Search

Importance: Breast cancer will be diagnosed in 12% of women in the United States over the course of their lifetimes and more than 250 000 new cases of breast cancer were diagnosed in the United States in 2017. This review focuses on current approaches and evolving strategies for local and systemic therapy of breast cancer.Observations: Breast cancer is categorized into 3 major subtypes based on the presence or absence of molecular markers for estrogen or progesterone receptors and human epidermal growth factor 2 (ERBB2; formerly HER2): hormone receptor positive/ERBB2 negative (70% of patients), ERBB2 positive (15%-20%), and triple-negative (tumors lacking all 3 standard molecular markers; 15%). More than 90% of breast cancers are not metastatic at the time of diagnosis. For people presenting without metastatic disease, therapeutic goals are tumor eradication and preventing recurrence. Triple-negative breast cancer is more likely to recur than the other 2 subtypes, with 85% 5-year breast cancer-specific survival for stage I triple-negative tumors vs 94% to 99% for hormone receptor positive and ERBB2 positive. Systemic therapy for nonmetastatic breast cancer is determined by subtype: patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors receive endocrine therapy, and a minority receive chemotherapy as well; patients with ERBB2-positive tumors receive ERBB2-targeted antibody or small-molecule inhibitor therapy combined with chemotherapy; and patients with triple-negative tumors receive chemotherapy alone. Local therapy for all patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer consists of surgical resection, with consideration of postoperative radiation if lumpectomy is performed. Increasingly, some systemic therapy is delivered before surgery. Tailoring postoperative treatment based on preoperative treatment response is under investigation. Metastatic breast cancer is treated according to subtype, with goals of prolonging life and palliating symptoms. Median overall survival for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer is approximately 1 year vs approximately 5 years for the other 2 subtypes.Conclusions and Relevance: Breast cancer consists of 3 major tumor subtypes categorized according to estrogen or progesterone receptor expression and ERBB2 gene amplification. The 3 subtypes have distinct risk profiles and treatment strategies. Optimal therapy for each patient depends on tumor subtype, anatomic cancer stage, and patient preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Published studies have suggested that most patients with early stage breast cancer are willing, for modest survival benefits, to receive 6 months of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil, an older regimen that is used infrequently today. We examined preferences regarding the survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of a contemporary chemotherapy regimen.Methods: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Protocol 5103 was a phase 3 trial that randomized breast cancer patients to receive standard adjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with either bevacizumab or placebo. Serial surveys to assess quality of life were administered to patients enrolled between January 1, 2010, and June 8, 2010. Survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of chemotherapy by patients was collected at the 18-month assessment. A parallel survey was sent to physicians who had enrolled patients in the study.Results: Of 519 patients who had not withdrawn at a time point earlier than 18 months, 87.8% responded to this survey. A total of 175 physicians participated. We found considerable variation in patient preferences, particularly for modest survival benefits: for 2 months of benefit, 57% would consider 6 months of chemotherapy, whereas 96% of patients would consider 6 months of chemotherapy for 24 months. Race and education were associated with the choices. Physicians who responded were less likely to accept chemotherapy for modest benefit.Conclusions: Among patients who received contemporary adjuvant chemotherapy in a randomized controlled trial, we found substantial variation in preferences regarding benefits that justified undergoing chemotherapy. Differences between patients' and physicians' choices were also apparent. Eliciting preferences regarding risks and benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy is critical. Cancer 2017;123:2821-28. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on breast cancer treatment. Topics discussed include use of epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–targeted therapies for treating the same; advantages of chemotherapy for treating breast cancer; and risk of developing recurrent breast cancer, and use of complex randomized trial for the same.

