Incorporating Biomarkers in Studies of Chemoprevention

Mammographic density, endocrine therapy and breast cancer risk: a prognostic and predictive biomarker review

BACKGROUND

Endocrine therapy is effective at preventing or treating breast cancer. Some forms of endocrine therapy have been shown to reduce mammographic density. Reduced mammographic density for women receiving endocrine therapy could be used to estimate the chance of breast cancer returning or developing breast cancer in the first instance (a prognostic biomarker). In addition, changes in mammographic density might be able to predict how well a woman responds to endocrine therapy (a predictive biomarker). The role of breast density as a prognostic or predictive biomarker could help improve the management of breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence that a reduction in mammographic density following endocrine therapy for breast cancer prevention in women without previous breast cancer, or for treatment in women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, is a prognostic or predictive biomarker.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 3 August 2020 along with reference checking, bibliographic searching, and contact with study authors to obtain further data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, cohort and case-control studies of adult women with or without breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy. Endocrine therapy agents included were selective oestrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors. We required breast density before start of endocrine therapy and at follow-up. We included studies published in English.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using adapted Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. We did not perform a quantitative meta-analysis due to substantial heterogeneity across studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies met our inclusion criteria, of which seven provided data on outcomes listed in the protocol (5786 women). There was substantial heterogeneity across studies in design, sample size (349 to 1066 women), participant characteristics, follow-up (5 to 14 years), and endocrine therapy agent. There were five breast density measures and six density change definitions. All studies had at least one domain as at moderate or high risk of bias. Common concerns were whether the study sample reflected the review target population, and likely post hoc definitions of breast density change. Most studies on prognosis for women receiving endocrine therapy reported a reduced risk associated with breast density reduction. Across endpoints, settings, and agents, risk ratio point estimates (most likely value) were between 0.1 and 1.5, but with substantial uncertainty. There was greatest consistency in the direction and magnitude of the effect for tamoxifen (across endpoints and settings, risk ratio point estimates were between 0.3 and 0.7). The findings are summarised as follows. Prognostic biomarker findings: Treatment Breast cancer mortality Two studies of 823 women on tamoxifen (172 breast cancer deaths) reported risk ratio point estimates of ~0.4 and ~0.5 associated with a density reduction. The certainty of the evidence was low. Recurrence Two studies of 1956 women on tamoxifen reported risk ratio point estimates of ~0.4 and ~0.7 associated with a density reduction. There was risk of bias in methodology for design and analysis of the studies and considerable uncertainty over the size of the effect. One study of 175 women receiving an aromatase inhibitor reported a risk ratio point estimate of ~0.1 associated with a density reduction. There was considerable uncertainty about the effect size and a moderate or high risk of bias in all domains. One study of 284 women receiving exemestane or tamoxifen as part of a randomised controlled trial reported risk ratio point estimates of ~1.5 (loco-regional recurrence) and ~1.3 (distance recurrence) associated with a density reduction. There was risk of bias in reporting and study confounding, and uncertainty over the size of the effects. The certainty of the evidence for all recurrence endpoints was very low. Incidence of a secondary primary breast cancer Two studies of 451 women on exemestane, tamoxifen, or unknown endocrine therapy reported risk ratio point estimates of ~0.5 and ~0.6 associated with a density reduction. There was risk of bias in reporting and study confounding, and uncertainty over the effect size. The certainty of the evidence was very low. We were unable to find data regarding the remaining nine outcomes prespecified in the review protocol. Prevention Incidence of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) One study of 507 women without breast cancer who were receiving preventive tamoxifen as part of a randomised controlled trial (51 subsequent breast cancers) reported a risk ratio point estimate of ~0.3 associated with a density reduction. The certainty of the evidence was low. Predictive biomarker findings: One study of a subset of 1065 women from a randomised controlled trial assessed how much the effect of endocrine therapy could be explained by breast density declines in those receiving endocrine therapy. This study evaluated the prevention of invasive breast cancer and DCIS. We found some evidence to support the hypothesis, with a risk ratio interaction point estimate ~0.5. However, the 95% confidence interval included unity, and data were based on 51 women with subsequent breast cancer in the tamoxifen group. The certainty of the evidence was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-/very low-certainty evidence to support the hypothesis that breast density change following endocrine therapy is a prognostic biomarker for treatment or prevention. Studies suggested a potentially large effect size with tamoxifen, but the evidence was limited. There was less evidence that breast density change following tamoxifen preventive therapy is a predictive biomarker than prognostic biomarker. Evidence for breast density change as a prognostic treatment biomarker was stronger for tamoxifen than aromatase inhibitors. There were no studies reporting mammographic density change following endocrine therapy as a predictive biomarker in the treatment setting, nor aromatase inhibitor therapy as a prognostic or predictive biomarker in the preventive setting. Further research is warranted to assess mammographic density as a biomarker for all classes of endocrine therapy and review endpoints.

