<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ABCR</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Advances in Breast Cancer Research</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2168-1589</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/abcr.2023.123008</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">ABCR-126215</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Epidemiological, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Aspects of Breast Cancer in the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233; from 2020 to 2022
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sirama</surname><given-names>Diarra</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moussa</surname><given-names>Samake</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Amaguiré</surname><given-names>Saye</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Brehima</surname><given-names>Dembélé</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Birama</surname><given-names>Traoré</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Souleymane</surname><given-names>B. Dembélé</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Déssé</surname><given-names>Diarra</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Yely</surname><given-names>Dianéssy</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Abdou</surname><given-names>Guiré</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bakarou</surname><given-names>Kamate</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>General Surgery Department of the Commune IV District Hospital, Bamako, Mali</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Anatomo-Pathology and Cytology Department of the Point G University Hospital, Bamako, Mali</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of the District Hospital of Commune IV, Bamako, Mali</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Obstetrics Gynecology Service of the CSREF of San, Bamako, Mali</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>14</day><month>06</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>97</fpage><lpage>113</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>8,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>8,</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>11,</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  In Mali, breast cancer remains a real health problem in the absence of an adequate and adapted health policy for their early diagnosis and their often 
  late or even non-existent treatment.
   
  <b>Objectives: </b>
  This study aimed to study the
   epidemiological, diagnostic, and therapeutic aspects of breast cancer to write the clinical aspects of breast cancer in the gynecology-obstetrics department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233; from 2020 to 2022
  . 
  <b>Methodology: </b>
  This was a retrospective and descriptive study of 219 cases of breast cancer that were diagnosed in the gynecology and obstetrics department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233; in Bamako, from 2020 to 2022.
   
  <b>Results:</b>
   The annual frequency was 77.2 cases per year, the average age 45.55 years with extremes of 16 to 85 years
  ;
   housewives represented 92.7%
  ;
   multiparas were reported at 57%. Considering the history, the personal history of benign breast pathology was 55.6%. Regarding the localization, the left breast was the most affected with 53.9%, 
  and 
  the tumor was found in the supero-external quadrant in 53.9%. The cancer was metastatic in 81.28%. The diagnosis biopsy + histology contributed to 98.6%. The histological type was invasive carcinoma of non-specific type in 95%. As for the histoprognostic grade of SBR studied, grade II was predominant at 46%, grade III at 34.95%. The therapeutic strategy was chemotherapy in 83.1%. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery in 10%, primary surgery in 6.4%, radiotherapy in 0.5%
  . 
  <b>Conclusion: </b>
  The major challenges in the fight against breast cancer in Mali remain a better organization of the system for early diagnosis, the establishment of a screening program, early diagnosis in women from the age of 40 and also adequate care
  .
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Epidemiology</kwd><kwd> Diagnosis</kwd><kwd> Therapeutics</kwd><kwd> Breast Cancer</kwd><kwd> Bamako (Mali)</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Over 2.2 million cases of breast cancer were recorded in 2020, making it the most common cancer. Nearly one in 12 women will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in women. Around 685,000 women died of breast cancer in 2020 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref1">1</xref>] .</p><p>Most breast cancer cases and breast cancer deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. When it comes to breast cancer, the disparities between low- and middle-income countries and high-income countries are huge.</p><p>It is in Africa and Polynesia that we observe the highest rate of mortality from breast cancer. In sub-Saharan Africa, half of the women who die of breast cancer are under the age of 50 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref1">1</xref>] .</p><p>Breast cancer treatment has seen great advances since 1980. In high-income countries, the age-specific breast cancer mortality rate fell by 40% between the 1980s and 2020s. These improvements have yet to be replicated in low- and middle-income countries.