Effects of menopausal hormone therapy on ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Menopausal Hormone Therapy and the Breast: A Review of Clinical Studies

Background

Women in the peri- or postmenopause can experience symptoms related to the gradual degradation of ovarian function. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is the most effective therapy to treat common menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes and vaginal discomfort. However, safety concerns have been raised revolving, among others also, around the risk of breast cancer.

Methods

This article is based on a selective literature search for relevant studies regarding HRT use and the risk of breast cancer in the general population or BRCA carriers, the risk of breast cancer recurrence, or the risk of breast cancer in situ.

Summary

HRT can lead to little or no increase in breast cancer risk. The risk depends on the duration and composition of the HRT and decreases after stopping the treatment. Data assessing the oncological safety of HRT after breast cancer are inconsistent. According to current knowledge, HRT is fundamentally contraindicated after breast cancer but can be individually considered after a risk-benefit assessment and when nonhormonal therapies have failed. The same applies to HRT after DCIS, which should not be routinely offered but nonetheless can be considered in individual cases. HRT can be offered up to the age of natural menopause for BRCA mutation carriers who are undergoing risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and do not have a personal history of breast cancer, but is contraindicated in BRCA mutation carriers who have already had breast cancer.

Effect of 3α-dihydroprogesterone and 5α-dihydroprogesterone on DCIS cells and possible impact for postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

Progesterone metabolites 5α-dihydroprogesterone (5αP) and 3α-dihydroprogesterone (3αP) have opposite effects on proliferation, apoptosis and metastasis in the breast. Evidence regarding their influence on ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions is lacking.

METHODS

MCF10DCIS.com cells were cultured in a 3D culture system and treated with 5αP or 3αP. After 5 and 12 days of treatment, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of proliferation, invasion/metastasis, anti-apoptotic or other markers was performed. Cells treated with the tumor-promoting 5αP were observed under the light and confocal microscopes to reveal possible morphological changes that could indicate a transition from an in situ to an invasive phenotype. As a control, the morphology of the MDA-MB-231 invasive cell line was examined. The invasive potential after exposure to 5αP was also assessed using a detachment assay.

RESULTS

The PCR analysis of the chosen markers showed no statistically significant difference between naive cells and cells treated with 5αP or 3αP. DCIS spheroids retained their in situ morphology after treatment with 5αP. The detachment assay showed no increased potential for invasion after exposure to 5αP. Progesterone metabolites 5αP and 3αP do not facilitate or prohibit tumor promotion/invasion in MCF10DCIS.com cells, respectively.

CONCLUSION

As oral micronized progesterone has been proved effective for hot flushes in postmenopausal women, first in vitro data propose that progesterone-only therapy could possibly be considered for women after DCIS suffering from hot flushes.

Hormone Replacement Therapy After Gynaecological Malignancies: a Review Article

Rapid advances in oncology have led to an increased survival rate in cancer patients, who live long enough to reach the natural age of menopause or experience the end of gonadal function as a side effect of oncological treatment. Survivors after gynaecological malignancies are a major challenge as these diseases are hormone-dependent and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) possibly increases the risk of recurrence. This article is based on a selective literature search for relevant studies and guidelines regarding HRT after gynaecological malignancies and provides a broad overview of current research. The data for assessing the oncological safety of HRT after gynaecological malignancy are insufficient overall. According to current knowledge, HRT is fundamentally contraindicated after breast and endometrial cancer. After ovarian cancer, HRT can be used after assessment of the risks and benefits, while there is usually no contraindication to HRT after vulvar, vaginal or cervical cancer.

Use of postmenopausal hormone therapies and risk of histology- and hormone receptor-defined breast cancer: results from a 15-year prospective analysis of NIH-AARP cohort

Background

Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) increases breast cancer (BC) risk, but cohort studies largely consider use only at enrollment. Evidence is limited on how changes in MHT use alter the magnitude of risk, and whether risk varies between invasive and in situ cancer, by histology or by hormone receptor status.

Methods

We investigated the roles of estrogen-alone therapy (ET) and estrogen plus progestin therapy (EPT) on BC risk overall, by histology and estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status, and on incidence of in situ disease, in the NIH-AARP cohort. Participants included 118,760 postmenopausal women (50–71 years), of whom 63.5% (n = 75,398) provided MHT use information at baseline in 1996 and in a follow-up survey in 2004, subsequent to the dissemination in 2002 of the Women’s Health Initiative trial safety concerns regarding EPT. ET analyses included 50,476 women with hysterectomy (31,439 with follow-up data); EPT analyses included 68,284 women with intact uteri (43,959 with follow-up data). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models using age as the time metric with follow-up through 2011.

Results

Eight thousand three hundred thirty-three incident BC cases were accrued, 2479 in women with follow-up data. BC risk was not elevated in current ET users at baseline (HR = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] CI = 0.95–1.16) but was higher in women continuing use through 2004 (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.04–1.75). Ever EPT use at baseline was associated with elevated BC risk overall (HR = 1.54 (1.44–1.64), with a doubling in risk for women with 10 or more years of use, for in situ disease, and across subtypes defined by histology and ER/PR status (all p < 0.004). Risk persisted in women who continued EPT through 2004 (HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.39–2.32). In contrast, no association was seen in women who discontinued EPT before 2004 (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.99–1.30).

