1
|
Brandt C, Vo JB, Gierach GL, Cheng I, Torres VN, Lawrence WR, McCullough LE, Veiga LHS, Berrington de González A, Ramin C. Second primary cancer risks according to race and ethnicity among U.S. breast cancer survivors. Int J Cancer 2024; 155:996-1006. [PMID: 38685564 PMCID: PMC11250897 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2023] [Revised: 03/16/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024]
Abstract
Breast cancer survivors have an increased risk of developing second primary cancers, yet risks by race and ethnicity have not been comprehensively described. We evaluated second primary cancer risks among 717,335 women diagnosed with first primary breast cancer (aged 20-84 years and survived ≥1-year) in the SEER registries using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs; observed/expected). SIRs were estimated by race and ethnicity compared with the racial- and ethnic-matched general population, and further stratified by clinical characteristics of the index breast cancer. Poisson regression was used to test for heterogeneity by race and ethnicity. SIRs for second primary cancer differed by race and ethnicity with the highest risks observed among non-Hispanic/Latina Asian American, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander (AANHPI), non-Hispanic/Latina Black (Black), and Hispanic/Latina (Latina) survivors and attenuated risk among non-Hispanic/Latina White (White) survivors (SIRAANHPI = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.44-1.54; SIRBlack = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.37-1.45; SIRLatina = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.41-1.49; SIRWhite = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.08-1.10; p-heterogeneity<.001). SIRs were particularly elevated among AANHPI, Black, and Latina survivors diagnosed with an index breast cancer before age 50 (SIRs range = 1.88-2.19) or with estrogen receptor-negative tumors (SIRs range = 1.60-1.94). Heterogeneity by race and ethnicity was observed for 16/27 site-specific second cancers (all p-heterogeneity's < .05) with markedly elevated risks among AANHPI, Black, and Latina survivors for acute myeloid and acute non-lymphocytic leukemia (SIRs range = 2.68-3.15) and cancers of the contralateral breast (SIRs range = 2.60-3.01) and salivary gland (SIRs range = 2.03-3.96). We observed striking racial and ethnic differences in second cancer risk among breast cancer survivors. Additional research is needed to inform targeted approaches for early detection strategies and treatment to reduce these racial and ethnic disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn Brandt
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Jacqueline B Vo
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Iona Cheng
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry, University of California San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Vanessa N Torres
- Cancer Research Center for Health Equity, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Wayne R Lawrence
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Lene H S Veiga
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de González
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Cody Ramin
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Cancer Research Center for Health Equity, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Giannakeas V, Lim DW, Narod SA. Bilateral Mastectomy and Breast Cancer Mortality. JAMA Oncol 2024:2821596. [PMID: 39052262 PMCID: PMC11273285 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.2212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
Importance The benefit of bilateral mastectomy for women with unilateral breast cancer in terms of deaths from breast cancer has not been shown. Objectives To estimate the 20-year cumulative risk of breast cancer mortality among women with stage 0 to stage III unilateral breast cancer according to the type of initial surgery performed. Design, Settings, and Participants This cohort study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program registry database to identify women with unilateral breast cancer (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) who were diagnosed from 2000 to 2019. Three closely matched cohorts of equal size were generated using 1:1:1 matching according to surgical approach. The cohorts were followed up for 20 years for contralateral breast cancer and for breast cancer mortality. The analysis compared the 20-year cumulative risk of breast cancer mortality for women treated with lumpectomy vs unilateral mastectomy vs bilateral mastectomy. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to February 2024. Exposures Type of breast surgery performed (lumpectomy, unilateral mastectomy, or bilateral mastectomy). Main Outcomes and Measures Contralateral breast cancer or breast cancer mortality during the 20-year follow-up period among the groups treated with lumpectomy vs unilateral mastectomy vs bilateral mastectomy. Results The study sample included 661 270 women with unilateral breast cancer (mean [SD] age, 58.7 [11.3] years). After matching, there were 36 028 women in each of the 3 treatment groups. During the 20-year follow-up, there were 766 contralateral breast cancers observed in the lumpectomy group, 728 contralateral breast cancers in the unilateral mastectomy group, and 97 contralateral cancers in the bilateral mastectomy group. The 20-year risk of contralateral breast cancer was 6.9% (95% CI, 6.1%-7.9%) in the lumpectomy-unilateral mastectomy group. The cumulative breast cancer mortality was 32.1% at 15 years after developing a contralateral cancer and was 14.5% for those who did not develop a contralateral cancer (hazard ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 3.52-4.54, using contralateral breast cancer as a time-dependent covariate). Deaths from breast cancer totaled 3077 women (8.54%) in the lumpectomy group, 3269 women (9.07%) in the unilateral mastectomy group, and 3062 women (8.50%) in the bilateral mastectomy group. Conclusions and Relevance This cohort study indicates that the risk of dying of breast cancer increases substantially after experiencing a contralateral breast cancer. Women with breast cancer treated with bilateral mastectomy had a greatly diminished risk of contralateral breast cancer; however, they experienced similar mortality rates as patients treated with lumpectomy or unilateral mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vasily Giannakeas
- Women’s College Research Institute, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Women’s Age Lab, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David W. Lim
- Women’s College Research Institute, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Surgery, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Medical Science, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Steven A. Narod
- Women’s College Research Institute, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Medical Science, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brantley KD, Rosenberg SM, Collins LC, Ruddy KJ, Tamimi RM, Schapira L, Borges VF, Warner E, Come SE, Zheng Y, Kirkner GJ, Snow C, Winer EP, Partridge AH. Second Primary Breast Cancer in Young Breast Cancer Survivors. JAMA Oncol 2024; 10:718-725. [PMID: 38602683 PMCID: PMC11009864 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 04/12/2024]
Abstract
Importance Among women diagnosed with primary breast cancer (BC) at or younger than age 40 years, prior data suggest that their risk of a second primary BC (SPBC) is higher than that of women who are older when they develop a first primary BC. Objective To estimate cumulative incidence and characterize risk factors of SPBC among young patients with BC. Design, Setting, and Participants Participants were enrolled in the Young Women's Breast Cancer Study, a prospective study of 1297 women aged 40 years or younger who were diagnosed with stage 0 to III BC from August 2006 to June 2015. Demographic, genetic testing, treatment, and outcome data were collected by patient surveys and medical record review. A time-to-event analysis was used to account for competing risks when determining cumulative incidence of SPBC, and Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to evaluate associations between clinical factors and SPBC risk. Data were analyzed from January to May 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures The 5- and 10- year cumulative incidence of SPBC. Results In all, 685 women with stage 0 to III BC (mean [SD] age at primary BC diagnosis, 36 [4] years) who underwent unilateral mastectomy or lumpectomy as the primary surgery for BC were included in the analysis. Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 10.0 (7.4-12.1) years, 17 patients (2.5%) developed an SPBC; 2 of these patients had cancer in the ipsilateral breast after lumpectomy. The median (IQR) time from primary BC diagnosis to SPBC was 4.2 (3.3-5.6) years. Among 577 women who underwent genetic testing, the 10-year risk of SPBC was 2.2% for women who did not carry a pathogenic variant (12 of 544) and 8.9% for carriers of a pathogenic variant (3 of 33). In multivariate analyses, the risk of SPBC was higher among PV carriers vs noncarriers (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 5.27; 95% CI, 1.43-19.43) and women with primary in situ BC vs invasive BC (sHR, 5.61; 95% CI, 1.52-20.70). Conclusions Findings of this cohort study suggest that young BC survivors without a germline pathogenic variant have a low risk of developing a SPBC in the first 10 years after diagnosis. Findings from germline genetic testing may inform treatment decision-making and follow-up care considerations in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristen D. Brantley
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shoshana M. Rosenberg
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Laura C. Collins
- Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kathryn J. Ruddy
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Rulla M. Tamimi
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Lidia Schapira
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, California
| | | | - Ellen Warner
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Steven E. Come
- Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yue Zheng
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Craig Snow
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Ann H. Partridge
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Breast Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang Y, Dackus GMHE, Rosenberg EH, Cornelissen S, de Boo LW, Broeks A, Brugman W, Chan TWS, van Diest PJ, Hauptmann M, Ter Hoeve ND, Isaeva OI, de Jong VMT, Jóźwiak K, Kluin RJC, Kok M, Koop E, Nederlof PM, Opdam M, Schouten PC, Siesling S, van Steenis C, Voogd AC, Vreuls W, Salgado RF, Linn SC, Schmidt MK. Long-term outcomes of young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve, triple-negative breast cancer patients according to BRCA1 status. BMC Med 2024; 22:9. [PMID: 38191387 PMCID: PMC10775514 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-03233-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/15/2023] [Indexed: 01/10/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Due to the abundant usage of chemotherapy in young triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, the unbiased prognostic value of BRCA1-related biomarkers in this population remains unclear. In addition, whether BRCA1-related biomarkers modify the well-established prognostic value of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) is unknown. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve TNBC patients according to BRCA1 status, taking sTILs into account. METHODS We included 485 Dutch women diagnosed with node-negative TNBC under age 40 between 1989 and 2000. During this period, these women were considered low-risk and did not receive chemotherapy. BRCA1 status, including pathogenic germline BRCA1 mutation (gBRCA1m), somatic BRCA1 mutation (sBRCA1m), and tumor BRCA1 promoter methylation (BRCA1-PM), was assessed using DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. sTILs were assessed according to the international guideline. Patients' outcomes were compared using Cox regression and competing risk models. RESULTS Among the 399 patients with BRCA1 status, 26.3% had a gBRCA1m, 5.3% had a sBRCA1m, 36.6% had tumor BRCA1-PM, and 31.8% had BRCA1-non-altered tumors. Compared to BRCA1-non-alteration, gBRCA1m was associated with worse overall survival (OS) from the fourth year after diagnosis (adjusted HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.18-3.75), and this association attenuated after adjustment for second primary tumors. Every 10% sTIL increment was associated with 16% higher OS (adjusted HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90) in gBRCA1m, sBRCA1m, or BRCA1-non-altered patients and 31% higher OS in tumor BRCA1-PM patients. Among the 66 patients with tumor BRCA1-PM and ≥ 50% sTILs, we observed excellent 15-year OS (97.0%; 95% CI, 92.9-100%). Conversely, among the 61 patients with gBRCA1m and < 50% sTILs, we observed poor 15-year OS (50.8%; 95% CI, 39.7-65.0%). Furthermore, gBRCA1m was associated with higher (adjusted subdistribution HR, 4.04; 95% CI, 2.29-7.13) and tumor BRCA1-PM with lower (adjusted subdistribution HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.95) incidence of second primary tumors, compared to BRCA1-non-alteration. CONCLUSIONS Although both gBRCA1m and tumor BRCA1-PM alter BRCA1 gene transcription, they are associated with different outcomes in young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve TNBC patients. By combining sTILs and BRCA1 status for risk classification, we were able to identify potential subgroups in this population to intensify and optimize adjuvant treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuwei Wang
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gwen M H E Dackus
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Efraim H Rosenberg
- Division of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sten Cornelissen
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Core Facility Molecular Pathology and Biobanking, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Leonora W de Boo
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annegien Broeks
- Core Facility Molecular Pathology and Biobanking, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wim Brugman
- Genomics Core Facility, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Terry W S Chan
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul J van Diest
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Natalie D Ter Hoeve
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Olga I Isaeva
- Division of Tumor Biology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent M T de Jong
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katarzyna Jóźwiak
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Roelof J C Kluin
- Genomics Core Facility, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marleen Kok
- Division of Tumor Biology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther Koop
- Department of Pathology, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | - Petra M Nederlof
- Division of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mark Opdam
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Philip C Schouten
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | - Adri C Voogd
- Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Vreuls
- Department of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Roberto F Salgado
- Department of Pathology, GZA-ZNA Hospitals, Antwerp, Belgium
- Division of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sabine C Linn
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wang Y, Broeks A, Giardiello D, Hauptmann M, Jóźwiak K, Koop EA, Opdam M, Siesling S, Sonke GS, Stathonikos N, Ter Hoeve ND, van der Wall E, van Deurzen CHM, van Diest PJ, Voogd AC, Vreuls W, Linn SC, Dackus GMHE, Schmidt MK. External validation and clinical utility assessment of PREDICT breast cancer prognostic model in young, systemic treatment-naïve women with node-negative breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2023; 195:113401. [PMID: 37925965 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 10/19/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The validity of the PREDICT breast cancer prognostic model is unclear for young patients without adjuvant systemic treatment. This study aimed to validate PREDICT and assess its clinical utility in young women with node-negative breast cancer who did not receive systemic treatment. METHODS We selected all women from the Netherlands Cancer Registry who were diagnosed with node-negative breast cancer under age 40 between 1989 and 2000, a period when adjuvant systemic treatment was not standard practice for women with node-negative disease. We evaluated the calibration and discrimination of PREDICT using the observed/expected (O/E) mortality ratio, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), respectively. Additionally, we compared the potential clinical utility of PREDICT for selectively administering chemotherapy to the chemotherapy-to-all strategy using decision curve analysis at predefined thresholds. RESULTS A total of 2264 women with a median age at diagnosis of 36 years were included. Of them, 71.2% had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors and 44.0% had grade 3 tumors. Median tumor size was 16 mm. PREDICT v2.2 underestimated 10-year all-cause mortality by 33% in all women (O/E ratio:1.33, 95%CI:1.22-1.43). Model discrimination was moderate overall (AUC10-year:0.65, 95%CI:0.62-0.68), and poor for women with ER-negative tumors (AUC10-year:0.56, 95%CI:0.51-0.62). Compared to the chemotherapy-to-all strategy, PREDICT only showed a slightly higher net benefit in women with ER-positive tumors, but not in women with ER-negative tumors. CONCLUSIONS PREDICT yields unreliable predictions for young women with node-negative breast cancer. Further model updates are needed before PREDICT can be routinely used in this patient subset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuwei Wang
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Annegien Broeks
- Core Facility Molecular Pathology and Biobanking, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Eurac Research, Institute of Biomedicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Katarzyna Jóźwiak
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Esther A Koop
- Department of Pathology, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - Mark Opdam
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Gabe S Sonke
- Department of Medical Oncology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nikolas Stathonikos
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Natalie D Ter Hoeve
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Elsken van der Wall
- Division of Internal Medicine and Dermatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Paul J van Diest
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Adri C Voogd
- Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Willem Vreuls
- Department of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine C Linn
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Medical Oncology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Gwen M H E Dackus
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Department of Molecular Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Watt GP, Smith SA, Howell RM, Pérez-Andújar A, Reiner AS, Cerviño L, McCormick B, Hess D, Knight JA, Malone KE, John EM, Bernstein L, Lynch CF, Mellemkjær L, Shore RE, Liang X, Woods M, Boice JD, Dauer LT, Bernstein JL. Trends in Radiation Dose to the Contralateral Breast During Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy. Radiat Res 2023; 200:331-339. [PMID: 37590492 PMCID: PMC10684055 DOI: 10.1667/rade-23-00014.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 08/19/2023]
Abstract
Over 4 million survivors of breast cancer live in the United States, 35% of whom were treated before 2009. Approximately half of patients with breast cancer receive radiation therapy, which exposes the untreated contralateral breast to radiation and increases the risk of a subsequent contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Radiation oncology has strived to reduce unwanted radiation dose, but it is unknown whether a corresponding decline in actual dose received to the untreated contralateral breast has occurred. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in unwanted contralateral breast radiation dose to inform risk assessment of second primary cancer in the contralateral breast for long-term survivors of breast cancer. Individually estimated radiation absorbed doses to the four quadrants and areola central area of the contralateral breast were estimated for 2,132 women treated with radiation therapy for local/regional breast cancers at age <55 years diagnosed between 1985 and 2008. The two inner quadrant doses and two outer quadrant doses were averaged. Trends in dose to each of the three areas of the contralateral breast were evaluated in multivariable models. The population impact of reducing contralateral breast dose on the incidence of radiation-associated CBC was assessed by estimating population attributable risk fraction (PAR) in a multivariable model. The median dose to the inner quadrants of the contralateral breast was 1.70 Gy; to the areola, 1.20 Gy; and to the outer quadrants, 0.72 Gy. Ninety-two percent of patients received ≥1 Gy to the inner quadrants. For each calendar year of diagnosis, dose declined significantly for each location, most rapidly for the inner quadrants (0.04 Gy/year). Declines in dose were similar across subgroups defined by age at diagnosis and body mass index. The PAR for CBC due to radiation exposure >1 Gy for women <40 years of age was 17%. Radiation dose-reduction measures have reduced dose to the contralateral breast during breast radiation therapy. Reducing the dose to the contralateral breast to <1 Gy could prevent an estimated 17% of subsequent radiation-associated CBCs for women treated under 40 years of age. These dose estimates inform CBC surveillance for the growing number of breast cancer survivors who received radiation therapy as young women in recent decades. Continued reductions in dose to the contralateral breast could further reduce the incidence of radiation-associated CBC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gordon P. Watt
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Susan A. Smith
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Rebecca M. Howell
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Anne S. Reiner
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Beryl McCormick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Julia A. Knight
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kathleen E. Malone