</p><p>In 2020, in Mali according to data from the cancer registry, breast cancer is the leading cancer; at the same time, there was a beginning of institutionalization of early diagnosis and management of breast cancer in Bamako by setting up a network in accordance with the health pyramid.</p><p>This network is made up of clinical and/or radiologically suspicious breast abnormalities diagnostic unit at CSCOM and CSREF level; reference services in the management of breast cancer after histological diagnosis.</p><p>The implementation of network support for breast cancer patients in Bamako not only has the advantage of improving access to adequate care, but also of building a better database on the disease.</p><p>Given the scarcity of data at the hospital level on breast cancer in Mali, we found it useful to continue studies in the gynecological and mammary cancer screening and management unit of the gynecology and obstetrics department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233;. The objective of this work is to study the epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of breast cancer from 2020 to 2022.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methodology</title><p>Our study took place at the gynecological and breast cancer management unit of the gynecology and obstetrics department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233;. It was a retrospective and descriptive study which took place from January 2020 as of October 31, 2022. The study population consists of patients with breast cancer diagnosed by histology during our study period.</p><p>The administrative and health authorities were informed of the survey by a request for authorization to collect data. The patients were collected according to the socio-demographic, clinical and anatomopathological data collected on the basis of the medical files. The data were collected on a validated individual survey form, a model of which is appended. The completed tools were reviewed over time to correct errors. The forms were anonymous and the confidentiality of the information collected was guaranteed with access restricted to members of the research team.</p><p>Data entry and analysis were done on SPSS 25, Excel and Microsoft Office 2013 Word software. The statistical tests used were:</p><p>➢ Parametric tests: mean and standard deviation;</p><p>➢ Non-parametric tests: the Chi-2 test.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>Frequency (Tables 1-6 and Figures 1-5):</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Breakdown by age group</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >age group</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Under 35 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 - 45 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >46 - 65 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Over 65 years old</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The average age is 45.55 years (16 - 85 years).</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Breakdown by occupation</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Occupation</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Housewives</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Official</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Housewives were in the majority at 92.7%.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution according to parity</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Parity</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Nulliparous</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primiparous</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pauciparous</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Multipara</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>57.5% were multiparous.</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> The distribution according to the duration of contraception</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Duration of birth control</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Less than 1 year</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.14</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 - 5 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.91</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Over 5 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.95</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >139</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Among patients with a notion of contraception, 66.9% had a duration of contraception between 1 and 5 years.</p><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Breakdown by breastfeeding duration</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breastfeeding duration</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >less than 1 year</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 - 2 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >more than 2 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >170</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>60.6% had a duration of breastfeeding between 1 and 2 years.</p><table-wrap id="table6" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution according to personal history of benign breast pathology</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast Pathology Personal ATCD</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Adenofibroma</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mastitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fibrocystic disease</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >106</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Mastitis was found in 55.6% of patients with a personal history of benign breast disease.