Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prostata- und Mammakarzinom: Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede

Prostate and breast cancer: similarities and differences

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Die Urologie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Prostata- und Mammakarzinome zählen mit stetig steigenden Inzidenzen zu den häufigsten Neuerkrankungen bei Männern und Frauen. Neben den teilweise bedeutenden gesundheitlichen Folgen führen beide Erkrankungen u. a. auch durch ihren Einfluss auf Vitalität und Sexualität zu einer deutlich eingeschränkten Lebensqualität der Betroffenen. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, durch eine gezielte Betrachtung von Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschieden beider Erkrankungen wissenschaftliche Ansätze und Forschungsschwerpunkte zu identifizieren, die perspektivisch zu Synergien in beiden Fachdisziplinen führen können. Dazu wurden sowohl klinisch relevante Aspekte wie Risikofaktoren und Behandlungsoptionen, wie auch wissenschaftliche Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in den Bereichen der Grundlagenforschung und Modellierung beider Tumorentitäten analysiert. Durch diese Vorgehensweise konnten wir zeigen, dass durch die vergleichbare Biologie beider Erkrankungen und die zugrunde liegenden Mechanismen durchaus wissenschaftliche Synergien zu einer zielgerichteten Forschung führen können. Auch klinische Gemeinsamkeiten zeigen auf, dass eine enge Zusammenarbeit beider Fachdisziplinen zu einer verbesserten Behandlung unserer Patientinnen und Patienten führen könnte. Evidenzlücken bei beiden Erkrankungen, wie beispielsweise die Metastasierungsmechanismen beider Tumorentitäten oder kontrovers diskutierte Aspekte wie Risikofaktoren zeigen deutlich, dass ein detaillierteres Verständnis beider Erkrankungen notwendig ist, um zukünftig weitere Erfolge in der Behandlung unserer Patientinnen und Patienten sicherstellen zu können.

Abstract

Prostate and breast carcinomas are amongst the most common new diseases in men and women, with steadily rising incidences. In addition to the significant health consequences, both diseases also lead to a significantly reduced quality of life due to their influence on sexual function. The aim of this work is to identify scientific approaches and research priorities that in the future might lead to synergies in both disciplines by specifically considering the similarities and differences between the two diseases. For this purpose, clinically relevant aspects such as risk factors, treatment options, as well as scientific similarities and differences that offer direct joint research approaches in the areas of cultivation and modeling of both tumor entities were analyzed. Through this approach, we were able to demonstrate that due to the comparable biology of the two diseases and the underlying mechanisms, scientific synergies may certainly lead to targeted research. Clinical similarities also indicate that close collaboration between the two disciplines could lead to improved treatment of our patients. Evidence deficiencies in both diseases (e.g. the metastasis mechanisms of both tumor entities) and controversially discussed aspects such as risk factors clearly show that further scientific projects for a more detailed understanding of both diseases are necessary to ensure future success in the treatment of our patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Robert Koch-Institut (2021) Krebs in Deutschland für 2017/2018. https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Krebs_in_Deutschland/krebs_in_deutschland_node.html. Zugegriffen: 11. Juli 2022

  2. Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM, Pinsky PF, Moss SM, Qiu S, de Carvalho TM, Hugosson J, Berg CD, Auvinen A, Andriole GL, Roobol MJ, Crawford ED, Nelen V, Kwiatkowski M, Zappa M, Luján M, Villers A, Feuer EJ, de Koning HJ, Mariotto AB, Etzioni R (2017) Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med 167(7):449–455. https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2586

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Zappa M, Nelen V, Kwiatkowski M, Lujan M, Määttänen L, Lilja H, Denis LJ, Recker F, Paez A, Bangma CH, Carlsson S, Puliti D, Villers A, Rebillard X, Hakama M, Stenman UH, Kujala P, Taari K, Aus G, Huber A, van der Kwast TH, van Schaik RH, de Koning HJ, Moss SM, Auvinen A, ERSPC Investigators (2014) Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 384(9959):2027–2035. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Health Council of the Netherlands (2014) Population screening for breast cancer: expectations and developments

    Google Scholar 

  5. Johns LE, Houlston RS (2003) A systematic review and meta-analysis of familial prostate cancer risk. BJU Int 91(9):789–794. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04232.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (2021) S3-Leitlinie Prostatakarzinom. https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/043-022OLl_S3_Prostatakarzinom_2021-10.pdf. Zugegriffen: 11. Juli 2022

