Search

Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management.Methods: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item.Results: Thirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5-60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0-25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0 and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT.Discussion: There is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

High BMI is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in post-menopausal women but poorer outcomes in all age groups. The underlying mechanism is likely to be multi-factorial. Patients with a high BMI may present later due to body habitus. Some studies have also indicated an increased incidence of biologically adverse features, including a higher frequency of oestrogen receptor (ER negative) tumours, in obese patients. Obese patients have a higher frequency of surgical complications, potentially delaying systemic therapies, and reports suggest that chemotherapy and endocrine therapy are less effective in patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2.High BMI is generally interpreted as excess adiposity and a World Cancer Research Fund report judged that the associations between BMI and incidence of breast cancer were due to body fatness. However, BMI cannot distinguish lean mass from fat mass, or characterise body fat distribution. Most chemotherapy drugs are dosed according to calculated body surface area (BSA). Patients with a similar BSA or BMI may have wide variations in their distribution of adipose tissue and skeletal muscle (body composition); however, few studies have looked at the effect of this on chemotherapy tolerance or effectiveness. Finally, adjuvant treatments for breast cancer can themselves result in body composition changes.Research is required to fully understand the biological mechanisms by which obesity influences cancer behaviour and the impact of obesity on treatment effectiveness and tolerance so that specific management strategies can be developed to improve the prognosis of this patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Aerobic exercise improves prognosis and quality of life (QoL) following completion of chemotherapy. However, the safety and efficacy of aerobic exercise during chemotherapy is less certain. A systematic review was performed of randomised trials of adult patients undergoing chemotherapy, comparing an exercise intervention with standard care.Method: From 253 abstracts screened, 33 unique trials were appraised in accordance with PRISMA guidance, including 3257 patients. Interventions included walking, jogging or cycling, and 23 were of moderate intensity (50-80% maximum heart rate).Results: Aerobic exercise improved, or at least maintained fitness during chemotherapy. Moderately intense exercise, up to 70-80% of maximum heart rate, was safe. Any reported adverse effects of exercise were mild and self-limiting, but reporting was inconsistent. Adherence was good (median 72%). Exercise improved QoL and physical functioning, with earlier return to work. Two out of four studies reported improved chemotherapy completion rates. Four out of six studies reported reduced chemotherapy toxicity. There was no evidence that exercise reduced myelosuppression or improved response rate or survival.Conclusions: Exercise during chemotherapy is safe and should be encouraged because of beneficial effects on QoL and physical functioning. More research is required to determine the impact on chemotherapy completion rates and prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Young patients presenting to surgical clinics with breast cancer are usually aware of their family history and frequently believe that a positive family history may adversely affect their prognosis. Tumour pathology and outcomes were compared in young British patients with breast cancer with and without a family history of breast cancer. Methods Prospective Outcomes in Sporadic versus Hereditary breast cancer ( POSH) is a large prospective cohort study of women aged less than 41 years with breast cancer diagnosed and treated in the UK using modern oncological management. Personal characteristics, tumour pathology, treatment and family history of breast/ovarian cancer were recorded. Follow-up data were collected annually. Results Family history data were available for 2850 patients. No family history was reported by 65·9 per cent, and 34·1 per cent reported breast/ovarian cancer in at least one first- or second-degree relative. Patients with a family history were more likely to have grade 3 tumours (63·3 versus 58·9 per cent) and less likely to have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive tumours (24·7 versus 28·8 per cent) than those with no family history. In multivariable analyses, there were no significant differences in distant disease-free intervals for patients with versus those without a family history, either for the whole cohort (hazard ratio ( HR) 0·89, 95 per cent c.i. 0·76 to 1·03; P = 0·120) or when stratified by oestrogen receptor ( ER) status ( ER-negative: HR 0·80, 0·62 to 1·04, P = 0·101; ER-positive: HR 0·95, 0·78 to 1·15, P = 0·589). Conclusion Young British patients presenting to breast surgical clinics with a positive family history can be reassured that this is not a significant independent risk factor for breast cancer outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analysis of data from a large prospective cohort study of young British breast cancer patients indicates that young obese breast cancer patients present with adverse tumour characteristics. Despite adjustment for this, obesity still independently predicts distant disease-free survival and overall survival.Background Obese breast cancer patients have a poorer prognosis than non-obese patients. We examined data from a large prospective cohort study to explore the associations of obesity with tumour pathology, treatment and outcome in young British breast cancer patients receiving modern oncological treatments. Patients and methods A total of 2956 patients aged ≤40 at breast cancer diagnosis were recruited from 126 UK hospitals from 2001 to 2007. Height and weight were measured at registration. Tumour pathology and treatment details were collected. Follow-up data were collected at 6, 12 months, and annually. Results A total of 2843 eligible patients (96.2%) had a body mass index (BMI) recorded: 1526 (53.7%) were under/healthy-weight (U/H, BMI <25 kg/m2), 784 (27.6%) were overweight (ov, BMI ≥25 to <30), and 533 (18.7%) were obese (ob, BMI ≥30). The median tumour size was significantly higher in obese and overweight patients than U/H patients (Ob 26 mm versus U/H 20 mm, P < 0.001; Ov 24 mm versus U/H 20 mm, P < 0.001). Obese and overweight patients had significantly more grade 3 tumours (63.9% versus 59.0%, P = 0.048; Ov 63.6% versus U/H 59.0% P = 0.034) and node-positive tumours (Ob 54.6% versus U/H 49.0%, P = 0.027; Ov 54.2% versus U/H 49%, P = 0.019) than U/H patients. Obese patients had more ER/PR/HER2-negative tumours than healthy-weight patients (25.0% versus 18.3%, P = 0.001). Eight-year overall survival (OS) and distant disease-free interval (DDFI) were significantly lower in obese patients than healthy-weight patients [OS: hazard ratio (HR) 1.65, P < 0.001; DDFI: HR 1.44, P < 0.001]. Multivariable analyses adjusting for tumour grade, size, nodal, and HER2 status indicated that obesity was a significant independent predictor of OS and DDFI in patients with ER-positive disease. Conclusions Young obese breast cancer patients present with adverse tumour characteristics. Despite adjustment for this, obesity still independently predicts DDFI and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]