The diagnosed of methastatic breast cancer patients retrospective evaluation of clinicopathologic features and investigation of relationship with long survival

Objective: Breast cancer is the most common cancer of the women Prognostic and predictive factors are important parameters that affect the progression of breast cancer. Especially in recent years thanks to improvements in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer is 3-4 years until acquired prolonged median survival times were too few patients over 10 years of survival. Metastatic patients with clinical and pathological factors, can affect the course of disease between patients and leads to the appearance of different survival rates. It is observed that these differences at the molecular and clinical level. In this work we investigated metastatic breast cancer, clinical, tumor, metastatic, treatment and hematologic features that may be associated with longer survival. Materials and methods: In this study, 188 patients who admitted to Karadeniz Technical University Medicine Faculty Oncology clinic and in patient at Oncology service and had diagnosed with metastatic breast in between 1995 and 2014. Age, gender, family history, place of residence, family size, any presence of cancer in the family, other cancer presence, age at menarche, age at menopause, marital status, number of children, alcohol, smoking, doctor presence in the family, a family nurse presence, all histological the type, grade, ER (estrogen receptor), PR (progesterone receptor), HER2 (c-erb2), all sizes, fever, night sweats, weight loss, comorbid conditions, performance status, BMI (body mass index), NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) use, bisphosphonate use, Ca, LDH, ALP, glucose level, whether the operation history, axillary lymph node positivity, liver or whether lung metastasis, if there is metastasis if this metastasis solitary oligo metastases, as to which of metastases multiple, soft tissue, whether brain or bone metastases and has been performed metastezectomy, which received neoadjuvant therapy, which is neoadjuvant therapy receives and takes several cycles of adjuvant therapy, take the take, received what many treatments cure, the receiving systemic chemotherapy, whether or not receive hormonal therapy, whether or not received targeted therapy, whether or not radiotherapy, eosinophil count, basophils count, lymphocyte count, hemoglobin, platelet count, neutrophil count, neutrophil/ lymphocyte ratio and platelet/lymphocyte ratio is viewed and evaluated overall survival of all patients. Later in the multivariate analysis, significant factors (Cox regression analysis) was performed. Findings: 84 of the 188 patients in the study (45%) had ex, 104 (55%) were alive. Patients, 167 of (88%) were achieved evidence that receiving or not neoadjuvant therapy, 41 (24%) received neoadjuvant therapy, 126 (76%) received neoadjuvant therapy had not, those who receive treatment free survival was significantly longer (p = 0.020). 68 (89%) were achieved data on whether or not the patient's treatment adjuvant, 165 (98%) received adjuvant therapy, 3 (2%) had received was determined to prolong the survival of adjuvant therapy (p = 0.022). In 67 patients (36%) gained the knowledge that there is sweating at night. In 19 patients (28%) of 48 as night sweats (72%) were determined to have night sweats, survival in patients with night sweats had a significantly decreased (p = 0.012) . In 69 patients (36%) gained knowledge as to whether weight loss ,of these 15 (21%) is not weight loss, 54 (78%) was found to be weight loss, was shorter survival time of the weight loss (p = 0.025). In 89 patients in the evaluation of the performance status of patient was reached, patient of 38 (42%) performance status of 0, 19 (23%) of 1, 8 (9%) ps 2, 12 (13%) pS 3 and 12 (13%) were evaluated pS 4.Having bad performance status of patients had increased mortality of patients with poor survival rate was decreased (p = 0.001). 147 of (78%) patients were known serum LDH levels, these 55 (37%) LDH levels are low, and 92 (63%) LDH showed levels as high, was considered inversely with survival (p = 0.000). Eosinophil, lymphocytes, basophils count and hemoglobin levels in patients with low it was found that survival was significantly shorter (p = 0.021, p = 0.04, p = 0.009, p = 0.04). Platelets, NLO, in patients with high levels PLO was determined that survival means so shorter (p = 0.03, p = 0.00, p = 0.039). Age, sex, place of residence, family size, any presence of cancer in the family, other cancer presence, age at menarche, age at menopause, marital status, number of children, alcohol, smoking, doctor presence in the family, a family nurse presence, all histological type, grade ER (estrogen receptor), PR (progesterone receptor), HER2 (c-erb2), all sizes, fever, comorbid diseases, BMI (body mass index), NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) use, bisphosphonate use, Ca, ALP, glucose level, whether the operation history, positive axillary lymph nodes, liver or lung metastases whether, if there is metastasis if this metastasis, solitary, oligo metastases, multiple metastasis from that which is the soft tissue, whether brain or bone metastases and has been performed metastezectomy, which they received neoadjuvant therapy and received several treatments, received what many treatments cure, which received systemic chemotherapy, which received hormonal treatment, which received targeted therapy, radiotherapy evaluated in terms of survival analysis is received but were not statistically significant. Results: Patients had been diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer; no night sweats, no weight loss, performance status with low serum LDH levels at the lower, who received adjuvant therapy, the number of eosinophils, basophils, with a high lymphocyte count and hemoglobin levels, not high platelet count, NLO and the PLO value of the survival of patients which were low was found to be better. This was seen as consistent with the literature. Key Words: metastatic breast cancer, prognostic factors,