</p><p>Physical examination (Tables 7-22 and Figures 6-9)</p><table-wrap id="table7" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref></label><caption><title> Breakdown by reason for consultation</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Reason for consultation</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Breast lump or swelling</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Nipple discharge</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >breast pain</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Vegetative ulceration</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The dominant reason for consultation was the breast lump at 92.7%.</p><table-wrap id="table8" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table8">Table 8</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution according to breast asymmetry</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast asymmetry</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >143</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Breast asymmetry was observed in 65.3%.</p><table-wrap id="table9" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table9">Table 9</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution according to contralateral breast involvement</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Contralateral breast involvement</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >YES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >71</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >148</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The contralateral breast was not affected in 67.6%.</p><table-wrap id="table10" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>0</label><caption><title> Distribution according to breast discharge</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast discharge</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >YES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >141</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Breast discharge was observed in 64.4%.</p><table-wrap id="table11" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>1</label><caption><title> Distribution according to Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade and Elston-Ellis grade</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade and Elston-Ellis grade</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Grade 2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >156</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >71.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Grade 3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade 2 and Elston-Ellis grade were observed in 71.2%.</p><table-wrap id="table12" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>2</label><caption><title> Distribution according to evolution</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Evolution</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Remission</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.90</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Complication</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.57</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lost view</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Death</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >119</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Death was observed in 54.33%.</p><table-wrap id="table13" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>3</label><caption><title> Distribution according to the location of the tumor</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Tumor location</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Superior-outer quadrant</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Superior-internal quadrant</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Whenrant inferior-internal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Inferior-outer quadrant</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Association</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The tumor was located in the supero-external quadrant in 53.9%.</p><table-wrap id="table14" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>4</label><caption><title> Breakdown according to the nature of the item sent for examination Anapath</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Nature of the part sent for examination Anapath</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Biopsy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >216</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mastectomy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The biopsy was performed in 98.6%.</p><table-wrap id="table15" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>5</label><caption><title> Distribution according to the number of metastases</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number of metastasis</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >178</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81.28</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.24</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.37</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Metastasis was present in 81.2%.