Background: Hospitalization is a stressful experience both for primary caregivers (PCs) and cancer patients alike. Although there is significant evidence that PCs of cancer patients can experience significant caregiver burden (CB), less is known about the relationships between PCs and patient symptom severity that influence CB. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, measures of the symptom severity were obtained from cancer patients. The PCs were assessed for CB. Associations between patients' symptoms and demographic characteristics and CB were investigated using multivariate analyses. Results: A total of 98 participants (patient-caregiver dyads) filled the questionnaires. According to the Zarit Burden Interview results, 65.3% of PCs had a high CB. Pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, drowsiness, well-being, and dyspnea had significantly higher mean values in those with high CB (p < .05). Financial difficulties, first-degree relationships with the patient, higher anxiety levels, and more pronounced tiredness appear to be the variables most predictive with high CB. Conclusion: In conclusion, the present study showed CB of PCs among a group of hospitalized incurable cancer patients. PCs of more symptomatic cancer patients had a higher CB, according to our findings. This emphasized the significance of palliative care. Appropriate guidance should be provided for the psychostress caused by the CB.

Although microtubule inhibitors are generally used in advanced stages, they provide the opportunity to prolong survival as an alternative when medical oncologists have difficulty finding options in their patients, who typically have a poor prognosis and most of whom are unresponsive to treatment. For this reason, we wanted to investigate the effect of ixabepilone treatment on survival in earlier metastatic lines. Our study also examined the frequency of side effects and survival differences in patients whose dose was reduced or whose treatment was discontinued. Our study includes patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer who received ixabepilone treatment between January 2011 and January 2021. Median overall survival (OS) in the group receiving ixabepilone on the 5th line and before was 22.0 months (95% CI: 21.0–22.9), in the group receiving ixabepilone after the 5th line was calculated as 10.0 months (95% CI: 8.9–11.0) (P < .001). Median OS (months) in the group receiving ixabepilone on the 4th line and before was 26.0 (95% CI: 23.6–28.3), in the group receiving ixabepilone after the 4th line was determined as 12.0 (95% CI: 10.5–13.4) (P < .001). Dose reduction or discontinuation of ixabepilone treatment in patients due to side effects did not affect OS and progression-free survival with ixabepilone statistically significantly. Ixabepilone treatment has side effects, similar to all other treatments used in metastatic breast cancer, however, these side effects are manageable. Additionally, since ixabepilone treatment is preferred in patients who have previously received many different chemotherapeutics and experienced cumulative toxicity, the side effects of ixabepilone may seem to be greater than they are. In our study, we showed that ixabepilone treatment has a statistically significant positive effect on survival if preferred in earlier metastatic lines. As similar studies increase in centers where ixabepilone treatment is generally given in advanced metastatic lines, treatment approaches may change in the coming years.

Background: Hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer frequently involves liver metastases, which are linked to poor outcomes. The optimal first-line treatment strategy in this subgroup remains unclear. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated 121 patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer and liver metastasis who had not received prior systemic chemotherapy or cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors (e.g., palbociclib, ribociclib). Patients were classified based on their initial treatment during the liver metastatic phase (CDK4/6 inhibitors or chemotherapy). Clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes were assessed. Cox regression analysis identified independent prognostic factors. Results: The median age was 53 years; 62% were postmenopausal. Chemotherapy was administered to 36.4%, and CDK4/6 inhibitors to 63.6% of patients. Most cases (59.5%) were recurrent disease. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except for the use of local liver-directed therapies. Progression-free survival favored CDK4/6 inhibitors (10.9 vs. 4.8 months; p < 0.01), while overall survival favored chemotherapy (42.2 vs. 25.9 months; p = 0.042). In multivariate analysis, initial treatment modality, local liver-directed therapy, hormonal status, and the size of the largest liver lesion were independent predictors of survival. Conclusions: In patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer and liver metastasis, first-line chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival compared to CDK4/6 inhibitors. Local liver-directed therapies contributed to longer survival, while larger liver lesions and endocrine-resistant disease correlated with worse outcomes. These findings support considering chemotherapy as first-line treatment in selected patients with aggressive liver metastatic disease.