BACKGROUND The authors have previously reported 2 consecutive phase 2 trials in patients with early breast cancer that overexpresses human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 ( HER2) to assess the feasibility of incorporating anti-HER2 therapies into dose-dense (dd) chemotherapy regimens. The incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) at a median follow-up of 2 years was 1.4% and 3.2%, respectively. METHODS In trial A, patients received dd doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC)→paclitaxel (T) (each given every 2 weeks) × 4 with trastuzumab (H) given × 1 year. In trial B, weekly T (weekly × 12) was substituted for ddT and lapatinib × 1 year was added. Herein, the authors report the longer-term incidence of CHF and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). RESULTS From January 2005 to May 2008, 165 patients enrolled (median age, 46 years, with a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 68% [range, 52%-81%]), 17%of whom had previous hypertension. With a median follow-up of 84 months (trial A) and 57 months (trial B), 1 additional patient developed CHF. Therefore, the cumulative incidence of CHF was 1.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.36%-7.7%) for trial A and 4.2% (95% CI, 4.2%-10.4%) for trial B. The 5-year DDFS for trials A and B was 92% (95% CI, 83%-97%) and 89% (95% CI, 81%-94%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Longer follow-up of these 2 studies has demonstrated that ddAC→TH only or with lapatinib is associated with a low risk of CHF and promising DDFS in patients with early breast cancer. Cancer 2013;119:3943-3951. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To examine whether hospitals where patients obtain care explain racial/ethnic differences in treatment delay. Data Source Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data linked with Medicare claims. Study Design We examined delays in adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation for women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer during 1992-2007. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the probability of delay by race/ethnicity and included hospital fixed effects to assess whether hospitals explained disparities. Principal Findings Among 54,592 women, black (11.9 percent) and Hispanic (9.9 percent) women had more delays than whites (7.8 percent, p < .0001). After adjustment, black (vs. white) women had higher odds of delay (odds ratio = 1.25, 95 percent confidence interval = 1.10-1.42), attenuated somewhat by including hospital fixed effects ( OR = 1.17, 95 percent CI = 1.02-1.33). Conclusions Hospitals are the important contributors to racial disparities in treatment delay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Trastuzumab is associated with improvements in overall survival (OS) among patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC); however disease course and patterns of care in individual patients are highly variable. Methods: 113 HER2-positive patients diagnosed with MBC from 1999 to 2005 who received trastuzumab-based therapy were retrospectively identified to allow for a minimum of 5 years of follow-up time. Median OS and median duration of therapy were determined using Kaplan–Meier methodology and group comparisons were based on the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) were obtained using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Median OS was 3.5 years (95% CI 3.0–4.4) from time of initiation of first therapy in the metastatic setting. On univariate analysis, central nervous system (CNS) disease at first recurrence was associated with a shorter OS compared with liver and/or lung metastases or other sites (CNS: 1.9 years CI 0.1–5.9, liver/lung: 3.2 years CI 2.5–4.2, other: 4.6 years CI 2.7–8.0; p = 0.05), however, this was not predictive of survival outcome in multivariate analysis. CNS metastases developed in 62 (55%) patients by the time of death or last follow-up. Median duration of therapy was similar up to 6 lines of treatment, and ranged from 5.2 months to 7.2 months. Conclusions: The natural history of HER2-positive MBC has evolved with trastuzumab-based therapy with median OS now exceeding 3 years. CNS disease is a major problem with continued risk of CNS progression over time. Patients demonstrate clinical benefit to multiple lines of HER2-directed therapy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In clinical practice, the surveillance and follow-up of patients with breast cancer (BC) is quite variable. At the 7th European Breast Cancer Conference, the ESO-MBC Task Force convened a series of lectures, followed by open debate, on the use of physical examination, imaging, and laboratory tests in patients with early-stage BC, and for restaging evaluations and follow-up among patients with MBC. Based on the available data, the Task Force recommends against intensive, routine radiologic or blood-based surveillance (with the exception of mammography) in patients with early-stage BC. As systemic therapies for MBC continue to improve, this question might be re-visited in the context of a carefully controlled clinical trial in specific BC subtypes. For patients with MBC, response to therapy should generally be assessed 2–3 months after initiation of treatment, and thereafter every 2–4 months for endocrine therapy or every 2–4 cycles for chemotherapy, depending on the dynamics of the disease, the location and extent of metastatic involvement, and type of treatment. Additional testing should be performed irrespective of the planned intervals if progression of disease is suspected (e.g. in the case of specific symptoms). Use of tumor markers is not recommended for surveillance of early-stage patients, but may be helpful in monitoring response to therapy in patients with metastatic disease. However, change in tumor markers alone should not be used for decision-making. Moving forward, enhanced efforts to document quality of life over time should be made in order to more fully evaluate the risk/benefit ratio of available options. