Search

The Breast Cancer Weight Loss (BWEL) trial is a randomized controlled trial designed to determine whether weight loss after a breast cancer diagnosis can reduce the risk of cancer recurrence in women with overweight or obesity. The BWEL trial will compare the efficacy of a telephone-based weight-loss intervention plus health education materials versus health education materials alone on invasive disease-free survival in 3,181 women with stage II or III breast cancer and BMI > 27 kg/m2 . This report provides a detailed description of the goals and methods of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting the intervention used in the BWEL trial. The intervention's primary goal for participants is to achieve and maintain a weight loss ≥ 10% of baseline weight through increased physical activity and caloric restriction. The evidence supporting the diet, physical activity, and behavioral components of this telephone-based weight-loss intervention, as well as strategies to promote participant engagement and retention, is described. The intervention is provided through 42 sessions delivered by trained health coaches over a 2-year period. If the BWEL lifestyle intervention is successful in improving cancer outcomes, then weight loss will be incorporated into the care of thousands of breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biological differences between BRCA-associated breast cancer and sporadic breast cancer may warrant different adjuvant chemotherapy (ACRx) recommendations despite similar phenotypic features. A 21-gene expression profile (Oncotype DX) generates a prognostic recurrence score (RS) that predicts the ACRx benefit in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. No reports describe assay results for BRCA-associated breast cancer.Methods: A review of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center databases identified 4908 patients with hormone receptor-positive, node-negative breast cancer who underwent Oncotype DX testing between July 2006 and March 2014. BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers (cases) were identified and matched (1:2) by age at diagnosis and tumor size to noncarrier controls. Two-sample nonparametric tests were used to compare the baseline characteristics, RSs, and risk stratification between BRCA1 and BRCA2 patients. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess these differences by mutational status.Results: Fifty mutation-associated cases (19 BRCA1 cases and 31 BRCA2 cases) and 100 controls who were well matched for age (P = .9) and tumor size (P = .6) were included. BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers had similar median RSs (P = .6) and risk category stratification (P = .3). The median RS was higher for cases versus controls (24 vs 16; P < .0001). Risk stratification also differed by mutational status (P = .0002). Cases had more high-risk disease (28% vs 7%) and intermediate-risk disease (56% vs 36%) and less low-risk disease (16% vs 57%). Cases were more likely than controls to receive ACRx (74% vs 46%; P = .002).Conclusions: Germline BRCA-associated hormone receptor-positive breast cancer may be associated with intrinsically less favorable biology. Few affected carriers have RS indicating a clear absence of benefit from ACRx. The increased use of ACRx and benefit from ACRx in BRCA carriers may mitigate otherwise inferior outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]