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Esther M. John
- Departments of Epidemiology & Population Health and of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California
| | | | | | - Roy E. Shore
- Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Meghan Woods
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - John D. Boice
- National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | | | - Jonine L. Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Morra A, Schreurs MAC, Andrulis IL, Anton‐Culver H, Augustinsson A, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Brauch H, Broeks A, Buys SS, Camp NJ, Castelao JE, Cessna MH, Chang‐Claude J, Chung WK, Colonna SV, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Dennis J, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dunning AM, Dwek M, Easton DF, Eccles DM, Eriksson M, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Fehm TN, Figueroa JD, Flyger H, Gabrielson M, Gago‐Dominguez M, García‐Closas M, García‐Sáenz JA, Genkinger J, Grassmann F, Gündert M, Hahnen E, Haiman CA, Hamann U, Harrington PA, Hartikainen JM, Hoppe R, Hopper JL, Houlston RS, Howell A, Jakubowska A, Janni W, Jernström H, John EM, Johnson N, Jones ME, Kristensen VN, Kurian AW, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Lux MP, Mannermaa A, Mavroudis D, Mulligan AM, Muranen TA, Nevanlinna H, Nevelsteen I, Neven P, Newman WG, Obi N, Offit K, Olshan AF, Park‐Simon T, Patel AV, Peterlongo P, Phillips K, Plaseska‐Karanfilska D, Polley EC, Presneau N, Pylkäs K, Rack B, Radice P, Rashid MU, Rhenius V, Robson M, Romero A, Saloustros E, Sawyer EJ, Schmutzler RK, Schuetze S, Scott C, Shah M, Smichkoska S, Southey MC, Tapper WJ, Teras LR, Tollenaar RAEM, Tomczyk K, Tomlinson I, Troester MA, Vachon CM, van Veen EM, Wang Q, Wendt C, Wildiers H, Winqvist R, Ziogas A, Hall P, Pharoah PDP, Adank MA, Hollestelle A, Schmidt MK, Hooning MJ. Association of the CHEK2 c.1100delC variant, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with contralateral breast cancer risk and breast cancer-specific survival. Cancer Med 2023; 12:16142-16162. [PMID: 37401034 PMCID: PMC10469654 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Revised: 04/30/2023] [Accepted: 06/03/2023] [Indexed: 07/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer (BC) patients with a germline CHEK2 c.1100delC variant have an increased risk of contralateral BC (CBC) and worse BC-specific survival (BCSS) compared to non-carriers. AIM To assessed the associations of CHEK2 c.1100delC, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with CBC risk and BCSS. METHODS Analyses were based on 82,701 women diagnosed with a first primary invasive BC including 963 CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers; median follow-up was 9.1 years. Differential associations with treatment by CHEK2 c.1100delC status were tested by including interaction terms in a multivariable Cox regression model. A multi-state model was used for further insight into the relation between CHEK2 c.1100delC status, treatment, CBC risk and death. RESULTS There was no evidence for differential associations of therapy with CBC risk by CHEK2 c.1100delC status. The strongest association with reduced CBC risk was observed for the combination of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy [HR (95% CI): 0.66 (0.55-0.78)]. No association was observed with radiotherapy. Results from the multi-state model showed shorter BCSS for CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers versus non-carriers also after accounting for CBC occurrence [HR (95% CI): 1.30 (1.09-1.56)]. CONCLUSION Systemic therapy was associated with reduced CBC risk irrespective of CHEK2 c.1100delC status. Moreover, CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers had shorter BCSS, which appears not to be fully explained by their CBC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Morra
- Division of Molecular PathologyThe Netherlands Cancer InstituteAmsterdamthe Netherlands
| | | | - Irene L. Andrulis
- Fred A. Litwin Center for Cancer GeneticsLunenfeld‐Tanenbaum Research Institute of Mount Sinai HospitalTorontoOntarioCanada
- Department of Molecular GeneticsUniversity of TorontoTorontoOntarioCanada
| | - Hoda Anton‐Culver
- Department of Medicine, Genetic Epidemiology Research InstituteUniversity of California IrvineIrvineCaliforniaUSA
| | | | - Matthias W. Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen‐EMN, Friedrich‐Alexander University Erlangen‐NurembergUniversity Hospital ErlangenErlangenGermany
| | - Sabine Behrens
- Division of Cancer EpidemiologyGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Stig E. Bojesen
- Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte HospitalCopenhagen University HospitalHerlevDenmark
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte HospitalCopenhagen University HospitalHerlevDenmark
- Faculty of Health and Medical SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
| | - Manjeet K. Bolla
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Hiltrud Brauch
- Dr. Margarete Fischer‐Bosch‐Institute of Clinical PharmacologyStuttgartGermany
- iFIT‐Cluster of ExcellenceUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site TübingenGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)TübingenGermany
| | - Annegien Broeks
- Division of Molecular PathologyThe Netherlands Cancer InstituteAmsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - Saundra S. Buys
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtahUSA
| | - Nicola J. Camp
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtahUSA
| | - Jose E. Castelao
- Oncology and Genetics Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS)Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo‐SERGASVigoSpain
| | | | - Jenny Chang‐Claude
- Division of Cancer EpidemiologyGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH)University Medical Center Hamburg‐EppendorfHamburgGermany
| | - Wendy K. Chung
- Departments of Pediatrics and MedicineColumbia UniversityNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| | - Sarah V. Colonna
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtahUSA
| | - Fergus J. Couch
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
| | - Angela Cox
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Sheffield Institute for Nucleic Acids (SInFoNiA)University of SheffieldSheffieldUK
| | - Simon S. Cross
- Department of Neuroscience, Academic Unit of PathologyUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
| | - Mary B. Daly
- Department of Clinical GeneticsFox Chase Cancer CenterPhiladelphiaPennsylvaniaUSA
| | - Joe Dennis
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of PathologyLeiden University Medical CenterLeidenthe Netherlands
- Department of Human GeneticsLeiden University Medical CenterLeidenthe Netherlands
| | - Thilo Dörk
- Gynaecology Research UnitHannover Medical SchoolHannoverGermany
| | - Alison M. Dunning
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Miriam Dwek
- School of Life SciencesUniversity of WestminsterLondonUK
| | - Douglas F. Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | | | - Mikael Eriksson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
| | - D. Gareth Evans
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of ManchesterManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen‐EMN, Friedrich‐Alexander University Erlangen‐NurembergUniversity Hospital ErlangenErlangenGermany
| | - Tanja N. Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital DüsseldorfHeinrich‐Heine University DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
| | - Jonine D. Figueroa
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and InformaticsThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
- Cancer Research UK Edinburgh CentreThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaMarylandUSA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte HospitalCopenhagen University HospitalHerlevDenmark
| | - Marike Gabrielson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
| | - Manuela Gago‐Dominguez
- Cancer Genetics and Epidemiology Group, SERGAS, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS) FoundationComplejo Hospitalario Universitario de SantiagoSantiago de CompostelaSpain
| | - Montserrat García‐Closas
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaMarylandUSA
| | - José A. García‐Sáenz
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC)Centro Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC)MadridSpain
| | - Jeanine Genkinger
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public HealthColumbia UniversityNew YorkNew YorkUSA
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer CenterNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| | - Felix Grassmann
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
- Health and Medical UniversityPotsdamGermany
| | - Melanie Gündert
- Molecular Epidemiology Group, C080German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Molecular Biology of Breast Cancer, University Womens Clinic HeidelbergUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
- Institute of Diabetes Research, Helmholtz Zentrum MünchenGerman Research Center for Environmental HealthNeuherbergGermany
| | - Eric Hahnen
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital CologneUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
- Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital CologneUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
| | - Christopher A. Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesCaliforniaUSA
| | - Ute Hamann
- Molecular Genetics of Breast CancerGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Patricia A. Harrington
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Jaana M. Hartikainen
- Translational Cancer Research AreaUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic MedicineUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
| | - Reiner Hoppe
- Dr. Margarete Fischer‐Bosch‐Institute of Clinical PharmacologyStuttgartGermany
- University of TübingenTübingenGermany
| | - John L. Hopper
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global HealthThe University of MelbourneMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
| | - Richard S. Houlston
- Division of Genetics and EpidemiologyThe Institute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | - Anthony Howell
- Division of Cancer SciencesUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, International Hereditary Cancer CenterPomeranian Medical UniversitySzczecinPoland
- Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic DiagnosticsPomeranian Medical UniversitySzczecinPoland
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynaecology and ObstetricsUniversity Hospital UlmUlmGermany
| | | | - Esther M. John
- Department of Epidemiology and Population HealthStanford University School of MedicineStanfordCaliforniaUSA
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer InstituteStanford University School of MedicineStanfordCaliforniaUSA
| | - Nichola Johnson
- The Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research CentreThe Institute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | - Michael E. Jones
- Division of Genetics and EpidemiologyThe Institute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | - Vessela N. Kristensen
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
- Department of Medical GeneticsOslo University Hospital and University of OsloOsloNorway
| | - Allison W. Kurian
- Department of Epidemiology and Population HealthStanford University School of MedicineStanfordCaliforniaUSA
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer InstituteStanford University School of MedicineStanfordCaliforniaUSA
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human GeneticsKU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
- VIB Center for Cancer BiologyVIBLeuvenBelgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- Epidemiology ProgramUniversity of Hawaii Cancer CenterHonoluluHawaiiUSA
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Department of Molecular Medicine and SurgeryKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
- Department of Clinical GeneticsKarolinska University HospitalStockholmSweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, International Hereditary Cancer CenterPomeranian Medical UniversitySzczecinPoland
| | - Michael P. Lux
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen‐EMN, Friedrich‐Alexander University Erlangen‐NurembergUniversity Hospital ErlangenErlangenGermany
| | - Arto Mannermaa
- Translational Cancer Research AreaUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic MedicineUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
- Biobank of Eastern FinlandKuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
| | - Dimitrios Mavroudis
- Department of Medical OncologyUniversity Hospital of HeraklionHeraklionGreece
| | - Anna Marie Mulligan
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathobiologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoOntarioCanada
- Laboratory Medicine ProgramUniversity Health NetworkTorontoOntarioCanada
| | - Taru A. Muranen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University HospitalUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University HospitalUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
| | - Ines Nevelsteen
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, University Hospitals LeuvenLeuven Cancer InstituteLeuvenBelgium
| | - Patrick Neven
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, University Hospitals LeuvenLeuven Cancer InstituteLeuvenBelgium
| | - William G. Newman
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of ManchesterManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
| | - Nadia Obi
- Institute for Medical Biometry and EpidemiologyUniversity Medical Center Hamburg‐EppendorfHamburgGermany
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Clinical Genetics Research Lab, Department of Cancer Biology and GeneticsMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkNew YorkUSA
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of MedicineMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| | - Andrew F. Olshan
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillNorth CarolinaUSA
| | | | - Alpa V. Patel
- Department of Population ScienceAmerican Cancer SocietyAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Paolo Peterlongo
- IFOM ETS ‐ The AIRC Institute of Molecular Oncology, Genome Diagnostics ProgramMilanItaly
| | - Kelly‐Anne Phillips
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global HealthThe University of MelbourneMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer CentreMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of OncologyThe University of MelbourneParkvilleVictoriaAustralia
| | - Dijana Plaseska‐Karanfilska
- Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov'MASASkopjeRepublic of North Macedonia
| | - Eric C. Polley
- Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health SciencesMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
| | | | - Katri Pylkäs
- Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter OuluUniversity of OuluOuluFinland
- Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor BiologyNorthern Finland Laboratory Centre OuluOuluFinland
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynaecology and ObstetricsUniversity Hospital UlmUlmGermany
| | - Paolo Radice
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori“Predictive Medicine: Molecular Bases of Genetic Risk”MilanItaly
| | - Muhammad U. Rashid
- Molecular Genetics of Breast CancerGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Department of Basic SciencesShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre (SKMCH & RC)LahorePakistan
| | - Valerie Rhenius
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Mark Robson
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of MedicineMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| | - Atocha Romero
- Medical Oncology DepartmentHospital Universitario Puerta de HierroMadridSpain
| | | | - Elinor J. Sawyer
- School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's CampusKing's College LondonLondonUK
| | - Rita K. Schmutzler
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital CologneUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
- Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital CologneUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
- Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital CologneUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
| | - Sabine Schuetze
- Department of Gynaecology and ObstetricsUniversity Hospital UlmUlmGermany
| | - Christopher Scott
- Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health SciencesMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
| | - Mitul Shah
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Snezhana Smichkoska
- Medical Faculty, University Clinic of Radiotherapy and OncologySs. Cyril and Methodius University in SkopjeSkopjeRepublic of North Macedonia
| | - Melissa C. Southey
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash HealthMonash UniversityClaytonVictoriaAustralia
- Department of Clinical PathologyThe University of MelbourneMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
- Cancer Epidemiology DivisionCancer Council VictoriaMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
| | | | - Lauren R. Teras
- Department of Population ScienceAmerican Cancer SocietyAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | | | - Katarzyna Tomczyk
- The Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research CentreThe Institute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | - Ian Tomlinson
- Cancer Research CentreThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
| | - Melissa A. Troester
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillNorth CarolinaUSA
| | - Celine M. Vachon
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Quantitative Health SciencesMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
| | - Elke M. van Veen
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of ManchesterManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustManchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUK
| | - Qin Wang
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Camilla Wendt
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, SödersjukhusetKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
- Department of OncologySödersjukhusetStockholmSweden
| | - Hans Wildiers
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, University Hospitals LeuvenLeuven Cancer InstituteLeuvenBelgium
| | - Robert Winqvist
- Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter OuluUniversity of OuluOuluFinland
- Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor BiologyNorthern Finland Laboratory Centre OuluOuluFinland
| | - Argyrios Ziogas
- Department of Medicine, Genetic Epidemiology Research InstituteUniversity of California IrvineIrvineCaliforniaUSA
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
- Department of OncologySödersjukhusetStockholmSweden
| | - Paul D. P. Pharoah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic EpidemiologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Muriel A. Adank
- Family Cancer ClinicThe Netherlands Cancer Institute ‐ Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamthe Netherlands
| | | | - Marjanka K. Schmidt
- Division of Molecular PathologyThe Netherlands Cancer InstituteAmsterdamthe Netherlands
- Division of Psychosocial Research and EpidemiologyThe Netherlands Cancer Institute ‐ Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - Maartje J. Hooning
- Department of Medical OncologyErasmus MC Cancer InstituteRotterdamthe Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ramin C, Veiga LHS, Vo JB, Curtis RE, Bodelon C, Aiello Bowles EJ, Buist DSM, Weinmann S, Feigelson HS, Gierach GL, Berrington de Gonzalez A. Risk of second primary cancer among women in the Kaiser Permanente Breast Cancer Survivors Cohort. Breast Cancer Res 2023; 25:50. [PMID: 37138341 PMCID: PMC10155401 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-023-01647-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer survivors are living longer due to early detection and advances in treatment and are at increased risk for second primary cancers. Comprehensive evaluation of second cancer risk among patients treated in recent decades is lacking. METHODS We identified 16,004 females diagnosed with a first primary stage I-III breast cancer between 1990 and 2016 (followed through 2017) and survived ≥ 1 year at Kaiser Permanente (KP) Colorado, Northwest, and Washington. Second cancer was defined as an invasive primary cancer diagnosed ≥ 12 months after the first primary breast cancer. Second cancer risk was evaluated for all cancers (excluding ipsilateral breast cancer) using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), and a competing risk approach for cumulative incidence and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for KP center, treatment, age, and year of first cancer diagnosis. RESULTS Over a median follow-up of 6.2 years, 1,562 women developed second cancer. Breast cancer survivors had a 70% higher risk of any cancer (95%CI = 1.62-1.79) and 45% higher risk of non-breast cancer (95%CI = 1.37-1.54) compared with the general population. SIRs were highest for malignancies of the peritoneum (SIR = 3.44, 95%CI = 1.65-6.33), soft tissue (SIR = 3.32, 95%CI = 2.51-4.30), contralateral breast (SIR = 3.10, 95%CI = 2.82-3.40), and acute myeloid leukemia (SIR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.18-3.48)/myelodysplastic syndrome (SIR = 3.25, 95%CI = 1.89-5.20). Women also had elevated risks for oral, colon, pancreas, lung, and uterine corpus cancer, melanoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (SIR range = 1.31-1.97). Radiotherapy was associated with increased risk for all second cancers (HR = 1.13, 95%CI = 1.01-1.25) and soft tissue sarcoma (HR = 2.36, 95%CI = 1.17-4.78), chemotherapy with decreased risk for all second cancers (HR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.78-0.98) and increased myelodysplastic syndrome risk (HR = 3.01, 95%CI = 1.01-8.94), and endocrine therapy with lower contralateral breast cancer risk (HR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.38-0.60). Approximately 1 in 9 women who survived ≥ 1 year developed second cancer, 1 in 13 developed second non-breast cancer, and 1 in 30 developed contralateral breast cancer by 10 years. Trends in cumulative incidence declined for contralateral breast cancer but not for second non-breast cancers. CONCLUSIONS Elevated risks of second cancer among breast cancer survivors treated in recent decades suggests that heightened surveillance is warranted and continued efforts to reduce second cancers are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody Ramin
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA.