Chemoprevention Agents to Reduce Mammographic Breast Density in Premenopausal Women: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

Background

Higher mammographic breast density (MBD) is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer when compared with lower MBD, especially in premenopausal women. However, little is known about the effectiveness of chemoprevention agents in reducing MBD in premenopausal women without a history of breast cancer. Findings from this review should provide insight on how to target MBD in breast cancer prevention in premenopausal women with dense breasts.

Methods

We searched 9 electronic databases for clinical trials in English, Spanish, French, or German published until January 2020. Articles evaluating the association of pharmacological agents and MBD were included. Data were extracted on methods, type and dose of intervention, outcomes, side effects, and follow up. Quality of the studies was assessed using the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria.

Results

We identified 7 clinical trials evaluating the associations of 6 chemoprevention agents with changes in MBD in premenopausal women without history of breast cancer. The studies evaluated selective estrogen-receptor modulators (n = 1); gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (n = 2); isoflavones (n = 1); vitamin D (n = 1); and Boswellia, betaine, and mayo-inositol compound (n = 1). Hormonal interventions were associated with net reductions in percent density (tamoxifen [13.4%], leuprolide acetate [8.9%], and goserelin [2.7%]), whereas nonhormonal (vitamin D and isoflavone) interventions were not. However, MBD returned to preintervention baseline levels after cessation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists.

Conclusions

A limited number of chemoprevention agents have been shown to reduce MBD in premenopausal women. Identification of new and well-tolerated chemoprevention agents targeting MBD and larger studies to confirm agents that have been studied in small trials are urgent priorities for primary breast cancer prevention in premenopausal women with dense breasts.

Breast cancer chemoprevention: An update on current practice and opportunities for primary care physicians

Several risk assessment models have been validated for the estimation of risk of breast cancer in women. Chemoprevention through hormonal therapy is an effective way to reduce the incidence of breast cancer in women with high risk. Selective estrogen receptor modulators, tamoxifen and raloxifene, are approved for this indication by the United States Food and Drug Administration, and aromatase inhibitors have also shown promise in recent studies. These medications are generally well tolerated, except for reported increased rates of fractures and venous thromboembolic events. Despite strong recommendations from several regulatory bodies, advocacy for chemoprevention has been inadequate in practice, more so among the primary care physicians. Studies have identified several barriers in physicians, patients, and the system, contributing to this problem. Lack of knowledge about risk assessment models and chemoprevention options preclude physicians from prescribing these medications with confidence. Fear of potential adverse events, confusion regarding the purpose of the therapy, and need for continued adherence for five years are among the principal reasons for reduced chemoprevention uptake and early discontinuation among patients. Multifaceted interventions directed at education and training of health care professionals, proper counseling of women at high risk, and promotion of the development of improved medications might help ensure better chemoprevention uptake in the target population.

Surrogate disease markers as substitutes for chronic disease outcomes in studies of diet and chronic disease relations

Surrogate biomarkers for clinical outcomes afford scientific and economic efficiencies when investigating nutritional interventions in chronic diseases. However, valid scientific results are dependent on the qualification of these disease markers that are intended to be substitutes for a clinical outcome and to accurately predict benefit or harm. In this article, we examine the challenges of evaluating surrogate markers and describe the framework proposed in a 2010 Institute of Medicine report. The components of this framework are presented in the context of nutritional interventions for chronic diseases. We present case studies of 2 well-accepted surrogate markers [blood pressure within sodium intake and cardiovascular disease (CVD) context and low density lipoprotein-cholesterol concentrations within a saturated fat and CVD context]. We also describe additional cases in which the evidence is insufficient to validate their surrogate status. Guidance is offered for future research that evaluates or uses surrogate markers.