Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Efficacy of a web-based women's health survivorship care plan for young breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial Abstract Purpose Breast cancer survivorship care plans (SCP) have limited content addressing women's health issues. This trial tested if young breast cancer survivors who receive a web-based, women's health SCP were more likely to improve on at least one of the four targeted issues (hot flashes, fertility-related concerns, contraception, and vaginal symptoms) compared to attention controls. Methods A randomized controlled trial recruited female survivors ages 18–45 at diagnosis, 18–50 at enrollment, completed primary cancer treatment, and had a significant women's health issue: moderate or higher fertility-related concerns; ≥ 4 hot flashes/day with ≥ 1 of moderate severity; ≥ 1 moderate vaginal atrophy symptoms; or not contracepting/using less effective methods. Survivors underwent stratified, block randomization with equal allocation to intervention and control groups. The intervention group accessed the online SCP; controls accessed curated resource lists. In intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome of improvement in at least one issue by 24 weeks was compared by group. Results 182 participants (86 intervention, 96 control), mean age 40.0 ± 5.9 and 4.4 ± 3.2 years since diagnosis, were randomized. 61 intervention group participants (70.9%) improved, compared to 55 controls (57.3%) (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.99–3.4, p = 0.057). The following issue-specific improvements were observed in the intervention versus control arms: fertility-related concerns (27.9% vs. 14.6%, OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1–4.8); hot flashes (58.5% vs. 55.8%, OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.57–2.2); vaginal symptoms (42.5% vs. 40.7%, OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6–2.0); contraception (50% vs. 42.6%, OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.74–2.5). Conclusions In young breast cancer survivors, a novel, web-based SCP did not result in more change in the primary outcome of improvement in at least one of the four targeted women's health issues, than the attention control condition. The intervention was associated with improved infertility concerns, supporting efficacy of disseminating accessible, evidence-based women's health information to this population.

Elevated serum levels of sialyl Lewis X (sLe X ) and inflammatory mediators in patients with breast cancer Abstract Purpose The carbohydrate sialyl LewisX (sLeX) mediates cell adhesion, is critical in the normal function of immune cells, and is frequently over-expressed on cancer cells. We assessed the association, differential levels, and prognostic value of sLeX and inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in breast cancer sera. Methods We retrospectively measured sLeX and a panel of cytokines/chemokines in the sera of 26 non-invasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 154 invasive non-metastatic breast cancer (non-MBC), 63 metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients, and 43 healthy controls. Differences in sLeX and inflammatory cytokines among and between patient groups and healthy controls were assessed with nonparametric tests and we performed survival analysis for the prognostic potential of sLeX using a cut-off of 8 U/mL as previously defined. Results Median serum sLeX was significantly higher than controls for invasive breast cancer patients (MBC and non-MBC) but not DCIS. In univariate analysis, we confirmed patients with serum sLeX > 8 U/mL have a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.0074) and overall survival (OS (P = 0.0003). Similarly, patients with high serum MCP-1 and IP-10 had shorter OS (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) and PFS (P = 0.010 and P < 0.001, respectively). sLeX, MCP-1 and IP-10 remained significant in multivariate survival analysis. Conclusion Elevated serum sLeX was associated with invasive cancer but not DCIS. High serum sLeX levels were associated with inflammatory mediators and may play a role in facilitating local invasion of breast tumor. Furthermore, serum MCP-1, IP-10 and sLeX may have prognostic value in breast cancer.

Noncompliance with palliative systemic therapy in patients with distant metastatic breast cancer: a blind spot for oncologists? Abstract Purpose The goal of our study was to provide a general overview of noncompliance with palliative systemic therapy in distant metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods We analyzed an unselected cohort of 339 patients who were diagnosed with MBC over a 22-year period (1990–2011, age restriction: ≥ 85 years old). Results Forty patients (11.8%) rejected the offered or recommended systemic therapy (age distribution of this noncompliance subgroup: ≤60 years at MBC diagnosis: 7.9%; 60–70 years: 13.2%; > 70 years: 15.6%). The rate of noncompliance was equally distributed over time (1990–1999: 12.2% vs. 2000–2011: 11.5%, p = 0.87). Compared to patients who had received palliative antineoplastic systemic therapy, those who remained untreated were significantly older (70 vs. 61 years, p = 0.015), had shorter metastatic disease survival (2 vs. 27 months, p < 0.001), had more often an aggressive tumor subtype (hormone-receptor negative carcinomas: 48.7% vs. 22.2%, p < 0.001), and had more often secondary MBC (95.0% vs. 73.6%, p = 0.001). Conclusions Although the high rate of noncompliance in the subgroup of elderly patients was not unexpected, it is noticeable that even in the subgroup of patients who were younger than 60 years, approximately 8% also rejected any systemic therapy before a MBC-related death occurred This group of younger women rarely had any relevant comorbidities, were potential candidates for chemotherapy and knowingly declined the therapy options. Such patients are never or seldom seen by oncologists in their daily practice and therefore play a minor role in their personal perception of disease. Nevertheless, these under-reported cases make up a significant proportion of MBC.

HER2 positive breast cancer patients having HER2 loss after neoadjuvant chemotherapy should still be treated with adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment

Change in study randomization allocation needs to be included in statistical analysis: comment on 'Randomized controlled trial of weight loss versus usual care on telomere length in women with breast cancer: the lifestyle, exercise, and nutrition (LEAN) study'

Atypical ductal hyperplasia in men with gynecomastia: what is their breast cancer risk? Abstract Purpose Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) significantly increases the risk of breast cancer in women. However, little is known about the implications of ADH in men. Methods Review of 932 males with breast pathology was performed to identify cases of ADH. Patients were excluded if ADH was upgraded to cancer on excision, or if they had contralateral breast cancer. Cases were reviewed to determine whether any male with ADH developed breast cancer. Results Nineteen males were diagnosed with ADH from June 2003 to September 2018. All had gynecomastia. Surgical procedure was mastectomy in 8 patients and excision/reduction in 11. One patient had their nipple areola complex removed, and 1 required a free nipple graft. Median patient age at ADH diagnosis was 25 years (range 18–72 years). Of the 14 patients with bilateral gynecomastia, 10 had bilateral ADH and 4 had unilateral. Five cases of ADH were described as severe, bordering on ductal carcinoma in situ. No patient reported a family history of breast cancer. No patient took tamoxifen. At a mean follow-up of 75 months (range 4–185 months), no patient developed breast cancer. Conclusion Our study is the first to provide follow-up information for males with ADH. With 6 years of mean follow-up, no male in our series has developed breast cancer. This suggests that either ADH in men does not pose the same risk as ADH in women or that surgical excision of symptomatic gynecomastia in men effectively reduces the risk of breast cancer.

Correction to: Reducing chemotherapy use in clinically high-risk, genomically low-risk pN0 and pN1 early breast cancer patients: five-year data from the prospective, randomised phase 3 West German Study Group (WSG) PlanB trial The article Reducing chemotherapy use in clinically high-risk, genomically low-risk pN0 and pN1 early breast cancer patients: five-year data from the prospective, randomised phase 3 West German Study Group (WSG) PlanB trial, written by Ulrike Nitz, Oleg Gluz, Matthias Christgen, Ronald E. Kates, Michael Clemens, Wolfram Malter, Benno Nuding, Bahriye Aktas, Sherko Kuemmel, Toralf Reimer, Andrea Stefek, Fatemeh Lorenz-Salehi, Petra Krabisch, Marianne Just, Doris Augustin, Cornelia Liedtke, Calvin Chao, Steven Shak, Rachel Wuerstlein, Hans H. Kreipe, Nadia Harbeck, was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on June 29, 2017 without open access.With the author(s)' decision to opt for Open Choice the copyright of the article changed on January 6, 2019 to © The Author(s) 2017 and the article is forthwith distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, a link is provided to the Creative Commons license and any changes made are indicated. The original article has been corrected.