- Cancer Research Center for Health Equity, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - Lene H S Veiga
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jacqueline B Vo
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Rochelle E Curtis
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Clara Bodelon
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Erin J Aiello Bowles
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Diana S M Buist
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Bernard J. Tyson Kaiser Permanente School of Medicine, Pasadena, CA, USA
| | - Sheila Weinmann
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Heather Spencer Feigelson
- Bernard J. Tyson Kaiser Permanente School of Medicine, Pasadena, CA, USA
- Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, CO, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de Gonzalez
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, ICR, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Morra A, Mavaddat N, Muranen TA, Ahearn TU, Allen J, Andrulis IL, Auvinen P, Becher H, Behrens S, Blomqvist C, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Brauch H, Camp NJ, Carvalho S, Castelao JE, Cessna MH, Chang-Claude J, Chenevix-Trench G, Czene K, Decker B, Dennis J, Dörk T, Dorling L, Dunning AM, Ekici AB, Eriksson M, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Figueroa JD, Flyger H, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, Geurts-Giele WRR, Giles GG, Guénel P, Gündert M, Hahnen E, Hall P, Hamann U, Harrington PA, He W, Heikkilä P, Hooning MJ, Hoppe R, Howell A, Humphreys K, Jakubowska A, Jung AY, Keeman R, Kristensen VN, Lubiński J, Mannermaa A, Manoochehri M, Manoukian S, Margolin S, Mavroudis D, Milne RL, Mulligan AM, Newman WG, Park-Simon TW, Peterlongo P, Pharoah PDP, Rhenius V, Saloustros E, Sawyer EJ, Schmutzler RK, Shah M, Spurdle AB, Tomlinson I, Truong T, van Veen EM, Vreeswijk MPG, Wang Q, Wendt C, Yang XR, Nevanlinna H, Devilee P, Easton DF, Schmidt MK. The impact of coding germline variants on contralateral breast cancer risk and survival. Am J Hum Genet 2023; 110:475-486. [PMID: 36827971 PMCID: PMC10027471 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2022] [Accepted: 02/01/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Evidence linking coding germline variants in breast cancer (BC)-susceptibility genes other than BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2 with contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the association of protein-truncating variants (PTVs) and rare missense variants (MSVs) in nine known (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) and 25 suspected BC-susceptibility genes with CBC risk and BCSS. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox regression models. Analyses included 34,401 women of European ancestry diagnosed with BC, including 676 CBCs and 3,449 BC deaths; the median follow-up was 10.9 years. Subtype analyses were based on estrogen receptor (ER) status of the first BC. Combined PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 and PALB2 were associated with increased CBC risk [HRs (95% CIs): 2.88 (1.70-4.87), 2.31 (1.39-3.85), 8.29 (2.53-27.21), 2.25 (1.55-3.27), and 2.67 (1.33-5.35), respectively]. The strongest evidence of association with BCSS was for PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA2 (ER-positive BC) and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 [HRs (95% CIs): 1.53 (1.13-2.07), 2.08 (0.95-4.57), and 1.39 (1.13-1.72), respectively, after adjusting for tumor characteristics and treatment]. HRs were essentially unchanged when censoring for CBC, suggesting that these associations are not completely explained by increased CBC risk, tumor characteristics, or treatment. There was limited evidence of associations of PTVs and/or rare MSVs with CBC risk or BCSS for the 25 suspected BC genes. The CBC findings are relevant to treatment decisions, follow-up, and screening after BC diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Morra
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Division of Molecular Pathology, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Nasim Mavaddat
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Taru A Muranen
- University of Helsinki, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Thomas U Ahearn
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jamie Allen
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Irene L Andrulis
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital, Fred A. Litwin Center for Cancer Genetics, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Toronto, Department of Molecular Genetics, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Päivi Auvinen
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oncology, Kuopio, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Department of Oncology, Cancer Center, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Heiko Becher
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Sabine Behrens
- German Cancer Research Center, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Carl Blomqvist
- University of Helsinki, Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark; Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark; University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Hiltrud Brauch
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, Germany; University of Tübingen, iFIT-Cluster of Excellence, Tübingen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium and German Cancer Research Center, Partner Site Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Nicola J Camp
- University of Utah, Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Sara Carvalho
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jose E Castelao
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS, Oncology and Genetics Unit, Vigo, Spain
| | | | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- German Cancer Research Center, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Georgia Chenevix-Trench
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | -
- Oslo University Hospital-Radiumhospitalet, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway; University of Oslo, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway; Vestre Viken Hospital, Department of Research, Drammen, Norway; Oslo University Hospital, Department of Tumor Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway; Oslo University Hospital-Radiumhospitalet, Department of Oncology, Division of Surgery, Cancer and Transplantation Medicine, Oslo, Norway; Akershus University Hospital, Department of Oncology, Lørenskog, Norway; Oslo University Hospital, Oslo Breast Cancer Research Consortium, Oslo, Norway; Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo, Norway; The Arctic University of Norway, Department of Community Medicine, Tromsø, Norway; The Arctic University of Norway, Core Facility for Biobanking, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Kamila Czene
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Brennan Decker
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK; Foundation Medicine, Inc, Pathology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Joe Dennis
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thilo Dörk
- Hannover Medical School, Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover, Germany
| | - Leila Dorling
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alison M Dunning
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Arif B Ekici
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute of Human Genetics, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Mikael Eriksson
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - D Gareth Evans
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- University Hospital Erlangen, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jonine D Figueroa
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD, USA; The University of Edinburgh, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Edinburgh, UK; The University of Edinburgh, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Manuela Gago-Dominguez
- Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS, Genomic Medicine Group, International Cancer Genetics and Epidemiology Group, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | - Graham G Giles
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Pascal Guénel
- INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Team Exposome and Heredity, Villejuif, France
| | - Melanie Gündert
- German Cancer Research Center, Molecular Epidemiology Group, C080, Heidelberg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Molecular Biology of Breast Cancer, University Womens Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Institute of Diabetes Research, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Eric Hahnen
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Germany
| | - Per Hall
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden; Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- German Cancer Research Center, Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Patricia A Harrington
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Wei He
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Päivi Heikkilä
- University of Helsinki, Department of Pathology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Reiner Hoppe
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, Germany; University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Anthony Howell
- University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Manchester, UK
| | - Keith Humphreys
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden
| | -
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Research Department, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, International Hereditary Cancer Center, Szczecin, Poland; Pomeranian Medical University, Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Audrey Y Jung
- German Cancer Research Center, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Division of Molecular Pathology, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Vessela N Kristensen
- University of Oslo, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway; Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo, Norway
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, International Hereditary Cancer Center, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Arto Mannermaa
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Kuopio, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Biobank of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- German Cancer Research Center, Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Siranoush Manoukian
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Milan, Italy
| | - Sara Margolin
- Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm, Sweden; Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Dimitrios Mavroudis
- University Hospital of Heraklion, Department of Medical Oncology, Heraklion, Greece
| | - Roger L Milne
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Anna Marie Mulligan
- University of Toronto, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, ON, Canada; University Health Network, Laboratory Medicine Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - William G Newman
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Paolo Peterlongo
- IFOM ETS - the AIRC Institute of Molecular Oncology, Genome Diagnostics Program, Milan, Italy
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Valerie Rhenius
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Elinor J Sawyer
- King's College London, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's Campus, London, UK
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Mitul Shah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Amanda B Spurdle
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Population Health Program, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Ian Tomlinson
- University of Birmingham, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, Birmingham, UK; University of Oxford, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK
| | - Thérèse Truong
- INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Team Exposome and Heredity, Villejuif, France
| | - Elke M van Veen
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester, UK
| | - Maaike P G Vreeswijk
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Human Genetics, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Qin Wang
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK
| | - Camilla Wendt
- Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm, Sweden; Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Xiaohong R Yang
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- University of Helsinki, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Peter Devilee
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Human Genetics, Leiden, the Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Douglas F Easton
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Division of Molecular Pathology, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 Amsterdam, the Netherlands; The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Schmidt MK, Kelly JE, Brédart A, Cameron DA, de Boniface J, Easton DF, Offersen BV, Poulakaki F, Rubio IT, Sardanelli F, Schmutzler R, Spanic T, Weigelt B, Rutgers EJT. EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Eur J Cancer 2023; 181:79-91. [PMID: 36641897 PMCID: PMC10326619 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.11.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2022] [Revised: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 11/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
After a diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer, increasing numbers of patients are requesting contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), the surgical removal of the healthy breast after diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. It is important for the community of breast cancer specialists to provide meaningful guidance to women considering CPM. This manifesto discusses the issues and challenges of CPM and provides recommendations to improve oncological, surgical, physical and psychological outcomes for women presenting with unilateral breast cancer: (1) Communicate best available risks in manageable timeframes to prioritise actions; better risk stratification and implementation of risk-assessment tools combining family history, genetic and genomic information, and treatment and prognosis of the first breast cancer are required; (2) Reserve CPM for specific situations; in women not at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), ipsilateral breast-conserving surgery is the recommended option; (3) Encourage patients at low or intermediate risk of CBC to delay decisions on CPM until treatment for the primary cancer is complete, to focus on treating the existing disease first; (4) Provide patients with personalised information about the risk:benefit balance of CPM in manageable timeframes; (5) Ensure patients have an informed understanding of the competing risks for CBC and that there is a realistic plan for the patient; (6) Ensure patients understand the short- and long-term physical effects of CPM; (7) In patients considering CPM, offer psychological and surgical counselling before surgery; anxiety alone is not an indication for CPM; (8) Eliminate inequality between countries in reimbursement strategies; CPM should be reimbursed if it is considered a reasonable option resulting from multidisciplinary tumour board assessment; (9) Treat breast cancer patients at specialist breast units providing the entire patient-centred pathway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Anne Brédart
- Institut Curie, Paris, France; Psychology Institute, Psychopathology and Health Process Laboratory UR4057, Paris City University, Paris, France
| | - David A Cameron
- Edinburgh University Cancer Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jana de Boniface
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Surgery, Breast Unit, Capio St. Göran's Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Birgitte V Offersen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital - Aarhus University, Aarhus N, Denmark
| | - Fiorita Poulakaki
- Breast Surgery Department, Athens Medical Center, Athens, Greece; Europa Donna - The European Breast Cancer Coalition, Milan, Italy
| | - Isabel T Rubio
- Breast Surgical Oncology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Madrid, Spain
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy; Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Rita Schmutzler
- Center for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Tanja Spanic
- Europa Donna - The European Breast Cancer Coalition, Milan, Italy; Europa Donna Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Britta Weigelt
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Emiel J T Rutgers
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Austin PC, Giardiello D, van Buuren S. Impute-then-exclude versus exclude-then-impute: Lessons when imputing a variable used both in cohort creation and as an independent variable in the analysis model. Stat Med 2023; 42:1525-1541. [PMID: 36807923 DOI: 10.1002/sim.9685] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Revised: 10/18/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/21/2023]
Abstract
We examined the setting in which a variable that is subject to missingness is used both as an inclusion/exclusion criterion for creating the analytic sample and subsequently as the primary exposure in the analysis model that is of scientific interest. An example is cancer stage, where patients with stage IV cancer are often excluded from the analytic sample, and cancer stage (I to III) is an exposure variable in the analysis model. We considered two analytic strategies. The first strategy, referred to as "exclude-then-impute," excludes subjects for whom the observed value of the target variable is equal to the specified value and then uses multiple imputation to complete the data in the resultant sample. The second strategy, referred to as "impute-then-exclude," first uses multiple imputation to complete the data and then excludes subjects based on the observed or filled-in values in the completed samples. Monte Carlo simulations were used to compare five methods (one based on "exclude-then-impute" and four based on "impute-then-exclude") along with the use of a complete case analysis. We considered both missing completely at random and missing at random missing data mechanisms. We found that an impute-then-exclude strategy using substantive model compatible fully conditional specification tended to have superior performance across 72 different scenarios. We illustrated the application of these methods using empirical data on patients hospitalized with heart failure when heart failure subtype was used for cohort creation (excluding subjects with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction) and was also an exposure in the analysis model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter C Austin
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- Institute for Biomedicine (affiliated with the University of Lübeck), Eurac Research, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Stef van Buuren
- University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research TNO, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Morra A, Schreurs MAC, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Augustinsson A, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Brauch H, Broeks A, Buys SS, Camp NJ, Castelao JE, Cessna MH, Chang-Claude J, Chung WK, Collaborators NBCS, Colonna SV, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Dennis J, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dunning AM, Dwek M, Easton DF, Eccles DM, Eriksson M, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Fehm TN, Figueroa JD, Flyger H, Gabrielson M, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, García-Sáenz JA, Genkinger J, Grassmann F, Gündert M, Hahnen E, Haiman CA, Hamann U, Harrington PA, Hartikainen JM, Hoppe R, Hopper JL, Houlston RS, Howell A, Investigators ABCTB, Investigators KC, Jakubowska A, Janni W, Jernström H, John EM, Johnson N, Jones ME, Kristensen VN, Kurian AW, Lambrechts D, Marchand LL, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Lux MP, Mannermaa A, Mavroudis D, Mulligan AM, Muranen TA, Nevanlinna H, Nevelsteen I, Neven P, Newman WG, Obi N, Offit K, Olshan AF, Park-Simon TW, Patel AV, Peterlongo P, Phillips KA, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, Polley EC, Presneau N, Pylkäs K, Rack B, Radice P, Rashid MU, Rhenius V, Robson M, Romero A, Saloustros E, Sawyer EJ, Schmutzler RK, Schuetze S, Scott C, Shah M, Smichkoska S, Southey MC, Tapper WJ, Teras LR, Tollenaar RA, Tomczyk K, Tomlinson I, Troester MA, Vachon CM, Veen EMV, Wang Q, Wendt C, Wildiers H, Winqvist R, Ziogas A, Hall P, Pharoah PD, Adank MA, Hollestelle A, Schmidt MK, Hooning MJ. Association of the CHEK2 c.1100delC variant, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with contralateral breast cancer risk and breast cancer-specific survival. RESEARCH SQUARE 2023:rs.3.rs-2569372. [PMID: 36824750 PMCID: PMC9949248 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2569372/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) patients with a germline CHEK2 c.1100delC variant have an increased risk of contralateral BC (CBC) and worse BC-specific survival (BCSS) compared to non-carriers. We aimed to assess the associations of CHEK2 c.1100delC, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with CBC risk and BCSS. Analyses were based on 82,701 women diagnosed with invasive BC including 963 CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers; median follow-up was 9.1 years. Differential associations of treatment by CHEK2 c.1100delC status were tested by including interaction terms in a multivariable Cox regression model. A multi-state model was used for further insight into the relation between CHEK2 c.1100delC status, treatment, CBC risk and death. There was no evidence for differential associations of therapy with CBC risk by CHEK2 c.1100delC status The strongest association with reduced CBC risk was observed for the combination of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy [HR(95%CI): 0.66 (0.55-0.78)]. No association was observed with radiotherapy. Results from the multi-state model showed shorter BCSS for CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers versus non-carriers also after accounting for CBC occurrence [HR(95%CI) :1.30 (1.09-1.56)]. In conclusion, systemic therapy was associated with reduced CBC risk irrespective of CHEK2 c.1100delC status. Moreover, CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers had shorter BCSS, which appears not to be fully explained by their CBC risk. (Main MS: 3201 words).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Hiltrud Brauch