</p><table-wrap id="table16" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>6</label><caption><title> Distribution according to breast edema</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast edema</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >116</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Breast edema was observed in 53%.</p><table-wrap id="table17" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>7</label><caption><title> Distribution according to breast redness</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast redness</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >YES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >141</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Redness of the breast has and observed in 64.4%.</p><table-wrap id="table18" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>8</label><caption><title> Distribution according to breasts affected</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Breast affected</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >right breast</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >left breast</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 + 2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The left breast was the frequently affected at 53.9%.</p><table-wrap id="table19" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>9</label><caption><title> Distribution according to skin signs</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Skin signs</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >no signs</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Swelling</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Orange peel</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >133</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ulceration</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Retraction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Association</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The orange peel appearance was observed in 60.7%.</p><table-wrap id="table20" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>0</label><caption><title> Distribution by tumor size</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Tumor size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >170</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The tumor was class T4 in 77.6%.</p><table-wrap id="table21" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>1</label><caption><title> Breakdown by treatment</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Treatment</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Chemotherapy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >182</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >83.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Surgery</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Radiotherapy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Chemotherapy + Surgery</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >219</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Chemotherapy was the treatment in 83.1%.</p><table-wrap id="table22" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>2</label><caption><title> Distribution according to the age group by the presence of metastasis</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >age range</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >presence of metastasis</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >absence of metastasis</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Under 35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 - 45 years old</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >46 - 65 years old</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Over 65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >132</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >71</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Chi2 is 0.041 so significant. The presence of metastasis would probably be influenced by the age of the patient.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>We collected a total of 219 breast cancer cases, all female; i.e. an average frequency of 77.2 new cases per year. This frequency is high compared to those found by M Ranaivomanan et al. in Madagascar, Zaki et al. in Niger, which are respectively 7.75 and 64.5 cases per year [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref3">3</xref>] . Regarding age, the extremes were 16 and 85 years, with an average age of 45.55 years. The 35 - 45 year old class was the most represented with 36.1% of cases. Moreover, 58.5% of women are less than or equal to 45 years old, corresponding to the period of genital activity. In Niger, Zaki et al. found 69.89% of breast cancers in women before the age of 50 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref3">3</xref>] , a higher value than ours. Overall in sub-Saharan Africa, cancer occurs in young women of middle age at the time of diagnosis between 42 and 53 years [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref4">4</xref>] . In our study, the decrease in breast cancer after the age of 50 may be linked on the one hand to the fact that certain habits such as breastfeeding for more than a year are respected, and on the other hand to the absence or low prevalence of certain risk factors such as hormonal treatments, as well as the low alcohol consumption observed in this population. The concept of contraception was found in 63.3% of patients with a duration of majority contraception between 1 to 5 years. Exclusive breastfeeding was practiced by 88.58% of the patients. The duration of breastfeeding was predominant at 60.6% between 1 and 2 years.