Breast cancer (BC) is the leading cause of cancer death in Hispanic/Latino women nationwide. Hispanic women are more likely to be presented with advanced disease and adverse prognosis subtypes. The aim of this study is to describe the clinico‐ pathological characteristics and disparities in breast cancer in this group at two tertiary care University‐based medical centers. After IRB approval, Cancer registry was used to analyze the variables of 3441 patients with breast cancer diagnosed and treated consecutively at two large tertiary University based medical and cancer center database centers in El Paso, TX and Loma Linda, CA between 2005 and 2015. Association between race/ethnicity and cancer type, stage, hormone receptor status and treatment option were investigated. Overall 45.5% of the patients were Hispanic (n: 1566) and those were more likely to be diagnosed at a younger age (57 years) similar to African Americans, more likely to have invasive ductal carcinoma type (82.7%) & triple negative disease (17.1%, 95%CI: 15% to 19%). 58.8% of Hispanics (95%CI: 56% to 61%) have hormone receptor (HR)+ & HER2− as opposed to 71% in non‐Hispanic White people. In addition, Hispanic individuals presented with advanced stages of BC (25.3%, 95% CI: 23% to 28%) similar to African American (25.4%), and had a lower proportion of lumpectomy (50%) similar to African American (50%). When compared to African American patients, Hispanic patients had a higher prevalence of triple negative BC (17.11% in Hispanics Versus 13.86% in African American). Conclusion: Hispanics had significantly higher relative risk of advanced stages at presentation (Relative Risk Ratio (RRR) = 2.05, P < 0.001), triple negative tumors (RRR = 2.64, P < 0.0001), HER2 + /HR ‐ disease (RRR = 1.77, P < 0.0001), and less HR+ /HER2− BC (RRR = 0.69, P < 0.0001). Hispanics and African Americans are diagnosed with breast cancer at a younger age, have a higher prevalence of Triple negative breast cancer, and are diagnosed at more advanced stages of disease. Increasing awareness and targeting minority populations for health promotion interventions, screening and early detection continue to be of paramount importance to reduce the burden of health disparities.

Sarcomas are rare tumors with limited treatment options. Although chemotherapy is standard for certain subtypes, overall survival has not improved in several decades. Bupivacaine has been shown to induce apoptosis and prevent cell growth in multiple different types of malignancies but has not been studied in sarcoma. The current study evaluated the effects of bupivacaine on multiple patient‑derived sarcoma cells and a commercial sarcoma cell line. Multiple patient‑derived sarcoma cell subtypes and a commercial synovial cell sarcoma cell line were exposed to bupivacaine for different durations and at different concentrations. The patient‑derived cells included a high‑grade conventional osteosarcoma, a high‑grade undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma of bone, and a high‑grade synovial sarcoma. Flow cytometry and an MTT assay were used to evaluate whether a treatment effect was observed. Treatment of all the subtypes of sarcomas in this study with bupivacaine demonstrated a time‑ and dose‑dependent increase in apoptosis and decrease in cell viability. A cell viability assay demonstrated that the IC₅₀ was between 0.04 and 0.05% and that the treatment effect occurred at clinically relevant doses in vitro. Bupivacaine was toxic to both the patient‑derived cells and the commercial cell line at doses commonly used in the clinical setting. These findings provide a foundation for further in vivo studies to evaluate whether these effects will translate to the clinical setting. Although further research is necessary, bupivacaine shows promise as not only an adjunct for pain management but as a treatment modality for sarcoma.

Background: Video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has become the recommended approach for treatment of resectable lung cancer. However, no large randomized clinical trial has been conducted formally comparing surgical resections completed by VATS to those done by open thoracotomy (OT) in low volume centers. The current study sought to assess differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), positive margins and postoperative length of stay (LOS) between VATS and OT lobectomies in our center. Method: A single institution retrospective chart review from May 2005 through May 2015 was conducted. All patients diagnosed with stage I through III lung cancer who underwent surgical resection were selected. Patient and tumor characteristics recorded included age at diagnosis, sex, tobacco use, tumor location (side and lobe), stage, size and receipt of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Chis-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare demographics, tumor characteristics and LOS. Multiple logistic and Cox regression analyses were used to compute relative risk (RR) for positive margins and mortality hazard ratios along with 95 percent confidence intervals (95%CI), respectively. Results: Of the 235 patients, 101 subjects had VATS while OT was performed in 134 patients. Age at diagnosis, sex, tobacco use, tumor location, and size were comparable for VATS and OT. No significant difference was observed in the relative risk of positive margins for VATS versus OT, RR = 0.56 (95%CI = 0.26, 1.05). However, VATS had shorter median LOS compared to OT (4 vs. 6 days, respectively), p = 0.002. A comparison of VATS versus OT showed no significant difference in the risk of recurrence, HR = 1.21 (95%CI = 0.74, 2.00), or death, HR = 1.34 (95%CI = 0.88, 2.06), in the intent-to-treat population. Similarly, no significant differences in recurrence or mortality risk were observed between VATS versus OT for analyses conducted separately for each cancer stage group or those limited to patients with negative margins. Conclusion: Our study indicates that compared to OT, VATS leads to shorter LOS while achieving comparable margins status, recurrence-free and overall survival regardless of tumor stage at diagnosis.