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology
| | | | | | | | - Jose E. Castelao
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - D. Gareth Evans
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre
| | | | - Tanja N. Fehm
- University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf
| | | | | | | | - Manuela Gago-Dominguez
- Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services
| | - José A. García-Sáenz
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Centro Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC)
| | | | | | | | - Eric Hahnen
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne
| | | | | | | | | | - Reiner Hoppe
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Patrick Neven
- Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven
| | | | - Nadia Obi
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Paolo Radice
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Rita K. Schmutzler
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne
| | | | | | | | - Snezhana Smichkoska
- Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Medical Faculty, University Clinic of Radiotherapy and Oncology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Elke M. van Veen
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre
| | | | | | - Hans Wildiers
- Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven
| | | | | | | | | | - Muriel A. Adank
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Keymeulen KBIM, Geurts SME, Kooreman LFS, Duijm LEM, Engelen S, Vanwetswinkel S, Luiten E, Siesling S, Voogd AC, Tjan-Heijnen VCG. Clinical value of contralateral breast cancers detected by pre-operative MRI in patients diagnosed with DCIS: a population-based cohort study. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:2209-2217. [PMID: 36180645 PMCID: PMC9935702 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09115-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES For patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), data about the impact of breast MRI at primary diagnosis on the incidence and characteristics of contralateral breast cancers are scarce. METHODS We selected all 8486 women diagnosed with primary DCIS in the Netherlands in 2011-2015 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The synchronous and metachronous detection of contralateral DCIS (cDCIS) and contralateral invasive breast cancer (cIBC) was assessed for patients who received an MRI upon diagnosis (MRI group) and for an age-matched control group without MRI. RESULTS Nineteen percent of patients received an MRI, of which 0.8% was diagnosed with synchronous cDCIS and 1.3% with synchronous cIBC not found by mammography. The 5-year cumulative incidence of synchronous plus metachronous cDCIS was higher for the MRI versus age-matched control group (2.0% versus 0.9%, p = 0.02) and similar for cIBC (3.5% versus 2.3%, p = 0.17). The increased incidence of cDCIS was observed in patients aged < 50 years (sHR = 4.22, 95% CI: 1.19-14.99), but not in patients aged 50-74 years (sHR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.41-1.93). CONCLUSIONS MRI at primary DCIS diagnosis detected additional synchronous cDCIS and cIBC, and was associated with a higher rate of metachronous cDCIS without decreasing the rate of metachronous cIBC. This finding was most evident in younger patients. KEY POINTS • Magnetic resonance imaging at primary diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ detected an additional synchronous breast lesion in 2.1% of patients. • In patients aged younger than 50 years, the use of pre-operative MRI was associated with a fourfold increase in the incidence of a second contralateral DCIS without decreasing the incidence of metachronous invasive breast cancers up to 5 years after diagnosis. • In patients aged over 50 years, the use of pre-operative MRI did not result in a difference in the incidence of a second contralateral DCIS or metachronous invasive breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristien B I M Keymeulen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Sandra M E Geurts
- Division Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Loes F S Kooreman
- Department of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Lucien E M Duijm
- Department of Radiology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne Engelen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Sigrid Vanwetswinkel
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Ernest Luiten
- Department of Surgery, Tawam Hospital UAE, UAE University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Adri C Voogd
- Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen
- Division Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Krul IM, Boekel NB, Kramer I, Janus CPM, Krol ADG, Nijziel MR, Zijlstra JM, van der Maazen RWM, Roesink JM, Jacobse JN, Schaapveld M, Schmidt MK, Opstal-van Winden AWJ, Sonke GS, Russell NS, Aleman BMP, van Leeuwen FE. Breast cancer and cardiovascular outcomes after breast cancer in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer 2022; 128:4285-4295. [PMID: 36281718 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2021] [Revised: 02/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors treated with chest radiotherapy have an increased risk of breast cancer (BC). Prior HL treatment and associated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk may limit BC treatment options. It is unknown how treatment adaptations affect BC and CVD outcomes. METHODS The authors compared 195 BC patients treated with chest/axillary radiotherapy for HL (BC-HL) with 5988 age- and calendar year-matched patients with first primary BC (BC-1). Analyses included cumulative incidence functions and Cox regression models, accounting for tumor characteristics and BC treatment. RESULTS Compared to BC-1 patients, BC-HL patients received anthracycline-containing chemotherapy (23.7% vs. 43.8%, p < .001) and breast-conserving surgery followed by radiotherapy (7.1% vs. 57.7%, p < .001) less often. BC treatment considerations were reported for 71% of BC-HL patients. BC-HL patients had a significantly higher risk of 15-year overall mortality than BC-1 patients (61% vs. 23%). Furthermore, risks of BC-specific mortality and nonfatal BC events were significantly increased among BC-HL patients, also when accounting for tumor and treatment characteristics (2.2- to 4.5-fold). BC-HL patients with a screen-detected BC had a significantly reduced (61%) BC-specific mortality. One-third of BC-HL patients had CVD at BC-diagnosis, compared to <0.1% of BC-1 patients. Fifteen-year CVD-specific mortality and CVD incidence were significantly higher in BC-HL patients than in BC-1 patients (15.2% vs. 0.4% and 40.4% vs. 6.8%, respectively), which was due to HL treatment rather than BC treatment. CONCLUSIONS BC-HL patients experience a higher burden of CVD and worse BC outcomes than BC-1 patients. Clinicians should be aware of increased CVD risk when selecting BC treatment for HL survivors. LAY SUMMARY Patients with breast cancer after Hodgkin lymphoma (BC-HL) may have limited options for BC treatment, due to earlier HL treatment and an associated increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). BC treatment considerations were reported for 71% of BC-HL patients. We examined whether BC-HL patients have a higher risk of CVD or BC events (recurrences/metastases) compared to patients with breast cancer that had no earlier tumors (BC-1). We observed a higher burden of CVD and worse BC outcomes in HL patients compared to BC-1 patients. Clinicians should be aware of increased CVD risk when selecting BC treatment for HL survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inge M Krul
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Naomi B Boekel
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Iris Kramer
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cécile P M Janus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus University MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Augustinus D G Krol
- Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marten R Nijziel
- Department of Hematology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Josée M Zijlstra
- Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Judith M Roesink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Judy N Jacobse
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Schaapveld
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Gabe S Sonke
- Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nicola S Russell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Berthe M P Aleman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Flora E van Leeuwen
- Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Gail MH, Jatoi I. Tools for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Decision Making. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:3653-3659. [PMID: 35759730 PMCID: PMC9622574 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.02782] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Revised: 03/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Women with unilateral breast cancer are increasingly opting for the removal of not only the involved breast, but also for the removal of the opposite uninvolved breast (contralateral prophylactic mastectomy [CPM]), although the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) has decreased in recent years. Models to predict the absolute risk of CBC can help a woman decide whether to undergo CPM. Our objective is to illustrate that a better decision can be made if the patient and doctor also have estimates of the absolute risks of regional and distant recurrences and mortality from non-breast cancer causes. MATERIALS AND METHODS We based our analyses on two published models for CBC and published information on the hazards of regional and distant recurrences and non-breast cancer mortality. Assuming that CPM eliminates CBC but has no effect on other events, we calculated how much CPM reduces a woman's CBC risk and total risk from all these events for 10 hypothetical women with various subtypes of breast cancer and risk factors. RESULTS The risk of CBC and total risk vary greatly, depending on the breast cancer subtype. In some cases, a decision for or against CPM can be based on CBC risk alone, but in others, additional consideration of total risk may cause a woman to decline CPM. CONCLUSION There is a potential to develop more informative tools for deciding on CPM. Realizing this potential will require more and better data to validate existing models of absolute CBC risk and to characterize the hazards of regional and distant recurrences and deaths from non-breast cancer causes for women with various subtypes of breast cancers and risk factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mitchell H. Gail
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Ismail Jatoi
- Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, University of Texas Health, San Antonio, TX
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Giardiello D, Hooning MJ, Hauptmann M, Keeman R, Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Becher H, Blomqvist C, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Camp NJ, Czene K, Devilee P, Eccles DM, Fasching PA, Figueroa JD, Flyger H, García-Closas M, Haiman CA, Hamann U, Hopper JL, Jakubowska A, Leeuwen FE, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Margolin S, Martinez ME, Nevanlinna H, Nevelsteen I, Pelders S, Pharoah PDP, Siesling S, Southey MC, van der Hout AH, van Hest LP, Chang-Claude J, Hall P, Easton DF, Steyerberg EW, Schmidt MK. PredictCBC-2.0: a contralateral breast cancer risk prediction model developed and validated in ~ 200,000 patients. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH : BCR 2022; 24:69. [PMID: 36271417 PMCID: PMC9585761 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-022-01567-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2022] [Accepted: 10/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prediction of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk is challenging due to moderate performances of the known risk factors. We aimed to improve our previous risk prediction model (PredictCBC) by updated follow-up and including additional risk factors. METHODS We included data from 207,510 invasive breast cancer patients participating in 23 studies. In total, 8225 CBC events occurred over a median follow-up of 10.2 years. In addition to the previously included risk factors, PredictCBC-2.0 included CHEK2 c.1100delC, a 313 variant polygenic risk score (PRS-313), body mass index (BMI), and parity. Fine and Gray regression was used to fit the model. Calibration and a time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) at 5 and 10 years were assessed to determine the performance of the models. Decision curve analysis was performed to evaluate the net benefit of PredictCBC-2.0 and previous PredictCBC models. RESULTS The discrimination of PredictCBC-2.0 at 10 years was higher than PredictCBC with an AUC of 0.65 (95% prediction intervals (PI) 0.56-0.74) versus 0.63 (95%PI 0.54-0.71). PredictCBC-2.0 was well calibrated with an observed/expected ratio at 10 years of 0.92 (95%PI 0.34-2.54). Decision curve analysis for contralateral preventive mastectomy (CPM) showed the potential clinical utility of PredictCBC-2.0 between thresholds of 4 and 12% 10-year CBC risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and non-carriers. CONCLUSIONS Additional genetic information beyond BRCA1/2 germline mutations improved CBC risk prediction and might help tailor clinical decision-making toward CPM or alternative preventive strategies. Identifying patients who benefit from CPM, especially in the general breast cancer population, remains challenging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Institute of Biomedicine, EURAC Research Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Heiko Becher
- Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Carl Blomqvist
- Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.,Department of Oncology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.,Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.,Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nicola J Camp
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Diana M Eccles
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jonine D Figueroa
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.,Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Ute Hamann
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - John L Hopper
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.,Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Floor E Leeuwen
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Clinical Genetics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Sara Margolin
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Maria Elena Martinez
- Moores Cancer Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.,Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Ines Nevelsteen
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Louven, Belgium
| | - Saskia Pelders
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Department of HealthTechnology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Melissa C Southey
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.,Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Annemieke H van der Hout
- Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen, University Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Liselotte P van Hest
- Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Akdeniz D, van Barele M, Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Steyerberg EW, Hauptmann M, van de Beek I, van Engelen K, Wevers MR, Gómez García EB, Ausems MGEM, Berger LPV, van Asperen CJ, Adank MA, Collée MJ, Stommel-Jenner DJ, Jager A, Schmidt MK, Hooning MJ. Effects of chemotherapy on contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: A nationwide cohort study. Breast 2022; 61:98-107. [PMID: 34929424 PMCID: PMC8693290 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.12.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2021] [Revised: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/12/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with primary breast cancer (PBC) are at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). In a nationwide cohort, we investigated the effects of chemotherapeutic agents given for PBC on CBC risk separately in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Patients and methods BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with an invasive PBC diagnosis from 1990 to 2017 were selected from a Dutch cohort. We estimated cumulative CBC incidence using competing risks analysis. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and different chemotherapeutic agents on CBC risk were estimated using Cox regression. Results We included 1090 BRCA1 and 568 BRCA2 mutation carriers; median follow-up was 8.9 and 8.4 years, respectively. Ten-year cumulative CBC incidence for treatment with and without chemotherapy was 6.7% [95%CI: 5.1–8.6] and 16.7% [95%CI: 10.8–23.7] in BRCA1 and 4.8% [95%CI: 2.7–7.8] and 16.0% [95%CI: 9.3–24.4] in BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. Chemotherapy was associated with reduced CBC risk in BRCA1 (multivariable HR: 0.46, 95%CI: 0.29–0.74); a similar trend was observed in BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.29–1.39). In BRCA1, risk reduction was most pronounced in the first 5 years (HR: 0.32, 95%CI: 0.17–0.61). Anthracyclines and the combination of anthracyclines with taxanes were associated with substantial CBC risk reduction in BRCA1 carriers (HR: 0.34, 95%CI: 0.17–0.68 and HR: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.08–0.62, respectively). Conclusion Risk-reducing effects of chemotherapy are substantial for at least 5 years and may be used in personalised CBC risk prediction in any case for BRCA1 mutation carriers. Contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk is high in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Chemotherapy for primary breast cancer results in decreased CBC risk in BRCA1. Anthracyclines with/without taxanes show the largest CBC risk reduction in BRCA1. For BRCA2 similar trends are observed as in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Chemotherapy must be considered in personalised CBC risk models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delal Akdeniz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mark van Barele
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Neuroppin, Germany
| | - Irma van de Beek
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Klaartje van Engelen
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marijke R Wevers
- Department for Clinical Genetics, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | | | - Margreet G E M Ausems
- Division of Laboratories, Pharmacy and Biomedical Genetics, Department of Genetics, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Lieke P V Berger
- Department of Genetics, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Christi J van Asperen
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Muriel A Adank
- Family Cancer Clinic, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Margriet J Collée
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Denise J Stommel-Jenner
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Agnes Jager