</p><p>In our series, housekeepers account for 92.7%; the multiparous majority at 57.57%; this predominant tendency of multiparas was reported by M. Tour&#233; et al. in C&#244;te d’Ivoire at 45% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref5">5</xref>] . Does the occupation property of housewives lead to unstable moods, furthermore cause an imbalance in the secretion of certain hormones and ultimately lead to their high rate of breast cancer diagnosis?</p><p>Given the background; those of personal benign breast pathology, and the absence of a family history of breast cancer were reported in the respective order of 55.6% and 98.6% in our study. Physical inactivity was observed in 74.4% of patients.</p><p>Of the 219 cases identified, the left breast was the most affected with 53.9%, followed by the right side, 43.8% and finally 2.3% bilateral involvement. In general, the involvement of the left breast was predominant compared to the right breast according to several authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref7">7</xref>] . However, some like Darr&#233; T et al. And Sano D et al. reported a predominance of the right breast [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref9">9</xref>] . In the literature, bilateral involvement is generally between 3 and 13% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref10">10</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref11">11</xref>] . In our study, the tumor was found at the QSE in 53.9% of cases, at the QSI in 18.7%, regardless of the side of the breast affected. These rates are higher than those reported by Togo A et al. who found 41.4% for the QSE, 12.2% for the QSI; however, the nipple site was present in them in 19.05% of cases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref12">12</xref>] . Breast pain was reported in 68%, breast discharge observed in 64.4% of cases.</p><p>In varying proportions, local clinical signs were reported: breast swelling in 92.7% of cases; tumor size classified as T4 in 77.6%; breast asymmetry was observed in 65.3% of patients; breast redness in 64.4%; the appearance of orange peel in 60.7%; firm consistency of the breast in observed in 57%; breast edema in 53%.</p><p>Lymph node involvement revealed N1 in 67.12% of cases; breast cancer is very frequently metastatic with at most one metastasis in 81.28% of cases. The occurrence of metastases would probably be influenced by the age of the patients (Chi2 = 0.041 therefore significant).</p><p>The high rate of frequencies of locoregional and general signs is consistent with the late diagnosis of breast cancer in our series. This proof is supported by the review of the literature of multiple authors carried out by M. Ly et al. who shares the observation of the diagnosis at stage III and IV [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>For the diagnostic evocation, we note 98.6% of biopsy + histology and mastectomy + histology in 1.4% of the cases; in C&#244;te d’Ivoire, Tour&#233; et al. reported 80% fine needle aspiration + cytology and 20% microbiopsy echoguided + histology [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref5">5</xref>] .</p><p>The histological type was specified in almost all patients. Non-specific invasive carcinoma is the most represented with 208 cases (95%). Darre et al. in Togo found, as in our series, the predominance of the same histological type up to (96%) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref13">13</xref>] . The histoprognostic grade of SBR studied in this series revealed the predominance of grade II in the order of 70.2%, followed by grade III at 29.2%. This order corroborates that of Darr&#233; et al. in Togo but in different proportions, namely grade II (54.67%), grade III (34.95%) and I (10.38%) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref13">13</xref>] . In Yaound&#233;, Essiben et al. finds a different trend, with in order of frequency, grades II, I and III [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126215-ref14">14</xref>] . The immunohistochemical status has been studied very little, only 1 case reported (0.45%). This proportion was low compared to the entire study population and cannot reliably reflect reality. This is explained by the recent introduction of this type of analysis in the country’s diagnostic package, access to which remains restricted for financial reasons. However, the prognostic and predictive role of hormone receptors remains essential in the management of breast cancer.</p><p>Following the multidisciplinary consultation meeting, the therapeutic strategy was chemotherapy in 83.1%; neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery in 10% of cases; primary surgery 6.4% and radiotherapy in 0.5% of cases. This order of frequency sufficiently shows the problem of late diagnosis of breast cancer in our series, it corroborates the trends revealed by a study carried out in Madagascar which were 55% diagnosis at stage III, 32% at stage IV.</p><p>The problem of late diagnosis of breast cancer in the context of Mali partly explains the poor prognosis of patients with breast cancer. This is consistent with the observations of our study with records a death rate of 54.3% during the period of our study.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>Our study of 219 cases of breast cancer in the gynecology-obstetrics department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233; allowed the analysis of the epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of breast cancer. It emerges that the major challenges in the fight against breast cancer in Mali remain screening, early diagnosis and adequate care.