcancer［J］? South Med J, 2007, 100(2): 197.

［7］ Sasco AJ, Lowenfels AB, Pasker-de Jong P. Epidemiology of malebreast cancer. A meta-analysis of published case-control studies anddiscussion of selected aetiological factors［J］. Int J Cancer, 1993, 53(4): 538-49.

［8］Nahleh Z, Girnius S. Male breast cancer: a gender issue［J］. Nat ClinPract Oncol, 2006, 3(8): 428-37.

［9］ Rani Kanthan, Isabella Fried, Theresa Rueckl, et al. Expr-ession ofcell cycle proteins in male breast carcinoma［J］. World J Surg Oncol,2010, 8: 10.

［10］Guénel P, Cyr D, Sabroe S, et al. Alcohol drinking may increase riskof breast cancer in men: a European population-based casecontrolstudy［J］. Cancer Causes Control, 2004, 15(6): 571-80.

［11］Giordano SH. A review of the diagnosis and management of malebreast cancer［J］. Oncologist, 2005, 10(7): 471-9.

［12］Meguerditchian AN, Falardeau M, Martin G. Male breast carcinoma［J］. Can J Surg, 2002, 45(4): 296-302.

［13］Ottini L, Palli D, Rizzoc S, et al. Male breast cancer［J］. Crit Rev

Oncol Hematol, 2010, 73(2): 141-55.［14］Hollstein M, Sidransky D, Vogelstein B, et al. p53 mutations in

human cancers［J］. Science, 1991, 253(5015): 49-52.［15］Harris CC, Hollstein M. Clinical implications of the p53 tumor-

suppressor gene［J］. N Engl J Med, 1993, 329(18): 1318-27.［16］Mies C, Mejias A, Nadji M, et al. p53 and HER-2 neu are rarely

immunohistochemically detectable in male breast cancer［J］. ModPathol, 1994, 7: 19A.

［17］Bruce DM, Heys SD, Payne S, et al. Male breast cancer: clinico-pathological features, immunocytochemical characteristics andprognosis［J］. Eur J Surg Oncol, 1996, 22(1): 42-6.

［18］Rayson D, Erlichman C, Suman VJ, et al. Molecular markers in malebreast carcinoma［J］. Cancer, 1998, 83(9): 1947-55.

［19］von Minckwitz G, Sinn HP, Raab G, et al. German Breast Group:clinical response after two cycles compared to HER2, Ki-67, p53,and bcl-2 in independently predicting a pathological completeresponse after preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operablecarcinoma of the breast［J］. Breast Cancer Res, 2008, 10(2): R30-41.

［20］Di DomenicoMarina, Ricciardi Carmela, Fusco Alfredo, et al.Anti-VEGF therapy in breast and lung mouse models of cancers［J］. JBiomed Biotechnol, 2011, 2011: 947928.

［21］Yildirim E, Berberoglu U. Male breast cancer: a 22-year experience［J］. Eur J Surg Oncol, 1998, 24(6): 548-52.

［22］Zabel A, Milker-Za bel S, Zuna I, et al. External beam radiotherapyin the treatment of male breast carcinoma: patterns of failure in asingle institute experience［J］. Tumori, 2005, 91(2): 151-5.

［23］Chung HC, Koh EH, Roh JK, et al. Male breast cancer-a 20-yearreview of 16 cases at Yonsei University［J］. Yonsei Med J, 1990, 31(3): 242-50.

（编辑：宋建武）

一项单中心的25例男性乳腺癌临床病理特点总结

夏 青，史艳侠，刘东耕，姜文奇中山大学肿瘤防治中心内科，广东 广州 510060

摘要：目的 根据单中心资料对男性乳腺癌患者的临床病理学特点及疾病预后进行分析。方法 对2000年1月1日至2011

年4月30日在中山大学肿瘤防治中心接受治疗的25名男性乳腺癌患者病例资料进行分析，中位随访时间为51个月（1~90

个月）。纳入分析的参数包括肿瘤家族史、年龄、吸烟、酗酒、肿瘤部位、肿瘤象限、病理类型、雌激素受体、孕激素受体、表

皮生长因子受体-2、Ki-67、血管内皮生长因子、P53蛋白、新辅助化疗、手术方式、辅助化疗、辅助放疗、辅助内分泌治疗、肿

瘤大小、淋巴结转移、远处转移及肿瘤TNM分期。通过单因素分析评价这些参数对患者生存的影响。结果 患者的5年

生存率为66.5%，新辅助化疗、肿瘤大小、淋巴结转移、远处转移及TNM分期是影响患者生存的独立预后因素，接受了辅

助内分泌治疗的患者有更好的预后（P=0.086）。接受新辅助化疗的患者预后差于不接受新辅助化疗的患者（P=0.000），早

期患者预后好于晚期患者（P=0.000）。结论 男性乳腺癌患者5年生存率为66.5%，新辅助化疗、肿瘤大小、淋巴结转移、远

处转移及TNM分期是影响患者生存的独立预后因素。

关键词：乳腺癌；男性乳腺癌；单因素；预后

中图分类号：R473 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1673-4254（2011）09-1469-05

··1473