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Lopes Cardozo JMN, Byng D, Drukker CA, Schmidt MK, Binuya MA, van 't Veer LJ, Cardoso F, Piccart M, Smorenburg CH, Poncet C, Rutgers EJT. Outcome without any adjuvant systemic treatment in stage I ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients included in the MINDACT trial. Ann Oncol 2021; 33:310-320. [PMID: 34861376 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.11.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2021] [Revised: 10/26/2021] [Accepted: 11/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adjuvant systemic treatments (AST) reduce mortality, but have associated short- and long-term toxicities. Careful selection of patients likely to benefit from AST is needed. We evaluated outcome of low-risk breast cancer patients of the EORTC 10041/BIG 3-04 MINDACT trial who received no AST. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, lymph node-negative tumors ≤2 cm who received no AST were matched 1 : 1 to patients with similar tumor characteristics treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), using propensity score matching and exact matching on age, genomic risk (70-gene signature) and grade. In a post hoc analysis, distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis and hazard ratios (HR) by Cox regression. Cumulative incidences of locoregional recurrence (LRR) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) were assessed with competing risk analyses. RESULTS At 8 years, DMFI rates were 94.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92.7% to 96.9%] in 509 patients receiving no AST, and 97.3% (95% CI 95.8% to 98.8%) in 509 matched patients who received only ET [absolute difference: 2.5%, HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.30-1.03)]. No statistically significant difference was seen in 8-year OS rates, 95.4% (95% CI 93.5% to 97.4%) in patients receiving no AST and 95.6% (95% CI 93.8% to 97.5%) in patients receiving only ET [absolute difference: 0.2%, HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.53-1.41)]. Cumulative incidence rates of LRR and CBC were 4.7% (95% CI 3.0% to 7.0%) and 4.6% (95% CI 2.9% to 6.9%) in patients receiving no AST versus 1.4% (95% CI 0.6% to 2.9%) and 1.5% (95% CI 0.6% to 3.1%) in patients receiving only ET. CONCLUSIONS In patients with stage I low-risk breast cancer, the effect of ET on DMFI was limited, but overall significantly fewer breast cancer events were observed in patients who received ET, after the relatively short follow-up of 8 years. These benefits and side-effects of ET should be discussed with all patients, even those at a very low risk of distant metastasis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J M N Lopes Cardozo
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - D Byng
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C A Drukker
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M A Binuya
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - L J van 't Veer
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, USA
| | - F Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Center/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - M Piccart
- Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - C H Smorenburg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C Poncet
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - E J T Rutgers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Fatima SW, Imtiyaz K, Alam Rizvi MM, Khare SK. Microbial transglutaminase nanoflowers as an alternative nanomedicine for breast cancer theranostics. RSC Adv 2021; 11:34613-34630. [PMID: 35494746 PMCID: PMC9042677 DOI: 10.1039/d1ra04513j] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2021] [Accepted: 10/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women. With the aim of decreasing the toxicity of conventional breast cancer treatments, an alternative that could provide appropriate and effective drug utilization was envisioned. Thus, we contemplated and compared the in vitro effects of microbial transglutaminase nanoflowers (MTGase NFs) on breast cancer cells (MCF-7). Transglutaminase is an important regulatory enzyme acting as a site-specific cross-linker for proteins. With the versatility of MTGase facilitating the nanoflower formation by acting as molecular glue, it was demonstrated to have anti-cancer properties. The rational drug design based on a transglutaminase enzyme-assisted approach led to the uniform shape of petals in these nanoflowers, which had the capacity to act directly as an anti-cancer drug. Herein, we report the anti-cancer characteristics portrayed by enzymatic MTGase NFs, which are biocompatible in nature. This study demonstrated the prognostic and therapeutic significance of MTGase NFs as a nano-drug in breast cancer treatment. The results on MCF-7 cells showed a significantly improved in vitro therapeutic efficacy. MTGase NFs were able to exhibit inhibitory effects on cell viability (IC50-8.23 μg ml−1) within 24 h of dosage. To further substantiate its superior anti-proliferative role, the clonogenic potential was measured to be 62.8%, along with migratory inhibition of cells (3.76-fold change). Drastic perturbations were induced (4.61-fold increase in G0/G1 phase arrest), pointed towards apoptotic induction with a 58.9% effect. These results validated the role of MTGase NFs possessing a cytotoxic nature in mitigating breast cancer. Thus, MTGase bestows distinct functionality towards therapeutic nano-modality, i.e., nanoflowers, which shows promise in cancer treatment. Development of a novel therapeutic nano-modality in the form of enzymatic transglutaminase nanoflowers; endowed with anti-cancerous action against breast cancers.![]()
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Syeda Warisul Fatima
- Enzyme and Microbial Biochemistry Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi New Delhi-110016 India +91-112659 6533
| | - Khalid Imtiyaz
- Genome Biology Laboratory, Department of Biosciences, Jamia Millia Islamia New Delhi-110025 India
| | - Mohammad M Alam Rizvi
- Genome Biology Laboratory, Department of Biosciences, Jamia Millia Islamia New Delhi-110025 India
| | - Sunil K Khare
- Enzyme and Microbial Biochemistry Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi New Delhi-110016 India +91-112659 6533
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Morrow M. Quality of Life and Breast Cancer Surgery. JAMA Surg 2021; 156:e213759. [PMID: 34468707 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.3759] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Giannakeas V, Lim DW, Narod SA. The risk of contralateral breast cancer: a SEER-based analysis. Br J Cancer 2021; 125:601-610. [PMID: 34040177 PMCID: PMC8368197 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-021-01417-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Revised: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 04/22/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We sought to estimate the annual risk and 25-year cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer among women with stage 0-III unilateral breast cancer. METHODS We identified 812,851 women with unilateral breast cancer diagnosed between 1990 and 2015 in the SEER database and followed them for contralateral breast cancer for up to 25 years. Women with a known bilateral mastectomy were excluded. We calculated the annual risk of contralateral breast cancer by age at diagnosis, by time since diagnosis and by current age. We compared risks by ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) versus invasive disease, by race and by oestrogen receptor (ER) status of the first cancer. RESULTS There were 25,958 cases of contralateral invasive breast cancer diagnosed (3.2% of all patients). The annual risk of contralateral breast cancer over the 25-year follow-up period was 0.37% and the 25-year actuarial risk of contralateral invasive breast cancer was 9.9%. The annual risk varied to a small degree by age of diagnosis, by time elapsed since diagnosis and by current age. The 25-year actuarial risk was similar for DCIS and invasive breast cancer patients (10.1 versus 9.9%). The 25-year actuarial risk was higher for black women (12.7%) than for white women (9.7%) and was lower for women with ER-positive breast cancer (9.5%) than for women with ER-negative breast cancer (11.2%). CONCLUSIONS Women with unilateral breast cancer experience an annual risk of contralateral breast cancer ~0.4% per year, which persists over the 25-year follow-up period.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adult
- Age Factors
- Aged
- Aged, 80 and over
- Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology
- Breast Neoplasms/metabolism
- Breast Neoplasms/pathology
- Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/epidemiology
- Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/metabolism
- Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology
- Female
- Humans
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Staging
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/epidemiology
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/metabolism
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/pathology
- Receptors, Estrogen/metabolism
- Risk Factors
- SEER Program
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vasily Giannakeas
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David W Lim
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Steven A Narod
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
- Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Ramin C, Mullooly M, Schonfeld SJ, Advani PG, Bodelon C, Gierach GL, Berrington de González A. Risk factors for contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer Causes Control 2021; 32:803-813. [PMID: 33877513 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-021-01432-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The role of established breast cancer risk factors and clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer in the development of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) among postmenopausal women is unclear. METHODS We identified 10,934 postmenopausal women diagnosed with a first primary breast cancer between 1995 and 2011 in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. CBC was defined as a second primary breast cancer diagnosed in the contralateral breast ≥ 3 months after the first breast cancer. Exposures included pre-diagnosis risk factors (lifestyle, reproductive, family history) and clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS Over a median follow-up of 6.8 years, 436 women developed CBC. We observed an increasing trend in CBC risk by age (p-trend = 0.002) and decreasing trend by year of diagnosis (p-trend = 0.001) of the first breast cancer. Additional risk factor associations were most pronounced for endocrine therapy (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87) and family history of breast cancer (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.06-1.80, restricted to invasive first breast cancer). No associations were found for lifestyle (body mass index, physical activity, smoking, alcohol) or reproductive factors (age at menarche, parity, age at first birth, age at menopause). CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer and family history of breast cancer, but not pre-diagnosis lifestyle and reproductive factors, are strongly associated with CBC risk among postmenopausal women. Future studies are needed to understand how these factors contribute to CBC etiology and to identify further opportunities for prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody Ramin
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Maeve Mullooly
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Sara J Schonfeld
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Pragati G Advani
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Clara Bodelon
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de González
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Singh V, Reddy R, Sinha A, Marturi V, Panditharadyula SS, Bala A. A Review on Phytopharmaceuticals having Concomitant Experimental Anti-diabetic and Anti-cancer Effects as Potential Sources for Targeted Therapies Against Insulin-mediated Breast Cancer Cell Invasion and Migration. CURRENT CANCER THERAPY REVIEWS 2021. [DOI: 10.2174/1573394716999200831113335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Diabetes and breast cancer are pathophysiologically similar and clinically established
diseases that co-exist with a wider complex similar molecular signalling and having a similar set of
risk factors. Insulin plays a pivotal role in the invasion and migration of breast cancer cells. Several
ethnopharmacological evidences shed light on the concomitant anti-diabetic and anti-cancer activity
of medicinal plant and phytochemicals against breast tumors of patients with diabetes. This present
article reviewed the findings on medicinal plants and phytochemicals with concomitant antidiabetic
and anti-cancer effects reported in scientific literature to facilitate the development of dual-
acting therapies against diabetes and breast cancer. The schematic tabular form of published literature
on medicinal plants (63 plants belongs to 45 families) concluded the dynamics of phytochemicals
against diabetes and breast tumors that could be explored further for the discovery of therapies
for controlling of breast cancer cell invasion and migration in patients with diabetes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vibhavana Singh
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| | - Rakesh Reddy
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| | - Antarip Sinha
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| | - Venkatesh Marturi
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| | - Shravani S. Panditharadyula
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| | - Asis Bala
- Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, (NIPER) Hajipur, Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) Hajipur, Bihar 844102, India
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Woodward ER, van Veen EM, Evans DG. From BRCA1 to Polygenic Risk Scores: Mutation-Associated Risks in Breast Cancer-Related Genes. Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 16:202-213. [PMID: 34248461 DOI: 10.1159/000515319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background There has been huge progress over the last 30 years in identifying the familial component of breast cancer. Summary Currently around 20% is explained by the high-risk genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, a further 2% by other high-penetrance genes, and around 5% by the moderate risk genes ATM and CHEK2. In contrast, the more than 300 low-penetrance single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) now account for around 28% and they are predicted to account for most of the remaining 45% yet to be found. Even for high-risk genes which confer a 40-90% risk of breast cancer, these SNP can substantially affect the level of breast cancer risk. Indeed, the strength of family history and hormonal and reproductive factors is very important in assessing risk even for a BRCA carrier. The risks of contralateral breast cancer are also affected by SNP as well as by the presence of high or moderate risk genes. Genetic testing using gene panels is now commonplace. Key-Messages There is a need for a more parsimonious approach to panels only testing those genes with a definite 2-fold increased risk and only testing those genes with challenging management implications, such as CDH1 and TP53, when there is strong clinical indication to do so. Testing of SNP alongside genes is likely to provide a more accurate risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma R Woodward
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Elke M van Veen
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - D Gareth Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.,PREVENT Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, Nightingale Centre, Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, The Christie, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Watt GP, John EM, Bandera EV, Malone KE, Lynch CF, Palmer JR, Knight JA, Troester MA, Bernstein JL. Race, ethnicity and risk of second primary contralateral breast cancer in the United States. Int J Cancer 2021; 148:2748-2758. [PMID: 33544892 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Revised: 01/12/2021] [Accepted: 01/14/2021] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer survivors have a high risk of a second primary contralateral breast cancer (CBC), but there are few studies of CBC risk in racial/ethnic minority populations. We examined whether the incidence and risk factors for CBC differed by race/ethnicity in the United States. Women with a first invasive Stage I-IIB breast cancer diagnosis at ages 20-74 years between 2000 and 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) 18 registries were followed through 2016 for a diagnosis of invasive CBC ≥1 year after the first breast cancer diagnosis. We used cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models to test the association between race/ethnicity and CBC, adjusting for age, hormone receptor status, radiation therapy, chemotherapy and stage at first diagnosis, and evaluated the impact of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, socioeconomic status, and insurance status on the association. After a median follow-up of 5.9 years, 9247 women (2.0%) were diagnosed with CBC. Relative to non-Hispanic (NH) White women, CBC risk was increased in NH Black women (hazard ratio = 1.44, 95% CI 1.35-1.54) and Hispanic women (1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20), with the largest differences among women diagnosed at younger ages. Adjustment for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, socioeconomic status and health insurance did not explain the associations. Therefore, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic women have an increased risk of CBC that is not explained by clinical or socioeconomic factors collected in SEER. Large studies of diverse breast cancer survivors with detailed data on treatment delivery and adherence are needed to inform interventions to reduce this disparity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gordon P Watt
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Esther M John
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Elisa V Bandera
- Cancer Epidemiology and Health Outcomes, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Kathleen E Malone
- Epidemiology Program, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Charles F Lynch
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| | - Julie R Palmer
- Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Julia A Knight
- Prosserman Centre for Population Health Research, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Melissa A Troester
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Jonine L Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ramin C, Withrow DR, Davis Lynn BC, Gierach GL, Berrington de González A. Risk of contralateral breast cancer according to first breast cancer characteristics among women in the USA, 1992-2016. Breast Cancer Res 2021; 23:24. [PMID: 33596988 PMCID: PMC7890613 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-021-01400-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Estimates of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk in the modern treatment era by year of diagnosis and characteristics of the first breast cancer are needed to assess the impact of recent advances in breast cancer treatment and inform clinical decision making. Methods We examined CBC risk among 419,818 women (age 30–84 years) who were diagnosed with a first unilateral invasive breast cancer and survived ≥ 1 year in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program cancer registries from 1992 to 2015 (follow-up through 2016). CBC was defined as a second invasive breast cancer in the contralateral breast ≥ 12 months after the first breast cancer. We estimated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of CBC by year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and tumor characteristics for the first breast cancer. Cumulative incidence of CBC was calculated for women diagnosed with a first breast cancer in the recent treatment era (2004–2015, follow-up through 2016). Results Over a median follow-up of 8 years (range 1–25 years), 12,986 breast cancer patients developed CBC. Overall, breast cancer patients had approximately twice the risk of developing cancer in the contralateral breast when compared to that expected in the general population (SIR = 2.21, 95% CI = 2.17–2.25). SIRs for CBC declined by year of first diagnosis, irrespective of age at diagnosis and estrogen receptor (ER) status (p-trends < 0.001), but the strongest decline was after an ER-positive tumor. The 5-year cumulative incidence of CBC ranged from 1.01% (95% CI = 0.90–1.14%) in younger women (age < 50 years) with a first ER-positive tumor to 1.89% (95% CI = 1.61–2.21%) in younger women with a first ER-negative tumor. Conclusion Declines in CBC risk are consistent with continued advances in breast cancer treatment. The updated estimates of cumulative incidence inform breast cancer patients and clinicians on the risk of CBC and may help guide treatment decisions. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-021-01400-3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody Ramin
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Diana R Withrow
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Brittny C Davis Lynn
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de González