  7. Bonovas S, Filioussi K, Tsantes A (2004) Diabetes mellitus and risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Diabetologia 47(6):1071–1078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-004-1415-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. MacInnis RJ, English DR (2006) Body size and composition and prostate cancer risk: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Cancer Causes Control 17(8):989–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-006-0049-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. García-Estévez L, Cortés J, Pérez S, Calvo I, Gallegos I, Moreno-Bueno G (2021) Obesity and breast cancer: a paradoxical and controversial relationship influenced by menopausal status. Front Oncol 13(11):705911. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.705911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (2021) Interdisziplinäre S3-Leitlinie für die Früherkennung, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms. https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/032-045OLl_S3_Mammakarzinom_2021-07.pdf. Zugegriffen: 11. Juli 2022

  11. Grignon DJ (2004) Unusual subtypes of prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 17(3):316–327. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.3800052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Huang H, Chen F (2012) Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma exhibits more advanced histopathological features than acinar adenocarcinoma. N. J Med Sci 5:208–211

    Google Scholar 

  13. Seipel AH, Delahunt B, Samaratunga H, Egevad L (2016) Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: histogenesis, biology and clinicopathological features. Pathology 48(5):398–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2016.04.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vinay K, Abul KA, Jon CA, Nelson F (2010) Robbins and Cotran pathologic basis of disease, 8. Aufl. Elsevier, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eheman CR, Shaw KM, Ryerson AB, Miller JW, Ajani UA, White MC (2009) The changing incidence of in situ and invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas: United States, 1999–2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18(6):1763–1769. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-1082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ariazi EA, Clark GM, Mertz JE (2002) Estrogen-related receptor alpha and estrogen-related receptor gamma associate with unfavorable and favorable biomarkers, respectively, in human breast cancer. Cancer Res 62(22):6510–6518

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Suzuki T, Miki Y, Moriya T, Shimada N, Ishida T, Hirakawa H, Ohuchi N, Sasano H (2004) Estrogen-related receptor alpha in human breast carcinoma as a potent prognostic factor. Cancer Res 64(13):4670–4676. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fujimura T, Takahashi S, Urano T, Kumagai J, Ogushi T, Horie-Inoue K, Ouchi Y, Kitamura T, Muramatsu M, Inoue S (2007) Increased expression of estrogen-related receptor alpha (ERRalpha) is a negative prognostic predictor in human prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 120(11):2325–2330. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22363

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Petrucelli N, Daly MB, Feldman GL (2010) Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer due to mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Genet Med 12(5):245–259. https://doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181d38f2f

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Eeles R, Olama A, Benlloch S et al (2013) Identification of 23 new prostate cancer susceptibility loci using the iCOGS custom genotyping array. Nat Genet 45:385–391. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2560

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Linxweiler J, Hajili T, Zeuschner P, Menger MD, Stöckle M, Junker K, Saar M (2022) Primary tumor resection decelerates disease progression in an orthotopic mouse model of metastatic prostate cancer. Cancers (Basel) 14(3):737. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14030737

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hajili T, Ohlmann CH, Linxweiler J, Niklas C, Janssen M, Siemer S, Stoeckle M, Saar M (2019) Radical prostatectomy in T4 prostate cancer after inductive androgen deprivation: results of a single-institution series with long-term follow-up. BJU Int 123(1):58–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Khan SA, Zhao F, Goldstein LJ, Cella D, Basik M, Golshan M, Julian TB, Pockaj BA, Lee CA, Razaq W, Sparano JA, Babiera GV, Dy IA, Jain S, Silverman P, Fisher CS, Tevaarwerk AJ, Wagner LI, Sledge GW (2022) Early local therapy for the primary site in de novo stage IV breast cancer: results of a randomized clinical trial (EA2108). J Clin Oncol 40(9):978–987. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.21.02006

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gandaglia G, Abdollah F, Schiffmann J, Trudeau V, Shariat SF, Kim SP, Perrotte P, Montorsi F, Briganti A, Trinh QD, Karakiewicz PI, Sun M (2014) Distribution of metastatic sites in patients with prostate cancer: a population-based analysis. Prostate 74(2):210–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.22742

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Peart O (2017) Metastatic breast cancer. Radiol Technol 88(5):519M–539M

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim H, Lee S, Byun SS, Hong SK (2021) Clinical outcomes and prognosis of metastatic prostate cancer patients ≤ 60-year-old. World J Urol 39(12):4319–4325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03785-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Paiss T, Herkommer K, Chab A, Häussler J, Vogel W, Gschwend JE, Hautmann RE (2002) Das familiäre Prostatakarzinom in Deutschland. Urologe A 41(1):38–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s120-002-8229-2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Carter BS, Beaty TH, Steinberg GD, Childs B, Walsh PC (1992) Mendelian inheritance of familial prostate cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89(8):3367–3371. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.89.8.3367