Conclusions

ET use was not associated with BC risk in this cohort, although excess risk was suggested in women who continued use through 2004. EPT use was linked to elevated in situ and invasive BC risk, and elevated risk across invasive BC histologic and hormone receptor-defined subtypes, with the highest risk for women who continued use through the 2004 follow-up survey.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-020-01365-9.

Hormone Replacement Therapy, Breast Cancer Risk Factors, and Breast Cancer Risk: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort

BACKGROUND

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) increases the risk of breast cancer, but the association may vary according to patient factors. We investigated the association between HRT and breast cancer in a nationwide cohort with risk stratification according to risk factors for breast cancer.

METHODS

Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, 4,558,376 postmenopausal women who underwent breast cancer screening and regular health checkups from 2009 to 2014 were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 696,084 (15.3%) women reported current or previous HRT use. Breast cancer was newly diagnosed in 26,797 (0.6%) women during a median follow-up of 5.35 years. The HR of the risk of breast cancer in HRT users was 1.25 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22-1.29] compared with HRT nonusers. The risk of breast cancer increased according to HRT duration [adjusted HR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12, for <2 years; adjusted HR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.25-1.40, for 2 to <5 years; and adjusted HR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.63-1.82, for ≥5 years). The effects of HRT on breast cancer risk applied to both invasive and in situ cancer. The HRT-related risk of breast cancer was higher in women who were leaner and those who had dense breasts.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide population-based study confirms the association between HRT use and breast cancer risk. The risk increased proportionally with duration of HRT and differed according to body weight and breast density.

IMPACTS

Risk stratification would be useful when deciding whether to apply HRT for relief of menopausal symptoms.

Change in risk of breast cancer after receiving hormone replacement therapy by considering effect-modifiers: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

We synthesize the current literatures and use the power of meta-analysis to examine trends on association between hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the risk of breast cancer (BC). We performed a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from their inception until Jan 2017. Prospective studies that provided adjusted risk estimates of HRT and BC risk were eligible. Categorical and dose-response meta-analyses followed the PRISMA were conducted using random effects model and restricted cubic spline model, respectively. Forty-seven publications from thirty-five unique studies were included, involving 3,898,376 of participants and 87,845 of BC cases. Compared with non-users, RR for current estrogen-only therapy (ET) users was 1.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05–1.22), and for per year increases was 1.02 (95% CI = 1.02–1.02). Moreover, RR for current estrogen plus progestin therapy (EPT) users was 1.76, (95% CI = 1.56–1.96), and for per year increases was 1.08 (95% CI = 1.08–1.08). Dose-response analyses revealed 8–10 years’ onset peaks, and indicated residual increased BC risk remained after stopping use of ET regimen rather than for EPT. Effect-modifiers like BMI, duration of use, race/ethnicity, routes of administration were recognized. In Conclusions, current use of EP or EPT and ever use of tibolone are associated with an elevated risk of BC. Compared with slim HRT users and non-users, lower BC risks were found among overweight/obese HRT users and former EPT users, respectively. Both ET and EPT users are associated with higher risk of lobular BC than ductal BC, and more ER-positive than negative BC cases were detected among EPT users.

Cancer statistics: Breast cancer in situ

An estimated 60,290 new cases of breast carcinoma in situ are expected to be diagnosed in 2015, and approximately 1 in 33 women is likely to receive an in situ breast cancer diagnosis in her lifetime. Although in situ breast cancers are relatively common, their clinical significance and optimal treatment are topics of uncertainty and concern for both patients and clinicians. In this article, the American Cancer Society provides information about occurrence and treatment patterns for the 2 major subtypes of in situ breast cancer in the United States-ductal carcinoma in situ and lobular carcinoma in situ-using data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and the 13 oldest Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. The authors also present an overview of in situ breast cancer detection, treatment, risk factors, and prevention and discuss research needs and initiatives.

Breast cancer incidence and menopausal hormone therapy in Norway from 2004 to 2009: a register-based cohort study

In Norway, the breast cancer incidence increased by 50% in the 1990s, during a period with initiation of mammography screening as well as a fourfold increase in use of menopausal hormone therapy (HT). After 2002, the HT use has dropped substantially; however, the breast cancer incidence has declined only marginally. How much mammography screening contributed to the breast cancer incidence increase in the 1990s compared with HT use and specifically different types of HT use, has thus been discussed. Whether HT affects the incidence of subtypes of breast cancer differently has also been questioned. We have linked individual data from several national registries from 2004 to 2009 on 449,717 women aged 50–65 years. 4597 cases of invasive cancer and 681 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were included in the analysis. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratio (HR) as a measure of the relative risk of breast cancer associated with use of HT. The HRs associated with prescriptions of HT for more than 1 year were 2.06 (1.90–2.24) for estrogen and progesterone combinations, 1.03 (0.85–1.25) for systemic estrogens, and 1.23 (1.01–1.51) for tibolone. Invasive lobular carcinoma was more strongly associated with use of estrogen and progesterone combinations, HR = 3.10 (2.51–3.81), than nonlobular carcinoma, HR = 1.94 (1.78–2.12). The corresponding value for DCIS was 1.61 (1.28–2.02). We estimated the population attributable fraction to 8.2%, corresponding to 90 breast cancer cases in 2006 indicating that HT use still caused a major number of breast cancer cases.