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Scheepens JCC, Veer LV', Esserman L, Belkora J, Mukhtar RA. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A narrative review of the evidence and acceptability. Breast 2021; 56:61-69. [PMID: 33621798 PMCID: PMC7907889 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2020] [Revised: 01/29/2021] [Accepted: 02/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
The uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has increased steadily over the last twenty years in women of all age groups and breast cancer stages. Since contralateral breast cancer is relatively rare and the breast cancer guidelines only recommend CPM in a small subset of patients with breast cancer, the drivers of this trend are unknown. This review aims to evaluate the evidence for and acceptability of CPM, data on patient rationales for choosing CPM, and some of the factors that might impact patient preferences. Based on the evidence, future recommendations will be provided. First, data on contralateral breast cancer risk and CPM rates and trends are addressed. After that, the evidence is structured around four main patient rationales for CPM formulated as questions that patients might ask their surgeon: Will CPM reduce mortality risk? Will CPM reduce the risk of contralateral breast cancer? Can I avoid future screening with CPM? Will I have better breast symmetry after CPM? Also, three different guidelines regarding CPM will be reviewed. Studies indicate a large gap between patient preferences for radical risk reduction with CPM and the current approaches recommended by important guidelines. We suggest a strategy including shared decision-making to enhance surgeons’ communication with patients about contralateral breast cancer and treatment options, to empower patients in order to optimize the use of CPM incorporating accurate risk assessment and individual patient preferences. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates have increased over the last 20 years. Patients may want CPM to reduce risk of contralateral breast cancer and mortality. Patients do not always have the tools available to make a well-informed decision. Patient and surgeon’s shared decision-making could optimize the use of CPM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josien C C Scheepens
- University of California, San Francisco, Department of Laboratory Medicine, 2340 Sutter St., Box 0808, San Francisco, CA, 94115, USA
| | - Laura van 't Veer
- University of California, San Francisco, Department of Laboratory Medicine, 2340 Sutter St., Box 0808, San Francisco, CA, 94115, USA
| | - Laura Esserman
- University of California, San Francisco, Department of Surgery, 1825 4th Street, 3rd Floor, Box 1710, San Francisco, CA, 94143-1710, USA
| | - Jeff Belkora
- University of California, San Francisco, Institute for Health Policy Studies and Department of Surgery, 3333 California Street, Suite 265, San Francisco, CA, 94118, USA
| | - Rita A Mukhtar
- University of California, San Francisco, Department of Surgery, 1825 4th Street, 3rd Floor, Box 1710, San Francisco, CA, 94143-1710, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Avanesyan AA, Sokolenko AP, Ivantsov AO, Kleshchev MA, Maydin MA, Bizin IV, Raskin GA, Shelekhova KV, Gorodnova TV, Bessonov AA, Anisimova EI, Volynshchikova OA, Romanko AA, Ni VI, Broyde RV, Tkachenko OB, Whitehead AJ, Scherbakov AM, Imyanitov EN. Gastric Cancer in BRCA1 Germline Mutation Carriers: Results of Endoscopic Screening and Molecular Analysis of Tumor Tissues. Pathobiology 2020; 87:367-374. [PMID: 33161400 DOI: 10.1159/000511323] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2020] [Accepted: 08/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is some evidence suggesting a link between BRCA1/2 germline mutations and increased risk of gastric cancer. METHODS Endoscopic screening for stomach malignancies was performed in 120 BRCA1 mutation carriers in order to evaluate the probability of detecting the tumor disease. RESULTS No instances of gastric cancer were revealed at the first visit. The analysis of atrophic changes performed by OLGA (Operative Link for Gastritis Assessment) criteria revealed that OLGA stages I-IV alterations were observed in 26 of 41 (63%) subjects aged >50 years as compared to 29 of 79 (37%) in younger subjects (p = 0.007, χ2 test). One BRCA1 mutation carrier developed gastric cancer 4 years after the first visit for endoscopic examination. We performed next-generation sequencing analysis for this tumor and additional 4 archival gastric cancers obtained from BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Somatic loss of the remaining BRCA1/2 allele was observed in 3 out of 5 tumors analyzed; all of these carcinomas, but none of the malignancies with the retained BRCA1/2 copy, showed chromosomal instability. CONCLUSION Taken together, these data justify further studies on the relationships between the BRCA1/2 and gastric cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albina A Avanesyan
- Department of Endoscopy, City Cancer Center, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.,Department of Endoscopy, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Anna P Sokolenko
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, .,Department of Medical Genetics, St. Petersburg Pediatric Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation,
| | - Alexandr O Ivantsov
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Maxim A Kleshchev
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Mikhail A Maydin
- Department of Carcinogenesis and Oncogerontology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Ilya V Bizin
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Grigory A Raskin
- A.M. Granov Center for Radiology and Surgical Technologies, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Ksenia V Shelekhova
- Department of Pathology, City Cancer Center, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Tatiana V Gorodnova
- Department of Oncogynecology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Alexandr A Bessonov
- Department of Mammology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Elena I Anisimova
- Leningrad Regional Oncology Hospital, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Olga A Volynshchikova
- Department of Clinical Management and Control, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Alexandr A Romanko
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Valeria I Ni
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Robert V Broyde
- Department of Endoscopy, City Cancer Center, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Oleg B Tkachenko
- Department of Endoscopy, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Aldon J Whitehead
- Medicine Internal Medicine Residency Program, The University of Illinois College of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Alexandr M Scherbakov
- Department of Endoscopy, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Evgeny N Imyanitov
- Department of Tumor Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.,Department of Medical Genetics, St. Petersburg Pediatric Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.,Department of Oncology, I.I. Mechnikov North-Western Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Kramer I, Hooning MJ, Mavaddat N, Hauptmann M, Keeman R, Steyerberg EW, Giardiello D, Antoniou AC, Pharoah PDP, Canisius S, Abu-Ful Z, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Aronson KJ, Augustinsson A, Becher H, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Bonanni B, Brauch H, Bremer M, Brucker SY, Burwinkel B, Castelao JE, Chan TL, Chang-Claude J, Chanock SJ, Chenevix-Trench G, Choi JY, Clarke CL, Collée JM, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dunning AM, Dwek M, Eccles DM, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Flyger H, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, García-Sáenz JA, Giles GG, Goldgar DE, González-Neira A, Haiman CA, Håkansson N, Hamann U, Hartman M, Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Hollestelle A, Hopper JL, Hou MF, Howell A, Ito H, Jakimovska M, Jakubowska A, Janni W, John EM, Jung A, Kang D, Kets CM, Khusnutdinova E, Ko YD, Kristensen VN, Kurian AW, Kwong A, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Li J, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Mannermaa A, Manoochehri M, Margolin S, Matsuo K, Mavroudis D, Meindl A, Milne RL, Mulligan AM, Muranen TA, Neuhausen SL, Nevanlinna H, Newman WG, Olshan AF, Olson JE, Olsson H, Park-Simon TW, Peto J, Petridis C, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, Presneau N, Pylkäs K, Radice P, Rennert G, Romero A, Roylance R, Saloustros E, Sawyer EJ, Schmutzler RK, Schwentner L, Scott C, See MH, Shah M, Shen CY, Shu XO, Siesling S, Slager S, Sohn C, Southey MC, Spinelli JJ, Stone J, Tapper WJ, Tengström M, Teo SH, Terry MB, Tollenaar RAEM, Tomlinson I, Troester MA, Vachon CM, van Ongeval C, van Veen EM, Winqvist R, Wolk A, Zheng W, Ziogas A, Easton DF, Hall P, Schmidt MK. Breast Cancer Polygenic Risk Score and Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk. Am J Hum Genet 2020; 107:837-848. [PMID: 33022221 PMCID: PMC7675034 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2020] [Accepted: 09/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Previous research has shown that polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can be used to stratify women according to their risk of developing primary invasive breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the association between a recently validated PRS of 313 germline variants (PRS313) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk. We included 56,068 women of European ancestry diagnosed with first invasive breast cancer from 1990 onward with follow-up from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Metachronous CBC risk (N = 1,027) according to the distribution of PRS313 was quantified using Cox regression analyses. We assessed PRS313 interaction with age at first diagnosis, family history, morphology, ER status, PR status, and HER2 status, and (neo)adjuvant therapy. In studies of Asian women, with limited follow-up, CBC risk associated with PRS313 was assessed using logistic regression for 340 women with CBC compared with 12,133 women with unilateral breast cancer. Higher PRS313 was associated with increased CBC risk: hazard ratio per standard deviation (SD) = 1.25 (95%CI = 1.18-1.33) for Europeans, and an OR per SD = 1.15 (95%CI = 1.02-1.29) for Asians. The absolute lifetime risks of CBC, accounting for death as competing risk, were 12.4% for European women at the 10th percentile and 20.5% at the 90th percentile of PRS313. We found no evidence of confounding by or interaction with individual characteristics, characteristics of the primary tumor, or treatment. The C-index for the PRS313 alone was 0.563 (95%CI = 0.547-0.586). In conclusion, PRS313 is an independent factor associated with CBC risk and can be incorporated into CBC risk prediction models to help improve stratification and optimize surveillance and treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iris Kramer
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - Nasim Mavaddat
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Neuruppin 16816, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands; Erasmus MC, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam 3015 GD, the Netherlands
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Sander Canisius
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Carcinogenesis, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Zumuruda Abu-Ful
- Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Haifa 35254, Israel
| | - Irene L Andrulis
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital, Fred A. Litwin Center for Cancer Genetics, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada; University of Toronto, Department of Molecular Genetics, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | - Hoda Anton-Culver
- University of California Irvine, Department of Epidemiology, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, Irvine, CA 92617, USA
| | - Kristan J Aronson
- Queen's University, Department of Public Health Sciences, and Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
| | - Annelie Augustinsson
- Lund University, Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund 222 42, Sweden
| | - Heiko Becher
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, Hamburg 20246, Germany; Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Berlin 10117, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Erlangen 91054, Germany
| | - Sabine Behrens
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Javier Benitez
- Centro de Investigación en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Madrid 28029, Spain; Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Madrid 28029, Spain
| | - Marina Bermisheva
- Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa 450054, Russia
| | - Natalia V Bogdanova
- Hannover Medical School, Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover 30625, Germany; Hannover Medical School, Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover 30625, Germany; N.N. Alexandrov Research Institute of Oncology and Medical Radiology, Minsk 223040, Belarus
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark; Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark; University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Copenhagen 2200, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Bernardo Bonanni
- IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Hiltrud Brauch
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart 70376, Germany; University of Tübingen, iFIT-Cluster of Excellence, Tübingen 72074, Germany; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, Tübingen 72074, Germany
| | - Michael Bremer
- Hannover Medical School, Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover 30625, Germany
| | - Sara Y Brucker
- University of Tübingen, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tübingen 72076, Germany
| | - Barbara Burwinkel
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Epidemiology Group, C080, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Molecular Biology of Breast Cancer, University Womens Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Jose E Castelao
- Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS, Oncology and Genetics Unit, Vigo 36312, Spain
| | - Tsun L Chan
- Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry, Hong Kong; Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Department of Pathology, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), Hamburg 20246, Germany
| | - Stephen J Chanock
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD 20850, USA
| | - Georgia Chenevix-Trench
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia
| | - Ji-Yeob Choi
- Seoul National University Graduate School, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul 03080, Korea
| | - Christine L Clarke
- University of Sydney, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, Sydney, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - J Margriet Collée
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Clinical Genetics, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - Fergus J Couch
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Angela Cox
- University of Sheffield, Sheffield Institute for Nucleic Acids (SInFoNiA), Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK
| | - Simon S Cross
- University of Sheffield, Academic Unit of Pathology, Department of Neuroscience, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK
| | - Kamila Czene
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm 171 65, Sweden
| | - Mary B Daly
- Fox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Clinical Genetics, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA
| | - Peter Devilee
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Human Genetics, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Thilo Dörk
- Hannover Medical School, Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover 30625, Germany
| | - Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Alison M Dunning
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Miriam Dwek
- University of Westminster, School of Life Sciences, London W1B 2HW, UK
| | - Diana M Eccles
- University of Southampton, Faculty of Medicine, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - D Gareth Evans
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Erlangen 91054, Germany; University of California at Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark
| | - Manuela Gago-Dominguez
- Grupo de Medicina Xenómica, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Santiago de Compostela 15706, Spain; University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD 20850, USA
| | - José A García-Sáenz
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Centro Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid 28040, Spain
| | - Graham G Giles
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - David E Goldgar
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
| | - Anna González-Neira
- Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Madrid 28029, Spain
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- University of Southern California, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Niclas Håkansson
- Karolinska Institutet, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Mikael Hartman
- National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, Singapore 119077, Singapore; National University Health System, Department of Surgery, Singapore 119228, Singapore
| | | | - Antoinette Hollestelle
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - John L Hopper
- The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Ming-Feng Hou
- Kaohsiung Medical University, Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan
| | - Anthony Howell
- University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Hidemi Ito
- Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan
| | - Milena Jakimovska
- MASA, Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov', Skopje 1000, Republic of North Macedonia
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, Szczecin 71-252, Poland; Pomeranian Medical University, Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Szczecin 71-252, Poland
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- University Hospital Ulm, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ulm 89075, Germany
| | - Esther M John
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford, CA 94304, USA
| | - Audrey Jung
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Daehee Kang
- Seoul National University Graduate School, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University College of Medicine, Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul 03080, Korea
| | - C Marleen Kets
- the Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Elza Khusnutdinova
- Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa 450054, Russia; Bashkir State University, Department of Genetics and Fundamental Medicine, Ufa 450000, Russia
| | - Yon-Dschun Ko
- Johanniter Krankenhaus, Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Bonn 53177, Germany
| | - Vessela N Kristensen
- Oslo University Hospital-Radiumhospitalet, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo 0379, Norway; Oslo University Hospital and University of Olso, Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo 0379, Norway
| | - Allison W Kurian
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford, CA 94304, USA; Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Ava Kwong
- Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry, Hong Kong; The University of Hong Kong, Department of Surgery, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong; Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Cancer Genetics Center and Department of Surgery, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, Leuven 3001, Belgium; University of Leuven, Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, Leuven 3000, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Epidemiology Program, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Human Genetics Division, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Stockholm 171 76, Sweden; Karolinska University Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics, Stockholm 171 76, Sweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, Szczecin 71-252, Poland
| | - Arto Mannermaa
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio 70210, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Kuopio 70210, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Biobank of Eastern Finland, Kuopio 70210, Finland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Sara Margolin
- Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden; Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden
| | - Keitaro Matsuo
- Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan
| | - Dimitrios Mavroudis
- University Hospital of Heraklion, Department of Medical Oncology, Heraklion 711 10, Greece
| | - Alfons Meindl
- University of Munich, Campus Großhadern, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Munich 81377, Germany
| | - Roger L Milne
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Anna Marie Mulligan