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Approximately 180,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the United States annually. The majority of these women are postmenopausal and have endocrine-sensitive tumors. Over the last four decades, multiple clinical trials have been conducted in efforts to establish and advance adjuvant endocrine therapies. We review the available evidence for adjuvant endocrine therapies and current recommendations for therapy in postmenopausal women. Although we have made substantial progress in the treatment of endocrine-sensitive breast cancer, future study will require incorporation of biological and translational questions with the goal of enhancing treatment benefits and minimizing toxicity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Compared with treatment options for early-stage breast cancer, few data exist regarding the optimal use of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The choice of using a combination of cytotoxic chemotherapies vs sequential single agents is controversial. At the 6th European Breast Cancer Conference, the European School of Oncology Metastatic Breast Cancer Task Force convened an open debate on the relative benefits of combination vs sequential therapy. Based on the available data, the Task Force recommends sequential monotherapy as the preferred choice in advanced disease, in the absence of rapid clinical progression, life-threatening visceral metastases, or the need for rapid symptom and/or disease control. Patient- and disease-related factors should be used to choose between combination and sequential single-agent chemotherapy for MBC. Additional research is needed to determine the impact of therapy on patient-rated quality of life and to identify predictive factors that can be used to guide therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The decision to receive chemotherapy or chemohormonal therapy involves careful consideration of both the potential benefits and possible risks of therapy. There are substantial short- and long-term side effects from chemotherapy. By convention, short-term side effects include those toxic effects encountered during chemotherapy, while long-term side effects include later complications of treatment arising after the conclusion of adjuvant chemotherapy. These side effects vary, depending on the specific agents used in the adjuvant regimen as well as on the dose used and the duration of treatment. There is also considerable variability in side effect profile across individuals. This review will focus on the short- and long-term toxicity seen with the most commonly used adjuvant chemotherapy and chemohormonal therapy regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Observational data support inverse relationships between exercise or metformin use and disease outcomes in colorectal and breast cancer survivors, although the mechanisms underlying these associations are not well understood. Methods In a phase II trial, stage I–III colorectal and breast cancer survivors who completed standard therapy were randomly assigned to structured exercise or metformin or both or neither for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was change in fasting insulin levels; secondary outcomes included changes in other blood-based energetic biomarkers and anthropometric measurements. Analyses used linear mixed models. Results In total, 139 patients were randomly assigned; 91 (65%) completed follow-up assessments. Fasting insulin levels statistically significantly decreased in all three intervention arms (−2.47 μU/mL combination arm, −0.08 μU/mL exercise only, −1.16 μU/mL metformin only, + 2.79 μU/mL control arm). Compared with the control arm, all groups experienced statistically significant weight loss between baseline and 12 weeks (−1.8% combination arm, −0.22% exercise only, −1.0% metformin only, +1.55% control). The combination arm also experienced statistically significant improvements in the homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (−30.6% combination arm, +61.2% control) and leptin (−42.2% combination arm, −0.8% control), compared with the control arm. The interventions did not change insulin-like growth factor–1 or insulin-like growth factor binding protein–3 measurements as compared with the control arm. Tolerance to metformin limited compliance (approximately 50% of the participants took at least 75% of the planned dosages in both treatment arms). Conclusions The combination of exercise and metformin statistically significantly improved insulin and associated metabolic markers, as compared to the control arm, with potential greater effect than either exercise or metformin alone though power limited formal synergy testing. Larger efforts are warranted to determine if such a combined modality intervention can improve outcomes in colorectal and breast cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This JAMA Patient Page describes the diagnosis and treatment of different types and stages of breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This phase Ib study (NCT00960960) evaluated pictilisib (GDC-0941; pan-phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor) plus paclitaxel, with and without bevacizumab or trastuzumab, or in combination with letrozole, in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.Methods: This was a three-part multischedule study. Patients in parts 1 and 2, which comprised 3 + 3 dose escalation and cohort expansion stages, received pictilisib (60-330 mg) plus paclitaxel (90 mg/m2) with and without bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) or trastuzumab (2-4 mg/kg). In part 3, patients received pictilisib (260 mg) plus letrozole (2.5 mg). Primary objectives were evaluation of safety and tolerability, identification of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of pictilisib, and recommendation of a phase II dosing regimen. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and preliminary antitumor activity.Results: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled; all experienced at least one adverse event (AE). Grade ≥ 3 AEs, serious AEs, and AEs leading to death were reported in 50 (72.5%), 21 (30.4%), and 2 (2.9%) patients, respectively. Six (8.7%) patients reported a DLT, and the MTD and recommended phase II pictilisib doses were established where possible. There was no pictilisib-paclitaxel drug-drug interaction. Two (3.4%) patients experienced complete responses, and 17 (29.3%) patients had partial responses.Conclusions: Combining pictilisib with paclitaxel, with and without bevacizumab or trastuzumab, or letrozole, had a manageable safety profile in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. The combination had antitumor activity, and the additive effect of pictilisib supported further investigation in a randomized study.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00960960 . Registered on August 13, 2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors discuss the study by Patricia Cortazar and colleagues which examines the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. The authors remark that the study failed to quantify the association between improvements in polymerase chain reaction (pCR) and either event-free survival or overall survival. The authors believe that the findings of the study need to be reassessed and different immediate endpoints need to be validated and developed.

