Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer, which develops from breast tissue. Usually the symptoms of breast cancer may include the following signs:
- a lump in the breast；
- a change in breast shape；
- dimpling of the skin；
- fluid coming from the nipple；
- a newly inverted nipple, or a red or scaly patch of skin.
In those with distant spread of the disease, there may happen such symptoms as:
- bone pain；
- swollen lymph nodes；
- shortness of breath；
- yellow skin.
Risk factors for the happening and further developing of breast cancer can be:
- being female(also there is such type of cancer as male breast cancer, but it happens not such common as female breast cancer)；
- obesity, lack of physical exercise, neglecting of the healthy mode of life and misuse of unhealthy food；
- drinking alcohol, drug misuse or suffering from other destroying habits;
- hormone replacement therapy during menopause；
- ionizing radiation；
- early age at first menstruation；
- having children late or not at all；
- older age;
- prior history of breast cancer, and family history, genetic reasons.
According to the numerous science reports , about 5–10% of cases of breast cancer are due to genes inherited from a person’s parents, including BRCA1 and BRCA2 among others. Breast cancer most commonly develops in cells from the lining of milk ducts and the lobules that supply the ducts with milk. Cancers developing from the ducts are known as ductal carcinomas, while those developing from lobules are known as lobular carcinomas.
According to my own knowledge, awareness, cognizance and wide experience, I agree with the science and being a healer I reckon that the breast cancer is really originated from the generation or family resourses, and I also according to the family situation decide how to heal the breast cancer.
In addition, there are more than 18 other sub-types of breast cancer, which ways to heal also similar to my regular way of breast cancer treatment. Some cancers, such as ductal carcinoma in situ, develop from pre-invasive lesions. The diagnosis of breast cancer is confirmed by taking a biopsy of the concerning lump. Once the diagnosis is made, further tests are done to determine if the cancer has spread beyond the breast and which treatments are most likely to be effective.
In the situation of cancer I usually support both traditional treatment and non traditional to be conducted together. This process I name as advanced breast cancer treatment.
The balance of benefits versus harms of breast cancer screening is controversial. A 2013 Cochrane review stated that it is unclear if mammographic screening does more good or harm. A 2009 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force found evidence of benefit in those 40 to 70 years of age, and the organization recommends screening every two years in women 50 to 74 years old. The medications tamoxifen or raloxifene may be used in an effort to prevent breast cancer in those who are at high risk of developing it. Surgical removal of both breasts is another preventative measure in some high risk women. In those who have been diagnosed with cancer, a number of treatments may be used, including surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and targeted therapy. Types of surgery vary from breast-conserving surgery to mastectomy. Breast reconstruction may take place at the time of surgery or at a later date. In those in whom the cancer has spread to other parts of the body, breast cancer treatments are mostly aimed at improving quality of life and comfort.
Outcomes for breast cancer vary depending on the cancer type, extent of disease, and person’s age. Survival rates in the developed world are high, with between 80% and 90% of those in England and the United States alive for at least 5 years. In developing countries survival rates are poorer. Worldwide, breast cancer is the leading type of cancer in women, accounting for 25% of all cases. In 2012 it resulted in 1.68 million new cases and 522,000 deaths. It is more common in developed countries and is more than 100 times more common in women than in men. I have suggested, invented and developed the new way of the breast cancer treatment , which contains both traditional and non traditional treatment. In this situation the success of the healing from the breast cancer can be achieved much more easier that in the situation when just the one way of breast cancer treatment is conducted. And as for me , my healing just has the positive diraction and positive results during the fixed period of time.
Research of the breast cancer
Treatments of breast cancer are being evaluated in trials. This includes individual drugs, combinations of drugs, and surgical and radiation techniques Investigations include new types of targeted therapy, cancer vaccines, oncolytic virotherapy, and immunotherapy.
The latest research is reported annually at scientific meetings such as that of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, and the St. Gallen Oncology Conference in St. Gallen, Switzerland. These studies are reviewed by professional societies and other organizations, and formulated into guidelines for specific treatment groups and risk category.
As of 2014 cryoablation is being studied to see if it could be a substitute for a lumpectomy in small cancers. There is tentative evidence in those with tumors less than 2 centimeters. It may also be used in those in who surgery is not possible. Another review states that cryoablation looks promising for early breast cancer of small size.