- University of Toronto, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada; University Health Network, Laboratory Medicine Program, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
| | - Taru A Muranen
- Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00290, Finland
| | - Susan L Neuhausen
- Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Department of Population Sciences, Duarte, CA 91010, USA
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00290, Finland
| | - William G Newman
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Andrew F Olshan
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Janet E Olson
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Håkan Olsson
- Lund University, Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund 222 42, Sweden
| | | | - Julian Peto
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Christos Petridis
- King's College London, Research Oncology, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Dijana Plaseska-Karanfilska
- MASA, Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov', Skopje 1000, Republic of North Macedonia
| | - Nadege Presneau
- University of Westminster, School of Life Sciences, London W1B 2HW, UK
| | - Katri Pylkäs
- University of Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter Oulu, Oulu 90220, Finland; Northern Finland Laboratory Centre Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Oulu 90220, Finland
| | - Paolo Radice
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT), Unit of Molecular Bases of Genetic Risk and Genetic Testing, Department of Research, Milan 20133, Italy
| | - Gad Rennert
- Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Haifa 35254, Israel
| | - Atocha Romero
- Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Medical Oncology Department, Madrid 28222, Spain
| | - Rebecca Roylance
- UCLH Foundation Trust, Department of Oncology, London NW1 2PG, UK
| | | | - Elinor J Sawyer
- King's College London, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's Campus, London SE1 1UL, UK
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne 50937, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne 50937, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC), Cologne 50931, Germany
| | - Lukas Schwentner
- University Hospital Ulm, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ulm 89075, Germany
| | - Christopher Scott
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Mee-Hoong See
- University of Malaya, Breast Cancer Research Unit, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
| | - Mitul Shah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Chen-Yang Shen
- Academia Sinica, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Taipei 115, Taiwan; China Medical University, School of Public Health, Taichung 40402, Taiwan
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Department of Research, Utrecht 3511 DT, the Netherlands; University of Twente, Department of Health Technology and Service Research, Technical Medical Center, Enschede 7522 NB, the Netherlands
| | - Susan Slager
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Christof Sohn
- University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Melissa C Southey
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - John J Spinelli
- BC Cancer, Population Oncology, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1G1, Canada; University of British Columbia, School of Population and Public Health, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
| | - Jennifer Stone
- The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Curtin University and University of Western Australia, The Curtin UWA Centre for Genetic Origins of Health and Disease, Perth, WA 6000, Australia
| | - William J Tapper
- University of Southampton, Faculty of Medicine, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - Maria Tengström
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio 70210, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Department of Oncology, Cancer Center, Kuopio 70210, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oncology, Kuopio 70210, Finland
| | - Soo Hwang Teo
- Cancer Research Malaysia, Breast Cancer Research Programme, Subang Jaya, Selangor 47500, Malaysia; University of Malaya, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
| | - Mary Beth Terry
- Columbia University, Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Rob A E M Tollenaar
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Ian Tomlinson
- University of Birmingham, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK; University of Oxford, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK
| | - Melissa A Troester
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Celine M Vachon
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Science Research, Division of Epidemiology, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Chantal van Ongeval
- Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Department of Radiology, Leuven 3000, Belgium
| | - Elke M van Veen
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Robert Winqvist
- University of Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter Oulu, Oulu 90220, Finland; Northern Finland Laboratory Centre Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Oulu 90220, Finland
| | - Alicja Wolk
- Karolinska Institutet, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden; Uppsala University, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala 751 05, Sweden
| | - Wei Zheng
- Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Argyrios Ziogas
- University of California Irvine, Department of Epidemiology, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, Irvine, CA 92617, USA
| | - Douglas F Easton
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Per Hall
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm 171 65, Sweden; Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Anwar SL, Prabowo D, Avanti WS, Dwianingsih EK, Harahap WA, Aryandono T. Clinical characteristics and the associated risk factors of the development of bilateral breast cancers: A case-control study. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2020; 60:285-292. [PMID: 33204419 PMCID: PMC7649582 DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2020.10.064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2020] [Revised: 10/26/2020] [Accepted: 10/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The clinical impacts of bilateralism on prognosis and clinical decision-making remain contradictory particularly in areas with low incidence and delayed diagnosis of primary breast cancer. Identification of women at risk of bilateral breast cancer is required to improve patient management and to design the appropriate surveillance. Methods A total of 1083 women were enrolled and analyzed for the presence of synchronous and metachronous bilateral breast cancer as cases and unilateral breast cancer as controls during the median follow-up of 4.8 years. Results The incidence of bilateral breast cancer was 7.5% (81 of 1083). In comparison with unilateral breast cancers, bilateral cases were significantly diagnosed in younger women (P = 0.037, mean age was 35.6 years) who had a larger tumor size (P = 0.012, mean tumor size was 8 cm in diameter). Histological type of lobular cancer was identified as one of the risk factors for the development of contralateral breast cancer (OR 5.564, 95% CI: 3.219-9.620) and synchronous bilateral breast cancer (OR 2.561, 95% CI: 1.182-5.550). Bilateral breast cancer had significantly shorter progression-free survival (Mean survival was 26.6 vs 52.5 months for bilateral and unilateral breast cancers, respectively; P = 0.001) and shorter time to develop distant metastasis (Mean survival was 41.7 vs 104 months for bilateral and unilateral breast cancers, respectively; P = 0.001). Conclusion Patients with first primary breast tumors with lobular histological type and advanced stages were observed to have higher risks for the development of contralateral breast cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sumadi Lukman Anwar
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Dr Sardjito Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia
| | - Dayat Prabowo
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Dr Sardjito Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia
| | - Widya Surya Avanti
- Department of Radiology, Dr Sardjito Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia
| | - Ery Kus Dwianingsih
- Department of Anatomical Pathology, Dr Sardjito Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia
| | - Wirsma Arif Harahap
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Dr M Jamil Hospital/Faculty of Medicine Universitas Andalas, Padang, 25127, Indonesia
| | - Teguh Aryandono
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Dr Sardjito Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Giardiello D, Kramer I, Hooning MJ, Hauptmann M, Lips EH, Sawyer E, Thompson AM, de Munck L, Siesling S, Wesseling J, Steyerberg EW, Schmidt MK. Contralateral breast cancer risk in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. NPJ Breast Cancer 2020; 6:60. [PMID: 33298933 PMCID: PMC7609533 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-020-00202-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2020] [Accepted: 10/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
We aimed to assess contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) compared with invasive breast cancer (BC). Women diagnosed with DCIS (N = 28,003) or stage I-III BC (N = 275,836) between 1989 and 2017 were identified from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cumulative incidences were estimated, accounting for competing risks, and hazard ratios (HRs) for metachronous invasive CBC. To evaluate effects of adjuvant systemic therapy and screening, separate analyses were performed for stage I BC without adjuvant systemic therapy and by mode of first BC detection. Multivariable models including clinico-pathological and treatment data were created to assess CBC risk prediction performance in DCIS patients. The 10-year cumulative incidence of invasive CBC was 4.8% for DCIS patients (CBC = 1334). Invasive CBC risk was higher in DCIS patients compared with invasive BC overall (HR = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04-1.17), and lower compared with stage I BC without adjuvant systemic therapy (HR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.82-0.92). In patients diagnosed ≥2011, the HR for invasive CBC was 1.38 (95% CI = 1.35-1.68) after screen-detected DCIS compared with screen-detected invasive BC, and was 2.14 (95% CI = 1.46-3.13) when not screen-detected. The C-index was 0.52 (95% CI = 0.50-0.54) for invasive CBC prediction in DCIS patients. In conclusion, CBC risks are low overall. DCIS patients had a slightly higher risk of invasive CBC compared with invasive BC, likely explained by the risk-reducing effect of (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy among BC patients. For support of clinical decision making more information is needed to differentiate CBC risks among DCIS patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Iris Kramer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology-Cancer Epidemiology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School, Neuruppin, Germany
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther H Lips
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Elinor Sawyer
- School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - Alastair M Thompson
- Department of Surgery, Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, USA
| | - Linda de Munck
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, the Netherlands
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Jelle Wesseling
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Giardiello D, Hauptmann M, Steyerberg EW, Adank MA, Akdeniz D, Blom JC, Blomqvist C, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Brinkhuis M, Chang-Claude J, Czene K, Devilee P, Dunning AM, Easton DF, Eccles DM, Fasching PA, Figueroa J, Flyger H, García-Closas M, Haeberle L, Haiman CA, Hall P, Hamann U, Hopper JL, Jager A, Jakubowska A, Jung A, Keeman R, Koppert LB, Kramer I, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Manoochehri M, Mariani L, Nevanlinna H, Oldenburg HSA, Pelders S, Pharoah PDP, Shah M, Siesling S, Smit VTHBM, Southey MC, Tapper WJ, Tollenaar RAEM, van den Broek AJ, van Deurzen CHM, van Leeuwen FE, van Ongeval C, Van't Veer LJ, Wang Q, Wendt C, Westenend PJ, Hooning MJ, Schmidt MK. Prediction of contralateral breast cancer: external validation of risk calculators in 20 international cohorts. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2020; 181:423-434. [PMID: 32279280 PMCID: PMC8380991 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-05611-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 03/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Three tools are currently available to predict the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). We aimed to compare the performance of the Manchester formula, CBCrisk, and PredictCBC in patients with invasive breast cancer (BC). METHODS We analyzed data of 132,756 patients (4682 CBC) from 20 international studies with a median follow-up of 8.8 years. Prediction performance included discrimination, quantified as a time-dependent Area-Under-the-Curve (AUC) at 5 and 10 years after diagnosis of primary BC, and calibration, quantified as the expected-observed (E/O) ratio at 5 and 10 years and the calibration slope. RESULTS The AUC at 10 years was: 0.58 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.59) for CBCrisk; 0.60 (95% CI 0.59-0.61) for the Manchester formula; 0.63 (95% CI 0.59-0.66) and 0.59 (95% CI 0.56-0.62) for PredictCBC-1A (for settings where BRCA1/2 mutation status is available) and PredictCBC-1B (for the general population), respectively. The E/O at 10 years: 0.82 (95% CI 0.51-1.32) for CBCrisk; 1.53 (95% CI 0.63-3.73) for the Manchester formula; 1.28 (95% CI 0.63-2.58) for PredictCBC-1A and 1.35 (95% CI 0.65-2.77) for PredictCBC-1B. The calibration slope was 1.26 (95% CI 1.01-1.50) for CBCrisk; 0.90 (95% CI 0.79-1.02) for PredictCBC-1A; 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-0.99) for PredictCBC-1B, and 0.39 (95% CI 0.34-0.43) for the Manchester formula. CONCLUSIONS Current CBC risk prediction tools provide only moderate discrimination and the Manchester formula was poorly calibrated. Better predictors and re-calibration are needed to improve CBC prediction and to identify low- and high-CBC risk patients for clinical decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Neuruppin, Germany
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Muriel A Adank
- Family Cancer Clinic, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Delal Akdeniz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jannet C Blom
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carl Blomqvist
- Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Department of Oncology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mariël Brinkhuis
- Laboratory for Pathology, East-Netherlands, Hengelo, The Netherlands
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Cancer Epidemiology, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), Hamburg, Germany
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Alison M Dunning
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Diana M Eccles
- Cancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California At Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- University Hospital Erlangen, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jonine Figueroa
- The University of Edinburgh Medical School, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Edinburgh, UK
- Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Edinburgh, UK
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Lothar Haeberle
- University Hospital Erlangen, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - John L Hopper
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Agnes Jager
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
- Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Audrey Jung
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Linetta B Koppert
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Iris Kramer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Luigi Mariani
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology and Trial Organization, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Hester S A Oldenburg
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Saskia Pelders
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mitul Shah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent T H B M Smit
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Melissa C Southey
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
- Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Rob A E M Tollenaar
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Alexandra J van den Broek
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Flora E van Leeuwen
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Chantal van Ongeval
- Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Laura J Van't Veer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Qin Wang
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Camilla Wendt
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Radiation and/or endocrine therapy? Recurrence and survival outcomes in women over 70 with early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2020; 182:411-420. [PMID: 32441018 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-05691-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2020] [Accepted: 05/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Women over 70 with early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery are typically offered adjuvant endocrine and radiation therapy. Prior studies have supported the omission of adjuvant radiation in this low-risk population. We sought to compare the effect of adjuvant treatment with endocrine therapy alone, radiation therapy alone or both versus no adjuvant treatment on local control and survival in this population. METHODS Data were extracted on 1363 breast cancer patients over the age of 70 treated with a breast-conserving surgery from 2003 until 2018. 460 patients met inclusion criteria of pT1N0, invasive disease with negative margins and not treated with chemotherapy. The primary outcome of this population-based study was local recurrence-free survival at 5 and 10 years. RESULTS Patients receiving no adjuvant therapy had worse local recurrence-free, loco-regional recurrence-free and disease-free survival than patients receiving at least one form of adjuvant therapy (p < 0.05). 5-year local recurrence rates were 0.8% in patients receiving both endocrine and radiation therapy, 1.5% in those receiving radiation alone, 4.2% in those receiving endocrine therapy alone and 12% in those receiving no adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS This study supports the benefit of some form of adjuvant therapy (radiation alone, endocrine therapy alone or both) in low-risk breast cancer patients over 70. Receiving no adjuvant therapy is associated with poorer outcomes. Many of these patients are candidates for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation which can be completed in less than a week. These patients should be offered radiation therapy, endocrine therapy or both.
Collapse
|
34
|
Discordant Marker Expression Between Invasive Breast Carcinoma and Corresponding Synchronous and Preceding DCIS. Am J Surg Pathol 2020; 43:1574-1582. [PMID: 31206365 DOI: 10.1097/pas.0000000000001306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a potential precursor of invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). Studies aiming to find markers involved in DCIS progression generally have compared characteristics of IBC lesions with those of adjacent synchronous DCIS lesions. The question remains whether synchronous DCIS and IBC comparisons are a good surrogate for primary DCIS and subsequent IBC. In this study, we compared both primary DCIS and synchronous DCIS with the associated IBC lesion, on the basis of immunohistochemical marker expression. Immunohistochemical analysis of ER, PR, HER2, p53, and cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX-2) was performed for 143 primary DCIS and subsequent IBC lesions, including 81 IBC lesions with synchronous DCIS. Agreement between DCIS and IBC was assessed using kappa, and symmetry tests were performed to assess the pattern in marker conversion. The primary DCIS and subsequent IBC more often showed discordant marker expression than synchronous DCIS and IBC. Strikingly, 18 of 49 (36%) women with HER2-positive primary DCIS developed an HER2-negative IBC. Such a difference in HER2 expression was not observed when comparing synchronous DCIS and IBC. The frequency of discordant marker expression did not increase with longer time between primary DCIS and IBC. In conclusion, comparison of primary DCIS and subsequent IBC yields different results than a comparison of synchronous DCIS and IBC, in particular with regard to HER2 status. To gain more insight into the progression of DCIS to IBC, it is essential to focus on the relationship between primary DCIS and subsequent IBC, rather than comparing IBC with synchronous DCIS.