A response by Fatima Cardoso and colleagues to a letter to the editor about their article "International Guidelines for Management of Metastatic Breast Cancer: Combination vs. Sequential Single-Agent Chemotherapy" in a 2009 issue of the journal is presented.

Cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the systemic therapy of choice for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), a poor-prognosis subtype of breast cancer. Growing data focusing on TNBC provides an opportunity to assess if we can tailor adjuvant chemotherapy based on patient and tumor characteristics. The standard of care for moderate-to-high risk TNBC remains a sequential anthracycline-taxane combination, with the potential for shorter and less toxic regimens in stage I disease. Platinums are promising in the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings but we await long-term outcome data before incorporation into standard regimens in the adjuvant setting. Specific subgroups within TNBC, such as BRCA mutation carriers, require special attention, and the role of platinums in these patients warrants further consideration. There is hope that in the future, further subdividing TNBC by gene expression profile, mutation, immune infiltrate, and others will reveal novel susceptibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Luminal breast cancers are traditionally considered to comprise of tumors expressing estrogen receptor (ER) and represent the majority of breast cancers. These tumors are characterized by significant heterogeneity in phenotype, molecular signature, relapse patterns and therapeutic response to endocrine and chemotherapy. Whilst adjuvant endocrine therapy is standard of care in patients with tumors that express either ER and/or progesterone receptor (PR), the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy is less clear-cut. On average, ER-positive breast tumors derive less benefit from chemotherapy compared to ER-negative tumors, however there is still clearly a subset of patients with ER-positive tumors that are chemosensitive. The basis for the addition of chemotherapy to adjuvant endocrine therapy is usually guided by the clinician''s estimation of prognosis and assessment of the endocrine sensitivity of the tumor. The use of chemotherapy in this setting, however, is highly variable. There is tremendous value in identifying subgroups of patients who can expect favorable outcomes with endocrine therapy and who may not require any additional therapy. Similarly, it is equally important, if not more important, to characterize patients with ER-positive disease who will derive a substantial benefit from cytotoxic chemotherapy. In this article, we aim to discuss the utility of current biomarkers used to guide decisions regarding chemotherapy in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Offers recommendations for the primary medical care of survivors of breast cancer. Health issues, including risk of secondary cancers, side-effects of breast surgery and radiation and chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure; Potential health benefits of hormone-replacement therapy; Impact of breast cancer on psychosocial well-being.

The article focuses on the debate of local therapy on breast cancer patients. Three contrasting perspectives are presented by the authors characterizing breast cancer spreading as a local disease with predictable spreading patterns, an intrinsically systemic disease, or a local and unpredictably metastasizing condition. An overview of research studies towards this discussion is given, highlighting the benefits of improved local area treatments on breast cancer patients. Suggestions are given regarding possible future research in the area.

