Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Locally advanced breast cancer in Saudi Arabia: high frequency of stage III in a young population

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), breast cancer constitutes 18% of all cancers in Saudi women. Whilst locally advanced breast cancer disease is unusual in Western countries, it constitutes more than 40% of all non-metastatic breast cancer in KSA. The relative frequency of locally advanced disease among our breast cancer population and the lack of a uniform consensus in the literature about its optimal management have prompted this retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with Stage III breast cancer patients seen at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center between 1981 and 1991. In all, 315 patients were identified. Their median age ±SD was 46±11.6 years which is distinctly different from the 60–65 years median age in industrial Western nations. Most patients were younger than 50 years (64%) and premenopausal (62%). Patients were approximately equally divided between Stage III A and Stage III B Patients received multimodality treatment, including surgery., adjuvant chemotherapy, tamoxifen, and adjuvant radiotherapy. Sixty-one patients were excluded from survival analysis as they were considered lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 254 patients, 73 (29%) were alive and disease free, and 18 patients (7%) were alive but, with evidence of the disease. The remaining 163 (64%) had died from breast cancer or its related complications. Their median overall survival (OS) was 54 months, (95%, Cl, 27 to 121 months) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 28.8 months (95% Cl, 14.2 to 113 months). Cox proportional hazard, model identified Stage III B and the number of positive axillary lymph nodes as poor predictors of OS and PFS. Radiotherapy was the only adjuvant modality that affected survival favourably. The prognosis of patients with Stage III disease remains poor despite the use of a multimodality approach. The overall young age of our patients may have contributed to the poor outcome. Moreover, the adverse effect of Stage III B disease (as compared with Stage III A) and axillary nodal status was evident. Whilst the favourable effect of radiotherapy on survival was demonstrated, the lack of independent efficacy of other modalities (adjuvant chemotherapy and tamoxifen) or the apparent deleterious effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be addressed with discretion in such retrospective analysis. Optimal management of patients with locally advanced breast cancer disease should be appraised in well designed, prospective, randomised studies.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parker SL, Tong T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics 1996.Ca-A Cancer J Clin 1996;46: 5–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Parkin DMet al. (eds).Cancer Incidence in Five Contiments, vol. 6. IARC Scientific Publication no. 120. IARC: Lyon, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mahboubi E. Epidemiology of cancer in Saudi Arabia, 1975–1985.Ann Saudi Med 1987; 7: 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ezzat Aet al. An overview of breast cancer.Ann Saudi Med 1997;17: 10–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Tamimi Tet al. Cancer in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia: a population-based study (1987–1988).Ann Saudi Med 1997;17(1): 53–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Omer YT, Gjorgov AN, Ismail AS, Tabik MA. Cancer trends in Kuwait (1974–1982). In: Khogali M, Omer YT, Gjorgov A, Ismail AS (eds).Cancer Prevention in Developing Countries. Pergamon: London, 1986, pp 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Henderson IC. Principles in the management of metastatic disease. In: Harris AL Jr, Henderson IC, Hellman Set al (eds).Breast Diseases. Lippincott: Philadelphia, PA, 1991, 547–665.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ibrahim EMet al. Women's knowledge about and attitude toward breast cancer in a developing country: implications for program interventions. Results based on interviewing 500 women in Saudi Arabia.J Cancer Edu 1991;6(2): 73–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Chlebowski RT, Lillington LM. A decade of breast cancer clinical investigation: results as reported in the program/proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.J Clin Oncol 1994;12: 1789–1795.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Harmanek P, Sobin LH. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. UICC International Union Against Cancer. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1987.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. American Joint Committee on Cancer. Manual for Staging of Cancer, 4th edn. Lippincott: Philadelphia, 1992, 149–154.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Haagensen CD, Stout AP. Carcinoma of the breast: Criteria of inoperability.Ann Surg 1943;118: 859–870.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. World Health Organization. WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment, no. 48. WHO: Switzerland, 1979, pp 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations.J Amer Statist Assn 1958;53: 457–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Brookmeyer R, Crowley J. A confidence interval for the median survival time.Biometrics 1982;38: 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mantel N. Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration.Cancer Chemother Rep 1966;50: 163–170.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cox DR, Oakes D. Regression models and life tables (with discussion).J Roy Statist Soc 1972;B34: 187–220.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL.The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. Wiley: New York, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kay R. Proportional hazard regression models and the analysis of censored survival data.Appl Statist 1977;26: 227–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dixon WJ, Brown MB, Engleman L, Jennrich RI.BMDP Statistical Software Manual. University of California Press: Berkeley, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hortobagyi GN. Comprehensive management of locally advanced breast cancer. 1990;54: 345–349.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Weil Met al. Long-term results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer: is tumor response a useful prognostic factor? Fourth International Congress on Anti-cancer Chemotherapy. 2–5 February 1993, Paris, p. 60.

