PURPOSE: Many patients and physicians remain concerned about the potential detrimental effects of pregnancy after breast cancer (BC) in terms of reproductive outcomes and maternal safety. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at providing updated evidence on these topics. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies including patients with a pregnancy after BC (PROSPERO number CRD42020158324). Likelihood of pregnancy after BC, their reproductive outcomes, and maternal safety were assessed. Pooled relative risks, odds ratios (ORs), and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were calculated using random effects models. RESULTS: Of 6,462 identified records, 39 were included involving 8,093,401 women from the general population and 112,840 patients with BC of whom 7,505 had a pregnancy after diagnosis. BC survivors were significantly less likely to have a subsequent pregnancy compared with the general population (relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.49). Risks of caesarean section (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.25), low birth weight (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.73), preterm birth (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.88), and small for gestational age (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.33) were significantly higher in BC survivors, particularly in those with previous chemotherapy exposure, compared with the general population. No significantly increased risk of congenital abnormalities or other reproductive complications were observed. Compared to patients with BC without subsequent pregnancy, those with a pregnancy had better disease-free survival (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.89) and overall survival (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68). Similar results were observed after correcting for potential confounders and irrespective of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics, pregnancy outcome, and timing of pregnancy. CONCLUSION: These results provide reassuring evidence on the safety of conceiving in BC survivors. Patients' pregnancy desire should be considered a crucial component of their survivorship care plan.

BACKGROUND: Triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC) is defined as breast cancer that is negative for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. TNBC represents 15% of all invasive breast cancers, but some studies have suggested that its prevalence differs between races. To the authors' knowledge, no previous studies have determined the prevalence of TNBC and its risk factors among Hispanic women.METHODS: The authors identified 2074 Hispanic women with breast cancer who attended the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City from 1998 to 2008. All histopathologic and immunohistochemical diagnoses were rereviewed by a breast cancer pathologist. The prevalence of TNBC, its association with clinicopathologic characteristics, and its prognostic impact were determined.RESULTS: The median patient age at diagnosis (±standard deviation) was 50 ± 12 years. The overall prevalence of TNBC was 23.1%. Younger age (P < .001), premenopausal status (P = .002), increased parity (P = .029), hormonal contraceptive use (P = .04) high histologic grade (P < .001), and advanced disease (P < .001) were associated independently with TNBC. Postmenopausal patients who had a body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m² (P = .027) or <30 kg/m² (P < .001) were more likely to have TNBC. In multivariate analysis, patients with TNBC had a higher risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR), lower disease‐free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.13‐2.32; P = .009), and a lower cancer‐specific survival (CSS) rate (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.20‐2.30; P = .002) than patients with non‐TNBC.CONCLUSIONS: The median age at diagnosis of Hispanic women with breast cancer was 11 years younger than the average age reported in the United States. The prevalence of TNBC in this study population was higher than that reported in white women with breast cancer. TNBC was associated with a higher risk of LRR and with lower DFS and CSS than those in patients with non‐TNBC. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Optimal treatment outcomes for breast cancer are dependent on a timely diagnosis followed by an organized, multidisciplinary approach to care. However, in many low‐ and middle‐income countries, effective care management pathways can be difficult to follow because of financial constraints, a lack of resources, an insufficiently trained workforce, and/or poor infrastructure. On the basis of prior work by the Breast Health Global Initiative, this article proposes a phased implementation strategy for developing sustainable approaches to enhancing patient care in limited‐resource settings by creating roadmaps that are individualized and adapted to the baseline environment. This strategy proposes that, after a situational analysis, implementation phases begin with bolstering palliative care capacity, especially in settings where a late‐stage diagnosis is common. This is followed by strengthening the patient pathway, with consideration given to a dynamic balance between centralization of services into centers of excellence to achieve better quality and decentralization of services to increase patient access. The use of resource checklists ensures that comprehensive therapy or palliative care can be delivered safely and effectively. Episodic or continuous monitoring with established process and quality metrics facilitates ongoing assessment, which should drive continual process improvements. A series of case studies provides a snapshot of country experiences with enhancing patient care, including the implementation of national cancer control plans in Kenya, palliative care in Romania, the introduction of a 1‐stop clinic for diagnosis in Brazil, the surgical management of breast cancer in India, and the establishment of a women's cancer center in Ghana.