Breast cancer cell lines
A considerable part of the current knowledge on breast carcinomas is based on in vivo and in vitro studies performed with cell lines derived from breast cancers. These provide an unlimited source of homogenous self-replicating material, free of contaminating stromal cells, and often easily cultured in simple standard media. The first breast cancer cell line described, BT-20, was established in 1958. Since then, and despite sustained work in this area, the number of permanent lines obtained has been strikingly low (about 100). Indeed, attempts to culture breast cancer cell lines from primary tumors have been largely unsuccessful. This poor efficiency was often due to technical difficulties associated with the extraction of viable tumor cells from their surrounding stroma. Most of the available breast cancer cell lines issued from metastatic tumors, mainly from pleural effusions. Effusions provided generally large numbers of dissociated, viable tumor cells with little or no contamination by fibroblasts and other tumor stroma cells. Many of the currently used BCC lines were established in the late 1970s. A very few of them, namely MCF-7, T-47D, and MDA-MB-231, account for more than two-thirds of all abstracts reporting studies on mentioned breast cancer cell lines, as concluded from a Medline-based survey.
NFAT transcription factors are implicated in breast cancer, more specifically in the process of cell motility at the basis of metastasis formation. Indeed, NFAT1 (NFATC2) and NFAT5 are pro-invasive and pro-migratory in breast carcinoma and NFAT3 (NFATc4) is an inhibitor of cell motility. NFAT1 regulates the expression of the TWEAKR and its ligand TWEAK with the Lipocalin 2 to increase breast cancer cell invasion and NFAT3 inhibits Lipocalin 2 expression to blunt the cell invasion.
Clinically, the most useful metabolic markers in breast cancer are the estrogen and progesterone receptors that are used to predict response to hormone therapy. New or potentially new markers for breast cancer include BRCA1 and BRCA2 to identify people at high risk of developing breast cancer, HER-2, and SCD1, for predicting response to therapeutic regimens, and urokinase plasminogen activator, PA1-1 and SCD1 for assessing prognosis.
History of breast cancer and breast cancer treatment
Because of its visibility, breast cancer was the form of cancer most often described in ancient documents. Because autopsies were rare, cancers of the internal organs were essentially invisible to ancient medicine. Breast cancer, however, could be felt through the skin, and in its advanced state often developed into fungating lesions: the tumor would become necrotic (die from the inside, causing the tumor to appear to break up) and ulcerate through the skin, weeping fetid, dark fluid.
The oldest discovered evidence of breast cancer is from Egypt and dates back 4200 years, to the Sixth Dynasty. The study of a woman’s remains from the necropolis of Qubbet el-Hawa showed the typical destructive damage due to metastatic spread. The Edwin Smith Papyrus describes 8 cases of tumors or ulcers of the breast that were treated by cauterization. The writing says about the disease, “There is no treatment.” For centuries, physicians described similar cases in their practices, with the same conclusion. Ancient medicine, from the time of the Greeks through the 17th century, was based on humoralism, and thus believed that breast cancer was generally caused by imbalances in the fundamental fluids that controlled the body, especially an excess of black bile. Alternatively it was seen as divine punishment. In the 18th century, a wide variety of medical explanations were proposed, including a lack of sexual activity, too much sexual activity, physical injuries to the breast, curdled breast milk, and various forms of lymphatic blockages, either internal or due to restrictive clothing. In the 19th century, the Scottish surgeon John Rodman said that fear of cancer caused cancer, and that this anxiety, learned by example from the mother, accounted for breast cancer’s tendency to run in families.
Although breast cancer was known in ancient times, it was uncommon until the 19th century, when improvements in sanitation and control of deadly infectious diseases resulted in dramatic increases in lifespan. Previously, most women had died too young to have developed breast cancer. Additionally, early and frequent childbearing and breastfeeding probably reduced the rate of breast cancer development in those women who did survive to middle age.
Because ancient medicine believed that the cause was systemic, rather than local, and because surgery carried a high mortality rate, the preferred treatments tended to be pharmacological rather than surgical. Herbal and mineral preparations, especially involving the poison arsenic, were relatively common.
Mastectomy for breast cancer was performed at least as early as AD 548, when it was proposed by the court physician Aetios of Amida to Theodora. It was not until doctors achieved greater understanding of the circulatory system in the 17th century that they could link breast cancer’s spread to the lymph nodes in the armpit. The French surgeon Jean Louis Petit (1674–1750) performed total mastectomies which included removing the axillary lymph nodes, as he recognized that this reduced recurrence. Petit’s work was built on by another French surgeon, Bernard Peyrilhe (1737–1804), who additionally removed the pectoral muscle underlying the breast, as he judged that this greatly improved the prognosis. The Scottish surgeon Benjamin Bell (1749–1806) advocated removal of the entire breast, even when only a portion was affected.