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest concerning the publication of this article.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Diarra, S., Samake, M., Saye, A., Demb&#233;l&#233;, B., Traor&#233;, B., Demb&#233;l&#233;, S.B., Diarra, D., Dian&#233;ssy, Y., Guir&#233;, A. and Kamate, B. (2023) Epidemiological, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Aspects of Breast Cancer in the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of the CHU Gabriel Tour&#233; from 2020 to 2022. Advances in Breast Cancer Research, 12, 97-113. https://doi.org/10.4236/abcr.2023.123008</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Abbreviations/Cycles</title><p>CS COM: Community Health Center</p><p>CS Ref: Reference Health Center</p><p>CHU: University Hospital Center</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Appendix</title><p>SURVEY SHEET</p><p>Q1. Survey sheet no.: ____________ /</p><p>Q2. Age (years): ______________/</p><p>Q3. Weight (Kg): ______________/</p><p>Q4. Blood group: ___________/</p><p>Q5. Gender: ________________/</p><p>1 = Male 2 = Female</p><p>Q6. Occupation: ________________________________ /</p><p>1 = Housewife 4 = Student</p><p>2 = Civil servant 5 = Other (to be specified) 3 = Trader</p><p>Q7. Ethnicity: ___________________/</p><p>1 = Sarakol&#233; 5 = Bambara 9 = Dogon</p><p>2 = Malinke 6 = Minianka/Senufo 10 = Peulh</p><p>3 = Kassonk&#233; 7 = Sonrha&#239; 11 = Others (specify)</p><p>4 = Tuareg 8 = Bobo</p><p>Q8. Usual address: ________________________________ /Tel</p><p>Q9. Nationality: _________________/</p><p>1 = Malian 2 = Other (specify)</p><p>Q11. Marital status: _________________/</p><p>1 = Married 3 = Divorced 5 = Other (specify)</p><p>2 = Single 4 = Widowed</p><p>Q12. Consultation Health Center: _______________________/</p><p>Q15. Reason for consultation: _____________/</p><p>1 = Breast nodule or swelling 6 = Vegetative ulceration</p><p>2 = Deformation of the skin or nipple 7 = Association to be specified</p><p>3 = Nipple discharge 8 = New recurrence</p><p>4 = Breast pain 9 = Other (specify)</p><p>5 = Axillary nodule</p><p>Q13. Consultation period: ______________/</p><p>Specify the number of months, weeks or days</p><p>Q14. Age of first period: _____________/</p><p>Specify age</p><p>Q14. Age at first pregnancy: ___________/</p><p>Q15. Parity (number of pregnancies): ____________/</p><p>Q16. Birth control: ____________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q21. If yes; Method used: _____________________________ /</p><p>1 = Oral 2 = Injectable 3 = others (specify)</p><p>Q22. Duration of intake: _____________________/</p><p>Specify the number of times</p><p>Q23. Contraceptive name: _____________________________/</p><p>Q24. Menopause: _______________________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q25. Age at menopause: __________________</p><p>Q26. Breastfeeding method: ___________________/</p><p>1 = Maternal 2 = Mixed 3 = Artificial</p><p>Q27. Duration of breastfeeding: _________________/</p><p>0 = Not breastfeeding 2 = 1 - 2 years</p><p>1 = less than 1 year 3 = greater than 2 years</p><p>Q28. Personal history of cancer: _________/</p><p>1 = Breast 2 = Other (specify) 3 = None</p><p>Q29. Family history of breast cancer: _________/</p><p>1 = Grandparents 3 = Sisters 5 = Others (specify)</p><p>2 = Mother 4 = Aunt 6 = None</p><p>Q30. Family history of other cancers: ___________/</p><p>1 = Grandparents 3 = Sisters 5 = Others (specify)</p><p>2 = Mother 4 = Aunt 6 = None</p><p>Q31. General signs: A. General condition: ____________________/</p><p>1 = Good 3 = Fair</p><p>2 = Altered</p><p>B. Conjunctivae: ____________________/</p><p>1 = Colored 2 = Jaundice 3 = Pale</p><p>C. Temperature (˚C): ________________/</p><p>Q32. Skin signs: _____________________/</p><p>1 = No signs 4 = Ulceration 7 = Association (to be specified)</p><p>2 = Swelling 5 = Retraction</p><p>3 = Orange peel skin 6 = Other (specify)</p><p>Q33. Affected breasts: ______________________/</p><p>1 = Left breast</p><p>2 = Right breast 3 = 1 + 2</p><p>Q34. Tumor location: _______________________________________________/</p><p>1 = Upper-outer quadrant 4 = Lower -outer quadrant</p><p>2 = Superior-internal quadrant 5 = Others (to be specified)</p><p>3 = Infero-internal quadrant 6 = Associations (to be specified)</p><p>Q35. anapath exam requested by: _____________/</p><p>1 = The patient herself 3 = Surgeon 5 = Others (specify)</p><p>2 = General practitioner 4 = Gynecologist</p><p>Q36. Tumor size: ______________________/</p><p>1 = T0 (no palpable tumour) 4 = T3 (tumor larger than 5 cm in diameter)</p><p>2 = T1 (tumor less than 2 cm in diameter) 5 = T4 (tumor with wall extension)</p><p>3 = T2 (2 cm to 5 cm and/or skin) and or to the skin)</p><p>Q37. Tumor consistency: _________________/</p><p>1 = Hard 3 = Soft</p><p>2 = Farm 4 = Other (specify)</p><p>. Muscle adhesion: ______________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q39. Adhesion to the rib grill: ___________________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q40. Lymph node involvement: ____________________/</p><p>1 = N0 (no palpable lymph nodes 3 = N2 (Fixed axillary adenopathy</p><p>2 = N1 (Mobile homolateral axillary lymph node) 4 = N4 (ADP supraclavicular or arm edema)</p><p>Q41. Breast pain: ________________________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q42. Breast discharge: ______________________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q43. Contralateral