Background As the available information about breast cancer is growing every day, the decision-making process for the therapy is getting more complex. ChatGPT as a transformer-based language model possesses the ability to write scientific articles and pass medical exams. But is it able to support the multidisciplinary tumor board (MDT) in the planning of the therapy of patients with breast cancer? Material and Methods We performed a pilot study on 10 consecutive cases of breast cancer patients discussed in MDT at our department in January 2023. Included were patients with a primary diagnosis of early breast cancer. The recommendation of MDT was compared with the recommendation of the ChatGPT for particular patients and the clinical score of the agreement was calculated. Results Results showed that ChatGPT provided mostly general answers regarding chemotherapy, breast surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and antibody therapy. It was able to identify risk factors for hereditary breast cancer and point out the elderly patient indicated for chemotherapy to evaluate the cost/benefit effect. ChatGPT wrongly identified the patient with Her2 1 + and 2 + (FISH negative) as in need of therapy with an antibody and called endocrine therapy “hormonal treatment”. Conclusions Support of artificial intelligence by finding individualized and personalized therapy for our patients in the time of rapidly expanding amount of information is looking for the ways in the clinical routine. ChatGPT has the potential to find its spot in clinical medicine, but the current version is not able to provide specific recommendations for the therapy of patients with primary breast cancer.

Background Current research in breast cancer focuses on individualization of local and systemic therapies with adequate escalation or de-escalation strategies. As a result, about two-thirds of breast cancer patients can be cured, but up to one-third eventually develop metastatic disease, which is considered incurable with currently available treatment options. This underscores the importance to develop a metastatic recurrence score to escalate or de-escalate treatment strategies. Patients and methods Data from 10,499 patients were available from 17 clinical cancer registries (BRENDA-project [1]. In total, 8566 were used to develop the BRENDA-Index. This index was calculated from the regression coefficients of a Cox regression model for metastasis-free survival (MFS). Based on this index, patients were categorized into very high, high, intermediate, low, and very low risk groups forming the BRENDA-Score. Bootstrapping was used for internal validation and an independent dataset of 1883 patients for external validation. The predictive accuracy was checked by Harrell’s c-index. In addition, the BRENDA-Score was analyzed as a marker for overall survival (OS) and compared to the Nottingham prognostic score (NPS). Results: Intrinsic subtypes, tumour size, grading, and nodal status were identified as statistically significant prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis. The five prognostic groups of the BRENDA-Score showed highly significant (p < 0.001) differences regarding MFS:low risk: hazard ratio (HR) = 2.4, 95%CI (1.7–3.3); intermediate risk: HR = 5.0, 95%CI.(3.6–6.9); high risk: HR = 10.3, 95%CI (7.4–14.3) and very high risk: HR = 18.1, 95%CI (13.2–24.9). The external validation showed congruent results. A multivariate Cox regression model for OS with BRENDA-Score and NPS as covariates showed that of these two scores only the BRENDA-Score is significant (BRENDA-Score p < 0.001; NPS p = 0.447). Therefore, the BRENDA-Score is also a good prognostic marker for OS. Conclusion: The BRENDA-Score is an internally and externally validated robust predictive tool for metastatic recurrence in breast cancer patients. It is based on routine parameters easily accessible in daily clinical care. In addition, the BRENDA-Score is a good prognostic marker for overall survival. Highlights: The BRENDA-Score is a highly significant predictive tool for metastatic recurrence of breast cancer patients. The BRENDA-Score is stable for at least the first five years after primary diagnosis, i.e., the sensitivities and specificities of this predicting system is rather similar to the NPI with AUCs between 0.76 and 0.81 the BRENDA-Score is a good prognostic marker for overall survival.

Purpose Due to improved therapy, early diagnosis, and growing incidence rates, the number of long-term breast cancer survivors is increasing. Survivors can still be affected by aftercare, resulting in reduced quality of life (QoL). Thus, in this study, we investigated possible predictors of decreased physical and social functioning in breast cancer survivors. Methods In a German multicenter prospective study, we enrolled 759 female patients with breast cancer before surgery (t1), and contacted them again 5 years after surgery (t4). Data on QoL were assessed at t4 using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its breast cancer module EORTC QLQ-BR23. Predictors of decreased physical and social functioning were analyzed using logistic regression with odds ratios as effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals. Thresholds for the clinical importance of detrimental effects on QoL were defined according to Giesinger. Results Questionnaires from 759 patients were retrieved at t1. Of these, 456 participated in the study at t4. Poor QoL 5 years after diagnosis was reported by 20%–50% of the participants. Age, mastectomy, chemotherapy, education, employment, cohabitation, psychiatric comorbidities at t1, anxiety, depression, and intensity of physical activity emerged as predictors of decreased physical and social functioning 5 years after diagnosis. Conclusion Relief of symptoms and improvement in the QoL should be priorities in aftercare. Detecting patients with a decreased QoL is a rising challenge. Healthcare providers should take special care of patients aged 50–59 years, patients with psychiatric comorbidities and depression, and patients who have undergone mastectomy.

Background This study examined the relationship between social service counseling (SSC) and financial and role functioning problems in primary breast cancer (BC) patients over a 5-year observation period. Methods In the multicenter prospective study, patients were approached before surgery (t1), before initiation of adjuvant treatment (t2), after therapy completion (t3), and 5 years after surgery (t4). We examined the proportion of BC survivors who had financial and role functioning problems and the proportion who were employed at t4. We examined how frequently patients were informed about, offered, or used SSC, and we used multivariate logistic regression analyses to examine the relationship between this and financial and role functioning problem prevalence. Results Of the 456 BC survivors, 33% had financial problems and 22% reported role functioning problems at t4. There was no evidence that women with increased financial problems were informed about SSC more often than those without (OR 1.1, p = 0.84) or that they used SSC more often (OR 1.3, p = 0.25). However, women with role functioning problems were informed about SSC significantly more often (OR 1.7, p = 0.02) and attended counseling significantly more often (OR 1.6, p = 0.03). Among participants aged < 65 years at t4 (n = 255), 70% were employed. Patients who had received SSC were more likely to be employed at t4 than patients who did not (OR 1.9, p = 0.04). Conclusion These findings underline the importance of SSC for BC patients with role functioning issues. They indicate that individuals who use SSC are more likely to be employed later on than individuals who do not.