Background: Management of the axilla in stage II/III breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is controversial. To understand current patterns of care, we collected axillary data from 2 NST trials: HER2-positive (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [CALGB] 40601) and triple-negative (CALGB 40603).Study Design: Axillary evaluation pre- and post-NST was per the treating surgeon and could include sentinel node biopsy. Post-NST, node-positive patients were recommended to undergo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). We report pre-NST histopathologic nodal evaluation and post-NST axillary surgical procedures with correlation to clinical and pathologic nodal status.Results: Seven hundred and forty-two patients were treated, 704 had complete nodal data pre-NST and post-NST. Pre-NST, 422 (60%) of 704 patients underwent at least 1 procedure for axillary node evaluation (total of 468 procedures): fine needle aspiration (n = 234; 74% positive), core needle biopsy (n = 138; 72% positive), and sentinel node biopsy (n = 96; 33% positive). Pre-NST, 304 patients were considered node-positive. Post-NST, 304 of 704 patients (43%) underwent sentinel node biopsy; 44 were positive and 259 were negative (29 and 36 patients, respectively, had subsequent ALND). Three hundred and ninety-one (56%) patients went directly to post-NST ALND and 9 (1%) pre-NST node-positive patients had no post-NST axillary procedure. Post-NST, 170 (24%) of the 704 patients had residual axillary disease. Agreement between post-NST clinical and radiologic staging and post-NST histologic staging was strongest for node-negative (81%) and weaker for node-positive (N1 31%, N2 29%), with more than half of the clinically node-positive patients found to be pathologic negative (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Our results suggest there is no widely accepted standard for axillary nodal evaluation pre-NST. Post-NST staging was highly concordant in patients with N0 disease, but poorly so in node-positive disease. Accurate methods are needed to identify post-NST patients without residual axillary disease to potentially spare ALND. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) is a promising approach to overcome resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer. Pictilisib is an oral inhibitor of multiple PI3K isoforms. The aim of this study is to establish if addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant can improve progression-free survival in oestrogen receptor-positive, endocrine-resistant breast cancer.Methods: In this two-part, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer resistant to treatment with an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant or metastatic setting, from 123 medical centres across 21 countries. Part 1 included patients with or without PIK3CA mutations, whereas part 2 included only patients with PIK3CA mutations. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 in part 1 and 2:1 in part 2) via a computer-generated hierarchical randomisation algorithm to daily oral pictilisib (340 mg in part 1 and 260 mg in part 2) or placebo starting on day 15 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg on day 1 and day 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of subsequent cycles in both groups. In part 1, we stratified patients by presence or absence of PIK3CA mutation, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, and measurable or non-measurable disease. In part 2, we stratified patients by previous aromatase inhibitor treatment for advanced or metastatic disease or relapse during or within 6 months of an aromatase inhibitor treatment in the adjuvant setting and measurable or non-measurable disease. All patients and those administering treatment and assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population for both parts 1 and 2 and also separately in patients with PIK3CA-mutated tumours in part 1. Tumour assessment (physical examination and imaging scans) was investigator-assessed and done at screening and after 8 weeks, 16 weeks, 24 weeks, and 32 weeks of treatment from day 1 of cycle 1 and every 12 weeks thereafter. We assessed safety in as-treated patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01437566.Findings: In part 1, between Sept 27, 2011, and Jan 11, 2013, we randomly allocated 168 patients to the pictilisib (89 [53%]) or placebo (79 [47%]) group. In part 2, between March 18, 2013, and Jan 2, 2014, we randomly allocated 61 patients to the pictilisib (41 [67%]) or placebo (20 [33%]) group. In part 1, we found no difference in median progression-free survival between the pictilisib (6·6 months [95% CI 3·9-9·8]) and placebo (5·1 months [3·6-7·3]) group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·52-1·06]; p=0·096). We also found no difference when patients were analysed according to presence (pictilisib 6·5 months [95% CI 3·7-9·8] vs placebo 5·1 months [2·6-10·4]; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·42-1·28]; p=0·268) or absence (5·8 months [3·6-11·1] vs 3·6 months [2·8-7·3]; HR 0·72 [0·42-1·23]; p=0·23) of PIK3CA mutation. In part 2, we also found no difference in progression-free survival between groups (5·4 months [95% CI 3·8-8·3] vs 10·0 months [3·6-13·0]; HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·53-2·18]; p=0·84). In part 1, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 54 (61%) of 89 patients in the pictilisib group and 22 (28%) of 79 in the placebo group. 19 serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in 14 (16%) of 89 patients. Only one (1%) of 79 patients reported treatment-related serious adverse events in the placebo group. In part 2, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 15 (36%) of 42 patients in the pictilisib group and seven (37%) of 19 patients in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in two (5%) of 42 patients. One treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in one (5%) of 19 patients in the placebo group.Interpretation: Although addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant did not significantly improve progression-free survival, dosing of pictilisib was limited by toxicity, potentially limiting its efficacy. For future assessment of PI3K inhibition as an approach to overcome resistance to hormonal therapy, inhibitors with greater selectivity than that of pictilisib might be needed to improve tolerability and potentially increase efficacy. No further investigation of pictilisib in this setting is ongoing.Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which examined the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer using adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab. Topics discussed include the risk of early cancer recurrence, effectiveness and adverse events associated with the adjuvant therapy, and the rate of survival free from the disease.