breast involvement: ___________________/</p><p>1 = Yes 2 = No</p><p>Q44. Personal history of mastopathies: ______________/</p><p>1 = Adenofibroma</p><p>2 = Mastitis 5 = Other to be specified</p><p>3 = Fibrocystic disease</p><p>4 = Cyst 6 = No ATCD</p><p>Q45. Other History: ____________________________/</p><p>Q46. Mammogram: ______________________________/</p><p>1 = Aspect suspicious of cancer 3 = Normal</p><p>2 = Benign tumor 4 = Other (specify)</p><p>Q47. Ultrasound: _________________________________/</p><p>1 = Aspect suspicious of cancer 3 = Normal</p><p>2 = Benign tumor 4 = Other (specify)</p><p>Q48. Cytopunction: _______________________________/</p><p>1 = Cancer 3 = Normal</p><p>2 = Benign tumor 4 = Other (specify)</p><p>Q49. Date of collection: _________________________/</p><p>Q50. Nature of the document sent for the anapath examination: __________/</p><p>1 = Breast biopsy 3 = Mastectomy 5 = 3 + 4</p><p>2 = Lumpectomy 4 = Lymph node dissection</p><p>Q51. Histological type: ________________________/</p><p>1 = ductal carcinoma in situ 11 = infiltrating micropapillary carcinoma</p><p>2 = metaphase carcinoma 12 = mucinous carcinoma</p><p>3 = lobular carcinoma in situ 13 = malignant phyllodes tumor</p><p>4 = apocrine carcinoma 14 = invasive cribriform carcinoma</p><p>5 = infiltrating ductal carcinoma 15 = scirrhous carcinoma</p><p>6 = adenoid cystic carcinoma 16 = breast endocrine carcinoma</p><p>7 = invasive lobular carcinoma 17 = colloidal adenocarcinoma</p><p>8 = mucoepidermoid carcinoma 18 = tubular carcinoma</p><p>9 = secreting carcinoma</p><p>10 = bone marrow carcinoma</p><p>Q52. Lymph node histology: ________________/</p><p>1 = Not done 2 = Invasion 3 = No invasion</p><p>Q53. SBR Rating: ______________________/</p><p>1 = Grade I 2 = Grade II 3 = Grade III</p><p>Q54. Treatment: ___________________________/</p><p>Q55. Immunohistochemistry</p><p>Yes …………. No …………</p><p>1 = Chemotherapy 4 = Hormone therapy 7 = 2 + 3</p><p>2 = surgery 5 = 1 + 2</p><p>3 = Radiotherapy 6 = 1 + 2 + 3</p><p>Q56. Evolution: ____________________________/</p><p>1 = remission 2 =complications 3 = Lost to follow-up 4 = Death</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.126215-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Breast Cancer—World Heath Organization (WHO) https://www.Who.int</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ranaivomanana, M., et al. (2021) Epidemio-Clinical Aspects of Breast Cancer in the Oncology Department of Fianarantsoa, Madagascar from 2011 to 2018. The Pan African Medical Journal, 38, 264.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zaki, H.M., Garba-Bouda, O., Garba, S.M. and Nouhou, H. (2013) Epidemiological and Pathological Profile of Breast Cancer in Niger. Journal Africain du Cancer/ African Journal of Cancer, 5, 185-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12558-013-0274-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ly, M., et al. (2011) Breast Cancer in Women in Sub-Saharan Africa: Current State of Knowledge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Toure, M., Nguessan, E., Bambara, A.T., Kouassi, Y.K.K., Dia, J.M.L. and Adoubi, I. (2013) Factors Related to the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa: Case of C&amp;#244te d’Ivoire. Gynécologie Obstétrique &amp; Fertilité, 41, 696-700.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dem, A., Traoré, B., Dieng, M.M., et al. (2006) Gynecological and Breast Cancers at the Curie Institute. Sante, 18, 25-29..</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lansac, J., Lecomte, P. and Marret, H. (2012) Gynecology for the Practitioner. Elsevier-Masson, Paris.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Roussy, G., Leroux, R. and Oberling, C.H. (1950) Precis of Anatomy Pathology. Mason, Paris, 1123-1125.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sano, D.I., Cisse, R., Dao, B., Lankoande, J., Traore, S.S.L., Soudre, R.B., et al. (1998) Breast Cancer: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Problems at the University Hospital of Ouagadougou. Black African Medicine, 45, 297-301.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cucinotta, E., Calbo, L., Palmeri, R., Pergolizzi, F.P. and Melita, G. (1996) Bilateral Carcinoma of the Breast. Annali Italiani di Chirurgia, 49, 9-14.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Awad, A.T., El-Husseini, G., Anwar, M., Abu-Nasr, A., Anwar, A.A. and Sakr, M. (1995) Bilateral Primary Breast Cancers: A Clinicopathological Study of the Second Primary. International Surgery, 81, 57-60.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Togo, A., Traore, A., Traore, C., Dembele, B.T., Kante, L., Diakite, I., et al. (2010) Breast Cancer in Two Hospitals in Bamako (Mali): Diagnostic and Therapeutic Aspects. Journal Africain du Cancer/African Journal of Cancer, 2, 88-91.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12558-010-0060-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Darré, T., Amegbor, K., Sonhayé, L., Kouyate, M., Aboubarak, A., N’Timo, B., et al. (2013) Histo-Epidemiological Profile of Breast Cancer: Apropos of 450 Cases Observed at the CHU of Lomé. Médecine Afr Noire, 60, 53-58.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126215-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Essiben, F., Foumane, P., Mboudou, E.T., Dohbit, J.S., Mve Koh, V. and Ndom, P. (2013) Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer in Cameroon: About 65 Cases. Mali Medical, 28, 1-5.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>