The study, published in Supportive Care in Cancer, found that female patients reported higher symptom severity than male patients, with mean scores of 7.05 versus 4.06, a difference the authors characterised as a small effect. Conversely, male patients scored higher on depressive symptoms measured with the PHQ-9 questionnaire, averaging 6.68 compared with 4.52 among women, again a small effect. Men were also diagnosed at more advanced cancer stages, with a mean stage of 2.88 versus 2.54 for women.

Male participants had higher risk-factor awareness scores than female participants, averaging 6.68 versus 5.69, and also reported differences in modifiable risk-factor exposure.

Diagnostic delay, the time between the onset of symptoms and diagnosis, did not differ significantly between men and women in the unadjusted comparison. However, once the researchers adjusted for current age, disease stage and study site, female patients showed a longer diagnostic delay than male patients, with an adjusted difference of 0.60 months and a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.11 to 1.10 months.

The adjusted analyses also confirmed the other group differences. Symptom severity remained significantly higher among women after adjustment, with a beta coefficient of 3.07, while depressive symptoms remained significantly higher among men, with a beta of −1.98. Risk-factor awareness and modifiable risk-factor exposure also differed significantly between the sexes after adjustment, with coefficients of −0.92 and −0.61 respectively, in each case indicating lower values among female patients.

Not every measured variable separated the groups. After adjustment, the study found no statistically significant differences between male and female patients in body mass index, current age, out-of-pocket expenditures or household size, indicating that the observed clinical and psychological contrasts were not simply reflections of broader socio-demographic differences.

Methodologically, the researchers used Mann–Whitney U tests for group comparisons, which they note were appropriate given the skewed distributions in the data and the small size of the male subsample of 31 patients. Multivariable regression models adjusted for current age, disease stage and study site. Because the male subsample was small and the study was cross-sectional, conducted at only two hospitals, the findings describe associations at a single point in time rather than causal relationships, and the effect sizes were consistently small.

The authors conclude that breast cancer care in India must move beyond a female-only focus. Their results indicate that female patients carry a higher symptom burden and lower awareness of risk factors, while male patients present with more advanced disease stages and elevated depression scores. They argue that screening programmes, awareness initiatives and psychosocial support services should be designed to address the specific needs of both male and female patients rather than assuming a single profile of the breast cancer patient.

By documenting that men face distinct psychosocial challenges, including higher depressive symptom scores, and that women face a heavier symptom burden and longer diagnostic delays once case-mix differences are accounted for, the research provides a baseline for tailoring supportive care services in India, where evidence on these differences had previously remained limited.

Subject of Research: Differences in clinical features, psychological outcomes and risk-factor awareness between male and female breast cancer patients in India

Article Title: Clinical and psychosocial differences between male and female breast cancer patients in India

Article References: Ranjan, S., & Thakur, R. (2026). Clinical and psychosocial differences between male and female breast cancer patients in India. Supportive Care in Cancer, 34(11), Article 1161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-026-11399-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s00520-026-11399-y

Keywords: breast cancer, male breast cancer, India, cross-sectional study, depression, symptom severity, diagnostic delay, risk-factor awareness, cancer stage, psychosocial outcomes, Supportive Care in Cancer, Clinical