Collapse
|
35
|
Montagna G, Morrow M. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer: what to discuss with patients. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2020; 20:159-166. [PMID: 32077338 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2020.1732213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: The contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate in the U.S. has been steadily increasing. This is of particular concern because many women who undergo this procedure are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.Areas covered: CPM's medical benefit is related to the risk of contralateral cancer development and whether CPM provides a survival benefit. Contralateral cancer rates have decreased, and CPM does not provide a survival benefit. Other potential benefits of the procedure may be improved quality of life; these data are reviewed. Research efforts have been undertaken to better understand the decision-making process of patients who consider, and ultimately undergo, this procedure.Expert opinion: Decisional traits, personal values, the desire for peace of mind, and the desire to obtain breast symmetry are important factors that drive a woman's decision to undergo CPM. Additionally, many patients lack the knowledge on how different types of breast surgery impact outcomes. To improve the shared decision-making process, a stepwise approach to address possible misconceptions, and clarify the real risks/benefits of this procedure should be utilized. A clear recommendation (for/against) should be made for every patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer who considers CPM. Communication tools to assist patients and surgeons in this process are sorely needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giacomo Montagna
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Bens A, Dehlendorff C, Friis S, Cronin-Fenton D, Jensen MB, Ejlertsen B, Lash TL, Kroman N, Mellemkjær L. The role of H1 antihistamines in contralateral breast cancer: a Danish nationwide cohort study. Br J Cancer 2020; 122:1102-1108. [PMID: 32063603 PMCID: PMC7109031 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0747-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2019] [Revised: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 01/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Preclinical studies have shown both pro- and antineoplastic effects of antihistamines. Here, we evaluated the effect of H1 antihistamines on contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk, and whether cationic amphiphilic (CAD) antihistamines could increase the sensitivity to chemotherapy. Methods From the Danish Breast Cancer Group clinical database, we identified all women aged ≥20 years with a first-time diagnosis of breast cancer during 1996–2012. Information on drug use, CBC and potential confounding factors was retrieved from nationwide registries. Using Cox proportional hazard regression models, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for CBC associated with H1-antihistamine use. Results We identified 52,723 patients with breast cancer with a total of 310,583 person-years of follow-up. Among them, 1444 patients developed a new primary tumour in the contralateral breast. Post-diagnosis use of H1 antihistamines (≥2 prescriptions) was not strongly associated with CBC risk (HR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.90–1.31) compared with non-use (<2 prescriptions). Use of CAD antihistamines among patients receiving chemotherapy was not associated with a decrease in CBC risk. Conclusions Taken together, our findings do not suggest any association of H1-antihistamine use with CBC development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annet Bens
- Unit of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christian Dehlendorff
- Unit of Statistics and Pharmacoepidemiology, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Søren Friis
- Unit of Statistics and Pharmacoepidemiology, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.,Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.,Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | - Bent Ejlertsen
- Danish Breast Cancer Group, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.,Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Timothy L Lash
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.,Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.,Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Niels Kroman
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Lene Mellemkjær
- Unit of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Imyanitov EN, Kuligina ES. Systemic investigations into the molecular features of bilateral breast cancer for diagnostic purposes. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2019; 20:41-47. [PMID: 31835926 DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2020.1705157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Many breast cancer (BC) patients develop the disease bilaterally. The emergence of two tumors in the same host is unlikely to be a random co-incidence: bilateral BC (biBC) patients are enriched by women who are susceptible to this disease due to genetic or non-genetic factors.Areas covered: Data on molecular pathogenesis and translational aspects of biBC research are summarized.Expert opinion: Studies on concordant and discordant molecular events occurring in paired tumors resemble twin studies, as they help to reveal core components of BC pathogenesis and to analyze interactions between host factors and tumor phenotype. Mutation profiling of biBC pairs suggested that most biBCs are clonally independent malignancies, although some instances of presumably contralateral metastatic spread were shown as well. Many biBCs, especially synchronous ones, demonstrate the similarity of essential tumor characteristics, which can be explained by sharing of genetic background, hormonal milieu, metabolic environment, and external exposures. biBC is strongly associated with BC-predisposing germline mutations; therefore, clinical management of biBC patients must include comprehensive genetic testing. Some contralateral metachronous BCs demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H). MSI-H is sometimes observed in radiation- and chemotherapy-induced tumors; therefore, it is possible that some second BCs are causally related to the therapy applied for the first cancer. MSI-H tumors are responsive to immune checkpoint blockade; hence, MSI-H analysis is advisable for biBC molecular testing. Systematic cataloging of biBC molecular portraits is likely to provide valuable information on fundamental aspects of cancer pathogenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evgeny N Imyanitov
- Department of Tumour Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, St.-Petersburg, Russia.,Department of Clinical Genetics, St.-Petersburg Pediatric Medical University, St.-Petersburg, Russia.,Department of Oncology, I.I. Mechnikov North-Western Medical University, St.-Petersburg, Russia
| | - Ekatherina Sh Kuligina
- Department of Tumour Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, St.-Petersburg, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Giardiello D, Steyerberg EW, Hauptmann M, Adank MA, Akdeniz D, Blomqvist C, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Brinkhuis M, Chang-Claude J, Czene K, Devilee P, Dunning AM, Easton DF, Eccles DM, Fasching PA, Figueroa J, Flyger H, García-Closas M, Haeberle L, Haiman CA, Hall P, Hamann U, Hopper JL, Jager A, Jakubowska A, Jung A, Keeman R, Kramer I, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Manoochehri M, Mariani L, Nevanlinna H, Oldenburg HSA, Pelders S, Pharoah PDP, Shah M, Siesling S, Smit VTHBM, Southey MC, Tapper WJ, Tollenaar RAEM, van den Broek AJ, van Deurzen CHM, van Leeuwen FE, van Ongeval C, Van't Veer LJ, Wang Q, Wendt C, Westenend PJ, Hooning MJ, Schmidt MK. Prediction and clinical utility of a contralateral breast cancer risk model. Breast Cancer Res 2019; 21:144. [PMID: 31847907 PMCID: PMC6918633 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-019-1221-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2019] [Accepted: 10/29/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer survivors are at risk for contralateral breast cancer (CBC), with the consequent burden of further treatment and potentially less favorable prognosis. We aimed to develop and validate a CBC risk prediction model and evaluate its applicability for clinical decision-making. METHODS We included data of 132,756 invasive non-metastatic breast cancer patients from 20 studies with 4682 CBC events and a median follow-up of 8.8 years. We developed a multivariable Fine and Gray prediction model (PredictCBC-1A) including patient, primary tumor, and treatment characteristics and BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, accounting for the competing risks of death and distant metastasis. We also developed a model without BRCA1/2 mutation status (PredictCBC-1B) since this information was available for only 6% of patients and is routinely unavailable in the general breast cancer population. Prediction performance was evaluated using calibration and discrimination, calculated by a time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) at 5 and 10 years after diagnosis of primary breast cancer, and an internal-external cross-validation procedure. Decision curve analysis was performed to evaluate the net benefit of the model to quantify clinical utility. RESULTS In the multivariable model, BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, family history, and systemic adjuvant treatment showed the strongest associations with CBC risk. The AUC of PredictCBC-1A was 0.63 (95% prediction interval (PI) at 5 years, 0.52-0.74; at 10 years, 0.53-0.72). Calibration-in-the-large was -0.13 (95% PI: -1.62-1.37), and the calibration slope was 0.90 (95% PI: 0.73-1.08). The AUC of Predict-1B at 10 years was 0.59 (95% PI: 0.52-0.66); calibration was slightly lower. Decision curve analysis for preventive contralateral mastectomy showed potential clinical utility of PredictCBC-1A between thresholds of 4-10% 10-year CBC risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and non-carriers. CONCLUSIONS We developed a reasonably calibrated model to predict the risk of CBC in women of European-descent; however, prediction accuracy was moderate. Our model shows potential for improved risk counseling, but decision-making regarding contralateral preventive mastectomy, especially in the general breast cancer population where limited information of the mutation status in BRCA1/2 is available, remains challenging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biometry and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School, Neuruppin, Germany
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Muriel A Adank
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Family Cancer Clinic, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Delal Akdeniz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carl Blomqvist
- Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Department of Oncology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mariël Brinkhuis
- East-Netherlands, Laboratory for Pathology, Hengelo, The Netherlands
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Alison M Dunning
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Diana M Eccles
- Cancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California at Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jonine Figueroa
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh, UK
- Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Edinburgh, UK
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Lothar Haeberle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - John L Hopper
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Agnes Jager
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
- Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Audrey Jung
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Iris Kramer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, VIB, Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Epidemiology Program, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Luigi Mariani
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology and Trial Organization, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Hester S A Oldenburg
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Saskia Pelders
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mitul Shah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent T H B M Smit
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Melissa C Southey
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Rob A E M Tollenaar
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Alexandra J van den Broek
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Flora E van Leeuwen
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Chantal van Ongeval
- Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Laura J Van't Veer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Qin Wang
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Camilla Wendt
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Bens A, Langballe R, Bernstein JL, Cronin-Fenton D, Friis S, Mellemkjaer L. Preventive drug therapy and contralateral breast cancer: summary of the evidence of clinical trials and observational studies. Acta Oncol 2019; 58:1581-1593. [PMID: 31393200 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2019.1643915] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer patients have a lifelong 2-4-fold increased risk of developing a second primary tumor in the contralateral breast compared with the risk for a first primary breast cancer in the general female population. Prevention of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) has received increased attention during recent decades. Here, we summarize and discuss the available literature on drug preventive therapy and CBC.Results: The endocrine-targetting drugs, tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors are used as standard adjuvant treatment for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. Both are associated with relative risk reductions of CBC of up to 50%, but incur serious side effects. Several prescription drugs originally developed for other purposes, including bisphosphonates, statins, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, metformin, anti-hypertensives and retinoids, have shown anti-cancer activity in preclinical models. However, results of observational studies on CBC are sparse and inconsistent, with only statins demonstrating promise as preventive agents and a potential treatment option for ER-negative breast cancer patients.Conclusion: Future studies are needed to assess the effect of statins in risk reduction and to identify other drugs with chemopreventive potential against CBC. Eventually, efforts must be directed towards identifying those breast cancer patients likely to benefit most from specific preventive therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annet Bens
- Unit of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Rikke Langballe
- Unit of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | | | - Søren Friis
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Unit of Statistics and Pharmacoepidemiology, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Lene Mellemkjaer
- Unit of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Watt GP, Reiner AS, Smith SA, Stram DO, Capanu M, Malone KE, Lynch CF, John EM, Knight JA, Mellemkjær L, Bernstein L, Brooks JD, Woods M, Liang X, Haile RW, Riaz N, Conti DV, Robson M, Duggan D, Boice JD, Shore RE, Tischkowitz M, Orlow I, Thomas DC, Concannon P, Bernstein JL. Association of a Pathway-Specific Genetic Risk Score With Risk of Radiation-Associated Contralateral Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e1912259. [PMID: 31560388 PMCID: PMC6777239 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Radiation therapy for breast cancer is associated with increased risk of a second primary contralateral breast cancer, but the genetic factors modifying this association are not well understood. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a genetic risk score comprising single nucleotide polymorphisms in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway is associated with radiation-associated contralateral breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This case-control study included a case group of women with contralateral breast cancer that was diagnosed at least 1 year after a first primary breast cancer who were individually matched to a control group of women with unilateral breast cancer. Inclusion criteria were receiving a first invasive breast cancer diagnosis prior to age 55 years between 1985 and 2008. Women were recruited through 8 population-based cancer registries in the United States, Canada, and Denmark as part of the Women's Environment, Cancer, and Radiation Epidemiology Studies I (November 2000 to August 2004) and II (March 2010 to December 2012). Data analysis was conducted from July 2017 to August 2019. EXPOSURES Stray radiation dose to the contralateral breast during radiation therapy for the first breast cancer. A novel genetic risk score comprised of genetic variants in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway was considered the potential effect modifier, dichotomized as high risk if the score was above the median of 74 and low risk if the score was at or below the median. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcome was risk of contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose stratified by genetic risk score, age, and latency. RESULTS A total of 5953 women were approached for study participation, and 3732 women (62.7%) agreed to participate. The median (range) age at first diagnosis was 46 (23-54) years. After 5 years of latency or more, among women who received the first diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years, exposure to 1.0 Gy (to convert to rad, multiply by 100) or more of stray radiation was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of contralateral breast cancer compared with women who were not exposed (rate ratio, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.1-3.6]). The risk was higher among women with a genetic risk score above the median (rate ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.1-8.1]), and there was no association among women with a genetic risk score below the median (rate ratio, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.5-3.7]). Among younger women with a high genetic risk score, the attributable increased risk for contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose was 28%. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer that was attributable to stray radiation exposure among women with a high genetic risk score and who received a first breast cancer diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years after 5 years or more of latency. This genetic risk score may help guide treatment and surveillance for women with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gordon P. Watt
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anne S. Reiner
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Susan A. Smith
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Daniel O. Stram
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | | | | | | | - Esther M. John
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Julia A. Knight
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Canada
- Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Leslie Bernstein
- Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Jennifer D. Brooks
- Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Meghan Woods
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Nadeem Riaz
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - David V. Conti
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | - Mark Robson
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - David Duggan
- Translational Genomics Research Institute, An Affiliate of City of Hope, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - John D. Boice
- National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland
- Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Roy E. Shore
- New York University School of Medicine, New York
| | | | - Irene Orlow
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Duncan C. Thomas
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Cheung KJ, Davidson NE. Double Trouble: Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk Management in the Modern Era. J Natl Cancer Inst 2019; 111:641-643. [PMID: 30698728 PMCID: PMC6624165 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy203] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2018] [Accepted: 10/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin J Cheung
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - Nancy E Davidson
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Rosenberg SM, Greaney ML, Patenaude AF, Partridge AH. Factors Affecting Surgical Decisions in Newly Diagnosed Young Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 2019; 8:463-468. [PMID: 30942651 DOI: 10.1089/jayao.2019.0002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Given that young women with breast cancer often have concerns and priorities attributable to their life stage, we conducted a series of interviews to better understanding the surgical decision-making experience among women diagnosed at age ≤40. Women spoke of how the potential effect of an extended recovery was affecting their decision and, in some cases, contributing to decisional conflict. Several women described their worry of leaving cancer cells behind; others cited the need for continued surveillance as a consideration. Attention to situational anxiety and concerns about recurrence are warranted to ensure that decisions are made in a supportive and patient-centered setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shoshana M Rosenberg
- 1Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Mary L Greaney
- 2Department of Kinesiology, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island
| | - Andrea F Patenaude
- 3Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ann H Partridge
- 1Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|