Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast is considered a rare entity, and for this reason there are no data from prospective clinical trials on its optimal management. Early stage tumors are usually treated with the same strategy used for the other types of invasive breast cancer. Anthracycline-and taxane-based regimens represent the most frequently administered chemotherapy in neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, as well as for metastatic disease, although combinations of platinum compounds and etoposide have been widely used, in particular for small-cell histology and tumors with a high proliferation index. For metastatic disease, a multimodality therapeutic strategy can be considered on an individual basis, with chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, radiation therapy, surgery, or a combination of the above. In the near future, a better knowledge of the biology of these tumors will hopefully provide new therapeutic targets for personalized treatment. In this review, we discuss the current evidence and the future perspectives on diagnosis and treatment of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast. The Oncologist 2016;21:28-32 Implications for Practice: Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast (NECB) is a distinct entity of breast cancer. Clinical features and morphology are not helpful to distinguish NECB from other subtypes of breast cancer; therefore, immunohistochemistry markers for neuroendocrine differentiation, mainly chromogranin and synaptophysin, should be routinely used to confirm the diagnosis, especially in cases of mucinous or solid papillary carcinoma in which the suspicion of NECB may be relevant. Adjuvant treatment should be offered according to the same recommendations given for the other types of invasive breast cancer. An accurate diagnosis of NECB is also important in the metastatic setting, in which a multimodality approach including specific therapies such as peptide receptor radionuclide therapy can be considered.

No abstract

No abstract

Ovarian cancer treatment strategy is mainly based on three pillars: cytoreductive surgery, platinum-based chemotherapy, and targeted therapies. The latter in the last decade has provided a remarkable improvement in progression free patients and, hopefully, in overall survival. In particular, poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors exploit BRCA 1/2 mutations and DNA damage response deficiencies, which are believed to concern up to 50% of high grade epithelial ovarian cancer cases. While these agents have an established role in ovarian cancer treatment strategy in BRCA mutated and homologous recombination deficient patients, an appropriate predictive molecular test to select patients is lacking in clinical practice. At the same time, the impressive results of immunotherapy in other malignancies, have opened the space for the introduction of immune-stimulatory drugs in ovarian cancer. Despite immune checkpoint inhibitors as a monotherapy bringing only modest efficacy when assessed in pretreated ovarian cancer patients, the combination with chemotherapy, anti-angiogenetics, PARP inhibitors, and radiotherapy is believed to warrant further investigation. We reviewed literature evidence on PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy in ovarian cancer treatment.