Their successful work was carried on by William Stewart Halsted who started performing radical mastectomies in 1882, helped greatly by advances in general surgical technology, such as aseptic technique and anesthesia. The Halsted radical mastectomy often involved removing both breasts, associated lymph nodes, and the underlying chest muscles. This often led to long-term pain and disability, but was seen as necessary in order to prevent the cancer from recurring. Before the advent of the Halsted radical mastectomy, 20-year survival rates were only 10%; Halsted’s surgery raised that rate to 50%. Extending Halsted’s work, Jerome Urban promoted superradical mastectomies, taking even more tissue, until 1963, when the ten-year survival rates proved equal to the less-damaging radical mastectomy.
Radical mastectomies remained the standard of care in America until the 1970s, but in Europe, breast-sparing procedures, often followed by radiation therapy, were generally adopted in the 1950s. One reason for this striking difference in approach may be the structure of the medical professions: European surgeons, descended from the barber surgeon, were held in less esteem than physicians; in America, the surgeon was the king of the medical profession. Additionally, there were far more European women surgeons: Less than one percent of American surgical oncologists were female, but some European breast cancer wards boasted a medical staff that was half female. American health insurance companies also paid surgeons more to perform radical mastectomies than they did to perform more intricate breast-sparing surgeries.
Breast cancer staging systems were developed in the 1920s and 1930s.
During the 1970s, a new understanding of metastasis led to perceiving cancer as a systemic illness as well as a localized one, and more sparing procedures were developed that proved equally effective. Modern chemotherapy developed after World War II.
Prominent women who died of breast cancer include Anne of Austria, the mother of Louis XIV of France; Mary Washington, mother of George, and Rachel Carson, the environmentalist.
The first case-controlled study on breast cancer epidemiology was done by Janet Lane-Claypon, who published a comparative study in 1926 of 500 breast cancer cases and 500 controls of the same background and lifestyle for the British Ministry of Health.
In the 1980s and 1990s, thousands of women who had successfully completed standard treatment then demanded and received high-dose bone marrow transplants, thinking this would lead to better long-term survival. However, it proved completely ineffective, and 15–20% of women died because of the brutal treatment.
The 1995 reports from the Nurses’ Health Study and the 2002 conclusions of the Women’s Health Initiative trial conclusively proved that hormone replacement therapy significantly increased the incidence of breast cancer.
Prognostic factors of breast cancer
The stage of the breast cancer is the most important component of traditional classification methods of breast cancer, because it has a greater effect on the prognosis than the other considerations. Staging takes into consideration size, local involvement, lymph node status and whether metastatic disease is present. The higher the stage at diagnosis, the poorer the prognosis. The stage is raised by the invasiveness of disease to lymph nodes, chest wall, skin or beyond, and the aggressiveness of the cancer cells. The stage is lowered by the presence of cancer-free zones and close-to-normal cell behaviour (grading). Size is not a factor in staging unless the cancer is invasive. For example, Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) involving the entire breast will still be stage zero and consequently an excellent prognosis with a 10-year disease free survival of about 98%.
Stage 1 cancers (and DCIS, LCIS) have an excellent prognosis and are generally treated with lumpectomy and sometimes radiation.
Stage 2 and 3 cancers with a progressively poorer prognosis and greater risk of recurrence are generally treated with surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without lymph node removal), chemotherapy (plus trastuzumab for HER2+ cancers) and sometimes radiation (particularly following large cancers, multiple positive nodes or lumpectomy).
Stage 4, metastatic cancer, (i.e. spread to distant sites) has poor prognosis and is managed by various combination of all treatments from surgery, radiation, chemotherapy and targeted therapies. Ten-year survival rate is 5% without treatment and 10% with optimal treatment.
The breast cancer grade is assessed by comparison of the breast cancer cells to normal breast cells. The closer to normal the cancer cells are, the slower their growth and the better the prognosis. If cells are not well differentiated, they will appear immature, will divide more rapidly, and will tend to spread. Well differentiated is given a grade of 1, moderate is grade 2, while poor or undifferentiated is given a higher grade of 3 or 4 (depending upon the scale used). The most widely used grading system is the Nottingham scheme.
Younger women with an age of less than 40 years or women over 80 years tend to have a poorer prognosis than post-menopausal women due to several factors. Their breasts may change with their menstrual cycles, they may be nursing infants, and they may be unaware of changes in their breasts. Therefore, younger women are usually at a more advanced stage when diagnosed. There may also be biologic factors contributing to a higher risk of disease recurrence for younger women with breast cancer.
Not all people with breast cancer experience their illness in the same manner. Factors such as age can have a significant impact on the way a person copes with a breast cancer diagnosis. Premenopausal women with estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer must confront the issues of early menopause induced by many of the chemotherapy regimens used to treat their breast cancer, especially those that use hormones to counteract ovarian function.
Read also: Alternative treatment for breast cancer