The article discusses research which investigated the administration of adjuvant treatment of exemestane with ovarian suppression to patients with premenopausal breast cancer. Topics explored include the evaluation of patient eligibility to the study, the oral endocrine therapy provided following chemotherapy, and the statistical analysis of research data gathered. Brief details about the breast cancer recurrence and patient outcomes recorded are also presented.

Despite a 20-year-old guideline from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Conference recommending breast conserving surgery with radiation (BCSR) over mastectomy for woman with early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) because it preserves the breast, recent evidence shows mastectomy rates increasing and higher-staged ESBC patients are more likely to receive mastectomy. These observations suggest that some patients and their providers believe that mastectomy has advantages over BCSR and these advantages increase with stage. These beliefs may persist because the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that served as the basis for the NIH guideline were populated mainly with lower-staged patients. Our objective is to assess the survival implications associated with mastectomy choice by patient alignment with the RCT populations. We used instrumental variable methods to estimate the relationship between surgery choice and survival for ESBC patients based on variation in local area surgery styles. We find results consistent with the RCTs for patients closely aligned to the RCT populations. However, for patients unlike those in the RCTs, our results suggest that higher mastectomy rates are associated with reduced survival. We are careful to interpret our estimates in terms of limitations of our estimation approach [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The status of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) in breast-cancer cells predicts clinical outcomes in women who receive adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy. We hypothesized that HER2 positivity predicts a benefit from adjuvant doxorubicin doses above standard levels, from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, or from both. Methods: We randomly selected 1500 women from 3121 women with node-positive breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin (60, 75, or 90 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus cyclophosphamide (600 mg per square meter) for four cycles, followed by four cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter) or observation. Tissue blocks from 1322 of these 1500 women were available. Immunohistochemical analyses of these tissue specimens for HER2 with the CB11 monoclonal antibody against HER2 or with a polyclonal-antibody assay kit and fluorescence in situ hybridization for HER2 amplification were performed. Results: No interaction was observed between HER2 positivity and doxorubicin doses above 60 mg per square meter. HER2 positivity was, however, associated with a significant benefit from paclitaxel. The interaction between HER2 positivity and the addition of paclitaxel to the treatment was associated with a hazard ratio for recurrence of 0.59 (P=0.01). Patients with a HER2-positive breast cancer benefited from paclitaxel, regardless of estrogen-receptor status, but paclitaxel did not benefit patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor–positive cancers. Conclusions: The expression or amplification, or both, of HER2 by a breast cancer is associated with a benefit from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant treatment with doxorubicin (<60 mg per square meter) plus cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer, regardless of estrogen-receptor status. Patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor–positive, node-positive breast cancer may gain little benefit from the administration of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1496-506. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The likelihood of premature menopause has not been thoroughly explored in women who remain premenopausal after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Methods: We used data from the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) Trials V and VI. Trial V enrolled 1407 eligible premenopausal women randomised to no systemic therapy (No CT) or 1 cycle of perioperative CMF-based chemotherapy (PeCT) if node negative, and 6 cycles of CMF-based chemotherapy postoperatively (CMF×6) or 1 cycle perioperative CMF-based chemotherapy plus CMF×6 postoperatively (CMF×7) if node positive. From Trial VI (a 2×2 factorial designed study of 3 versus 6 initial cycles of CMF and a reintroduction of three additional courses of CMF), we included 375 women randomised to receive only six initial cycles of CMF (CMF×6). Findings: We excluded women who reported no menses during 12–24 months after randomisation (N =934), hysterectomy (N =16) or bilateral oophorectomy (N =8), or missing menses data (N =57), creating a cohort of 767 women; 540 women had been randomised to PeCT or no CT, 227 randomised to CMF×6 or 7. A Cox proportional hazards model revealed that CMF×6 or 7 (HR=2.03, p <0.0001) and temporary amenorrhea (HR=1.96, p <0.0001) were associated with premature menopause. Interpretation: Women who remain premenopausal after 6 or 7 cycles of CMF-based chemotherapy have a higher likelihood of going through menopause at an earlier age than women who received little or no chemotherapy. Temporary cessation of menses appears to be a marker for earlier onset of menopause. These findings may assist women and clinicians when making treatment and reproductive decisions after a diagnosis of breast cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]