Background: Lymphedema is a common complication of axillary dissection for breast cancer. We investigated whether manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) could prevent or manage limb edema in women after breast-cancer surgery. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of MLD in the prevention and treatment of breast-cancer-related lymphedema. The PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases were searched for articles on MLD published before December 2012, with no language restrictions. The primary outcome for prevention was the incidence of postoperative lymphedema. The outcome for management of lymphedema was a reduction in edema volume. Results: In total, 10 RCTs with 566 patients were identified. Two studies evaluating the preventive outcome of MLD found no significant difference in the incidence of lymphedema between the MLD and standard treatment groups, with a risk ratio of 0.63 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.14 to 2.82. Seven studies assessed the reduction in arm volume, and found no significant difference between the MLD and standard treatment groups, with a weighted mean difference of 75.12 (95% CI, −9.34 to 159.58). Conclusions: The current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of MLD in preventing or treating lymphedema. However, clinical and statistical inconsistencies between the various studies confounded our evaluation of the effect of MLD on breast-cancer-related lymphedema.

Endoscopy-assisted breast surgery (EABS) performed through minimal axillary and/or periareolar incisions is a possible alternative to open surgery for certain patients with breast cancer. In this study, we report the early results of an EABS program in Taiwan. The medical records of patients who underwent EABS for breast cancer during the period May 2009 to December 2014 were collected from the Taiwan Endoscopic Breast Surgery Cooperative Group database. Data on clinicopathologic characteristics, type of surgery, method of breast reconstruction, complications and recurrence were analyzed to determine the effectiveness and oncologic safety of EABS in Taiwan. A total of 315 EABS procedures were performed in 292 patients with breast cancer, including 23 (7.8%) patients with bilateral disease. The number of breast cancer patients who underwent EABS increased initially from 2009 to 2012 and then stabilized during the period 2012–2014. The most commonly performed EABS was endoscopy-assisted total mastectomy (EATM) (85.4%) followed by endoscopy-assisted partial mastectomy (EAPM) (14.6%). Approximately 74% of the EATM procedures involved breast reconstruction, with the most common types of reconstruction being implant insertion and autologous pedicled TRAM flap surgery. During the six-year study period, there was an increasing trend in the performance of EABS for the management of breast cancer when total mastectomy was indicated. The positive surgical margin rate was 1.9%. Overall, the rate of complications associated with EABS was 15.2% and all were minor and wound-related. During a median follow-up of 26.8 (3.3–68.6) months, there were 3 (1%) cases of local recurrence, 1 (0.3%) case of distant metastasis and 1 (0.3%) death. The preliminary results from the EABS program in Taiwan show that EABS is a safe procedure and results in acceptable cosmetic outcome. These findings could help to promote this under-used surgical technique in the field of breast cancer.

Objective: To compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of minimal access and conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM). The secondary outcomes investigated included medical costs and oncological safety. Background: Minimal-access NSM has been increasingly applied in the treatment of patients with breast cancer. However, prospective multicenter trials comparing robotic-assisted NSM (R-NSM) versus C-NSM or endoscopic-assisted NSM (E-NSM) are lacking. Methods: A prospectively designed 3-arm multicenter, nonrandomized trial (NCT04037852) was conducted from October 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021, to compare R-NSM with C-NSM or E-NSM. Results: A total of 73 R-NSM, 74 C-NSM, and 84 E-NSM procedures were enrolled. The median wound length and operation time of C-NSM was (9 cm, 175 minutes), (4 cm, and 195 minutes) in R-NSM, and (4 cm and 222 minutes) in E-NSM. Complications were comparable among the groups. Better wound healing was observed in the minimal-access NSM group. The R-NSM procedure was 4000 and 2600 United States Dollars more expensive than C-NSM and E-NSM, respectively. Wound/scar and postoperative acute pain evaluation favored the use of minimal access NSM over C-NSM. Quality of life in terms of chronic breast/chest pain, mobility, and range of motion of the upper extremity showed no significant differences. The preliminary oncologic results showed no differences among the 3 groups. Conclusions: R-NSM or E-NSM is a safe alternative if compared with C-NSM in terms of perioperative morbidities, especially with better wound healing. The advantage of minimal access groups was higher wound-related satisfaction. Higher costs remain one of the major limiting factors in the widespread adoption of R-NSM.

Lung and breast cancer are the leading causes of mortality in women worldwide. The discovery of molecular alterations that underlie these two cancers and corresponding drugs has contributed to precision medicine. We found that CCND2 is a common target in lung and breast cancer. Hypermethylation of the CCND2 gene was reported previously; however, no comprehensive study has investigated the clinical significance of CCND2 alterations and its applications and drug discovery. Genome-wide methylation and quantitative methylation-specific real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) showed CCND2 promoter hypermethylation in Taiwanese breast cancer patients. As compared with paired normal tissues and healthy individuals, CCND2 promoter hypermethylation was detected in 40.9% of breast tumors and 44.4% of plasma circulating cell-free DNA of patients. The western cohort of The Cancer Genome Atlas also demonstrated CCND2 promoter hypermethylation in female lung cancer, lung adenocarcinoma, and breast cancer patients and that CCND2 promoter hypermethylation is an independent poor prognostic factor. The cell model assay indicated that CCND2 expression inhibited cancer cell growth and migration ability. The demethylating agent antroquinonol D upregulated CCND2 expression, caused cell cycle arrest, and inhibited cancer cell growth and migration ability. In conclusion, hypermethylation of CCND2 is a potential diagnostic, prognostic marker and drug target, and it is induced by antroquinonol D.