  23. Borrego M, Rebelo I. Locally advanced carcinoma of the breast initially treated with radiotherapy.Acta Med Port 1995;8(6): 341–345.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Saarto T, Blomqvist C, Grohen P, Rissanen P, Elomaa I. The prognosis of stage III breast cancer treated with postoperative radiotherapy and adriamycin-based chemotherapy with an without tamoxifen. Eight year follow-up results of a randomized trial.Eur J Surg Oncol 1995;21: 146–150.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fletcher G, Montague E. Carcinoma of the breast; criteria of operability.Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1965;93: 573–584.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sheldon Tet al. Primary radiation for locally advanced breast cancer.Cancer 1987;60: 1219–1225.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vora Net al. Local regional radiation therapy in patients with high-risk primary breast cancer receiving high-dose chemotherapy followed by stem cell rescue. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1994,13: A220.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pierce L, Adler D, Helvie M, Lichter A, Merajver S. The use of mammography in breast preservation in locally advanced breast cancer.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;34(3): 571–577.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hoekman Ket al. Primary high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic growth factors followed by surgery and radiotherapy in Stage III breast carcinoma: a phase II study in 15 patients.Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1994;138(21): 1069–1073.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Brufman Get al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5FU) for clinical Stage III breast cancer. Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Anti-cancer Chemotherapy, 2–5 February, 1993, Paris, p 58.

  31. Alvarez Aet al. Multimodality treatment in Stage III breast cancer: our experience Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1993;12: A131.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Torrecillas Let al. Analysis of clinicalvs pathological response in locally advanced breast cancer after FAC (5-FU, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide) or FEC (5-FU, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide) neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1993;12: A142.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ragaz Jet al. Impact of the residual disease in Stage III breast cancer patients treated with preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and mastectomy. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American, Society for Clinical Oncology 1994;13: A88.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hortobagyi GN. Multidisciplinary management of advanced primary and metastatic breast cancer.Cancer 1994;74 (Suppt): 416–423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rivkin SEet al. Adjuvant CMFVP versus melphalan for operable breast cancer with positive axillary nodes: 10-year results of a Southwest Oncology Group study.J Clin Oncol 1989;7: 1229–1238.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Grohn P, Heinonen E, Klefstrom P, Tarkkanen J. Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in stage III breast cancer.Cancer 1984;54: 670–674.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Masood S. Prediction of recurrence for advanced breast cancer. Traditional and contemporary pathologic and molecular markers.Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1995;4(4): 601–632.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gardin Get al. Locally advanced non-metastatic breast cancer: analysis of prognostic factors in 125 patients homogeneously treated with a combined modality approach.Eur J Cancer 1995;31A(9): 1428–1433.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Saif Al-Sobhi

  2. Department of Oncology (MBC 64), King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, PO Box 3354, 11211, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Adnan A Ezzat (Deputy Chairman), Ezzeldin M Ibrahim, Madras A Raja, Assem Rostom & Robert K Stuart

Authors
  1. Adnan A Ezzat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ezzeldin M Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Madras A Raja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saif Al-Sobhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Assem Rostom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Robert K Stuart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adnan A Ezzat.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ezzat, A.A., Ibrahim, E.M., Raja, M.A. et al. Locally advanced breast cancer in Saudi Arabia: high frequency of stage III in a young population. Med Oncol 16, 95–103 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02785842

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02785842

Keywords

Search

Navigation