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Reddy D, Bedi N, Dudderidge T (2020) Focal therapy, time to join the multi-disciplinary team discussion? Transl Androl Urol 9(3):1526–1534. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.09.30

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Lostumbo L, Carbine NE, Wallace J (2010) Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10(11):CD2748. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002748.pub3 (Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018 4:CD002748)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fode M, Sønksen J (2014) Sexual function in elderly men receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Sex Med Rev 2(1):36–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/smrj.17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. White ID, Wilson J, Aslet P, Baxter AB, Birtle A, Challacombe B, Coe J, Grover L, Payne H, Russell S, Sangar V, Van As N, Kirby M (2015) Development of UK guidance on the management of erectile dysfunction resulting from radical radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Int J Clin Pract 69(1):106–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12512

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Gandhi C, Butler E, Pesek S, Kwait R, Edmonson D, Raker C, Clark MA, Stuckey A, Gass J (2019) Sexual dysfunction in breast cancer survivors: Is it surgical modality or adjuvant therapy? Am J Clin Oncol 42(6):500–506. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000000552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Deep G, Jain A, Kumar A, Agarwal C, Kim S, Leevy WM, Agarwal R (2020) Exosomes secreted by prostate cancer cells under hypoxia promote matrix metalloproteinases activity at pre-metastatic niches. Mol Carcinog 59(3):323–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/mc.23157

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pugh CW, Gleadle J, Maxwell PH (2001) Hypoxia and oxidative stress in breast cancer. Hypoxia signalling pathways. Breast Cancer Res 3(5):313–317. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr313

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. McKeown SR (2014) Defining normoxia, physoxia and hypoxia in tumours-implications for treatment response. Br J Radiol 87(1035):20130676. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20130676

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Huang M, Du H, Zhang L, Che H, Liang C (2018) The association of HIF-1α expression with clinicopathological significance in prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Cancer Manag Res 10:2809–2816. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S161762

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ebright RY, Zachariah MA, Micalizzi DS, Wittner BS, Niederhoffer KL, Nieman LT, Chirn B, Wiley DF, Wesley B, Shaw B, Nieblas-Bedolla E, Atlas L, Szabolcs A, Iafrate AJ, Toner M, Ting DT, Brastianos PK, Haber DA, Maheswaran S (2020) HIF1A signaling selectively supports proliferation of breast cancer in the brain. Nat Commun 11(1):6311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20144-w

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Saar M, Körbel C, Linxweiler J, Jung V, Kamradt J, Hasenfus A, Stöckle M, Unteregger G, Menger MD (2015) Orthotopic tumorgrafts in nude mice: a new method to study human prostate cancer. Prostate 75(14):1526–1537. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Risbridger GP (2015) Prostate cancer: novel xenografts in mice—a new wave of preclinical models. Nat Rev Urol 12(10):540–541. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.198

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Liu X, Ye N, Liu S, Guan J, Deng Q, Zhang Z, Xiao C, Ding ZY, Zhang BX, Chen XP, Li Z, Yang X (2021) Hyperbaric oxygen boosts PD‑1 antibody delivery and T cell infiltration for augmented immune responses against solid tumors. Adv Sci (Weinh) 8(15):e2100233. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202100233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Xiang L, Semenza GL (2019) Hypoxia-inducible factors promote breast cancer stem cell specification and maintenance in response to hypoxia or cytotoxic chemotherapy. Adv Cancer Res 141:175–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acr.2018.11.001

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Arndt V, Dahm S, Kraywinkel K (2021) Krebsprävalenz in Deutschland 2017. Onkologe 27:717–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-021-00988-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Deutschland

    Jennifer Kranz, Marco Hoffmann &  Matthias Saar

  2. Universitätsklinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale), Halle (Saale), Deutschland

    Jennifer Kranz

  3. Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Deutschland

    Katja Krauß & Elmar Stickeler

Authors
  1. Jennifer Kranz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katja Krauß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elmar Stickeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matthias Saar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Saar.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

J. Kranz, M. Hoffmann, K. Krauß, E. Stickeler und M. Saar geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autor/-innen keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kranz, J., Hoffmann, M., Krauß, K. et al. Prostata- und Mammakarzinom: Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede. Urologie 61, 1068–1075 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-022-01913-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-022-01913-5

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation