Search

Background: Exercise interventions improve fitness, functional capacity, and quality of life in patients with early-stage breast cancer, but to the authors' knowledge there are few data regarding the feasibility or potential benefits of exercise in women with metastatic breast cancer.Methods: Individuals with metastatic breast cancer were randomized 1:1 to a 16-week moderate-intensity exercise intervention or wait-list control group. Intervention goals included 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise per week. The baseline and 16-week evaluations included a modified Bruce Ramp treadmill test, 7-day Physical Activity Recall interview, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ C-30) questionnaire.Results: A total of 101 participants were randomized (48 to the intervention group and 53 to the control group). The median age of the participants was 49 years, the median time since the diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer was 1.1 years, and approximately 42% of participants were undergoing chemotherapy at the time of enrollment. Study attrition was higher in the intervention arm (14 participants vs 8 participants; P = .15). Women randomized to the exercise intervention experienced a nonsignificant increase with regard to minutes of weekly exercise (62.4 minutes vs 46.0 minutes; P = .17) and physical functioning (EORTC QLQ C30: 4.79 vs 0.93 [P = .23] and Bruce Ramp Treadmill test: 0.61 minutes vs 0.37 minutes [P = .35]) compared with control participants.Conclusions: Participation in an exercise intervention did not appear to result in significant improvements in physical functioning in a heterogeneous group of women living with advanced breast cancer. Given the significant benefits of exercise in women with early-stage breast cancer, more work is needed to explore alternative interventions to determine whether exercise could help women with metastatic disease live more fully with fewer symptoms from disease and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of the current study was to characterize the outcomes of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancers, including the risk and clinical consequences of central nervous system (CNS) recurrence.Methods: Using pharmacy and pathology records, a study group of 116 patients who were treated for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between January 2000 and June 2006 was identified.Results: The median survival from time of metastatic diagnosis was 13.3 months. Sixteen patients (14%) were diagnosed with CNS involvement at the time of initial metastatic diagnosis; overall, 46% of patients were diagnosed with CNS metastases before death. The median survival after a diagnosis of CNS metastasis was 4.9 months. The age-adjusted and race-adjusted rate of death for patients whose first presentation included a CNS metastasis was 3.4 times (95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.1 times) that of patients without a CNS lesion at the time of first metastatic presentation. Of the 53 patients who developed brain metastases, only 3 patients were judged to have stable or responsive systemic disease in the face of progressive CNS disease at the last follow-up before death.Conclusions: Triple-negative breast cancer is associated with poor survival after recurrence. CNS recurrence is common, but death as a direct consequence of CNS progression in the setting of controlled systemic disease is uncommon. Thus, it does not appear that the high rate of CNS involvement is because of a sanctuary effect, but rather is due to the lack of effective therapies in general for this aggressive subtype of breast cancer. New treatment strategies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Five years of adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen was considered the gold-standard treatment for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer for many years. Data from a core group of clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have challenged this perception. These studies were designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AIs in the following clinical settings: 1) as initial adjuvant therapy (the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination trial, Breast International Group Trial 1-98), 2) in a "switched setting" after 2 to 3 years of treatment with tamoxifen (Arimidex-Nolvadex 95, the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group 8 [ABCSG 8] trial, the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole study, the Intergroup Exemestane Study), and 3) in extended settings (National Cancer Institute of Canada Trial MA.17, ABCSG 6a, National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project 33). The efficacy data from these studies suggested that AIs have added substantial benefit in terms of disease outcome. AIs were tolerated well, and patients who received them experienced fewer thrombolic events and less endometrial cancer, hot flashes, night sweats, and vaginal bleeding compared with patients who receive tamoxifen. However, patients who received tamoxifen had less skeletal events and accelerated bone resorption compared with women who received AIs. AIs should be considered when planning a patient's endocrine therapy, taking into account the differences in tolerability and end-organ effects of the classes of endocrine therapy. Outstanding issues to optimize AI therapy include identifying the optimal duration, agent, and patients for these therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]