Tamoxifen and pregnancy: an absolute contraindication? Abstract Purpose Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among young women of reproductive age. Adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen reduces the risk of recurrence in hormone-sensitive breast cancer. However, the use of tamoxifen is considered contraindicated during pregnancy, because of a limited number of case reports demonstrating potential adverse effects on the fetus. The objective of this report is to give a more broad overview of the available data on the effect of tamoxifen exposure during pregnancy. Methods A literature review was performed using PubMed and the databases of the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb and of the International Network on Cancer, Infertility, and Pregnancy. Results A total of 238 cases of tamoxifen use during pregnancy were found. Of the 167 pregnancies with known outcome, 21 were complicated by an abnormal fetal development. The malformations described were non-specific and the majority of cases concerned healthy infants despite exposure to tamoxifen. Conclusion There seems to be an increased risk of fetal abnormalities when taking tamoxifen during pregnancy (12.6% in contrast to 3.9% in the general population), but the evidence is limited and no causal relationship could be established. The possible disadvantage of postponing or discontinuing tamoxifen for the maternal prognosis is unclear. Patients should be counseled about the use of tamoxifen during pregnancy instead of presenting it as being absolutely contraindicated.

The combined expression of solute carriers is associated with a poor prognosis in highly proliferative ER+ breast cancer Abstract Purpose Breast cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease characterised by variant biology, metabolic activity, and patient outcome. Glutamine availability for growth and progression of BC is important in several BC subtypes. This study aimed to evaluate the biological and prognostic role of the combined expression of key glutamine transporters, SLC1A5, SLC7A5, and SLC3A2 in BC with emphasis on the intrinsic molecular subtypes. Methods SLC1A5, SLC7A5, and SLC3A2 were assessed at the protein level, using immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays constructed from a large well-characterised BC cohort (n = 2248). Patients were stratified into accredited clusters based on protein expression and correlated with clinicopathological parameters, molecular subtypes, and patient outcome. Results Clustering analysis of SLC1A5, SLC7A5, and SLC3A2 identified three clusters low SLCs (SLC1A5−/SLC7A5−/SLC3A2−), high SLC1A5 (SLC1A5+/SLC7A5−/SLC3A2−), and high SLCs (SLC1A5+/SLC7A5+/SLC3A2+) which had distinct correlations to known prognostic factors and patient outcome (p < 0.001). The key regulator of tumour cell metabolism, c-MYC, was significantly expressed in tumours in the high SLC cluster (p < 0.001). When different BC subtypes were considered, the association with the poor outcome was observed in the ER+ high proliferation/luminal B class only (p = 0.003). In multivariate analysis, SLC clusters were independent risk factor for shorter BC-specific survival (p = 0.001). Conclusion The co-operative expression of SLC1A5, SLC7A5, and SLC3A2 appears to play a role in the aggressive subclass of ER+ high proliferation/luminal BC, driven by c-MYC, and therefore have the potential to act as therapeutic targets, particularly in synergism.

Customized breast cancer risk assessment in an ambulatory clinic: a portal for identifying women at risk Abstract Purpose Existing high-risk clinic models focus on patients with known risk factors, potentially missing many high-risk patients. Here we describe our experience implementing universal risk assessment in an ambulatory breast center. Methods Since May 2017, all breast center patients completed a customized intake survey addressing known breast cancer risk factors and lifestyle choices. Patient characteristics, family history, risk scores, and lifestyle factors were examined; patients with high-risk breast lesions were excluded. Patients were considered at increased risk by model thresholds Gail 5-year risk > 1.7% (35–59 years), Gail 5-year risk > 5.5% (≥ 60 years), or Tyrer–Cuzick (T–C) v7 lifetime risk > 20% (any age). Results From May 2017–April 2018, there were 874 eligible patients—420 (48%) referred for risk assessment (RA) and 454 (52%) for non-specific breast complaints (NSBC). Overall, 389 (45%) were at increased risk of breast cancer. Gail 5-year risks were similar between RA and NSBC patients. However, RA patients more frequently met criteria by T–C score (P = 0.02). Of all patients at increased risk, 149 (39%) were overweight (BMI > 25) or obese (BMI > 30) and only 159 (41%) met recommended exercise standards. NSBC patients who met criteria were more frequently smokers (8% vs 1%, P < 0.01); all other demographic/lifestyle factors were similar among high-risk patients regardless of referral reason. Conclusions Universal risk assessment in a comprehensive breast health center identified 45% of our population to be at increased risk of breast cancer. This clinical care model provides a unique opportunity to identify and address modifiable risk factors among women at risk.