Declining second primary ovarian cancer after first primary breast cancer

PARPis response and outcome of ovarian cancer patients with BRCA1/2 germline mutation and a history of breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) response and outcome of ovarian cancer (OC) patients with BRCA1/2 germline mutation and a history of breast cancer (BC).

METHODS

Thirty-nine OC patients with BRCA1/2 germline mutation and a history of BC were included. The clinicopathological characteristics, PARPis response and prognosis were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median interval from BC to OC diagnosis was 115.3 months (range=6.4-310.1). A total of 38 patients (38/39, 97.4%) received platinum-based chemotherapy after surgical removal. The majority of these patients were reported to be platinum sensitive (92.1%, 35/38). 21 patients (53.8%) received PARPis treatment with 16 patients (76.2%) for maintenance treatment and 5 patients (5/21, 23.8%) for salvage treatment. The median duration for PARPis maintenance and salvage treatment was 14.9 months (range=2.0-56.9) and 8.2 months (range=5.2-20.7), respectively. In the entire cohort, 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rate was 33.1% and 78.9%, respectively. Patients with BRCA1 mutation had a non-significantly worse 5-year PFS (28.6% vs. 45.8%, p=0.346) and 5-year OS (76.9% vs. 83.3%, p=0.426) than those with BRCA2 mutation. In patients with stage III-IV (n=31), first line PARPis maintenance treatment associated with a non-significantly better PFS (median PFS: NR vs. 22.4 months; 5-year PFS: 64.3% vs. 21.9%, p=0.096).

CONCLUSION

The current study shows that these patients may have a good response to platinum-based chemotherapy and a favorable survival. And these patients can benefit from PARPis treatment and will likely be suitable candidates for PARPis.

Epidemiology and risk factors for ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is a complex disease, mostly observed in postmenopausal women, and is associated with poor survival rates. It is the sixth most common cancer and the fifth most common cause of death due to cancer among women in developed countries. Thus, despite representing less than one third of all gynaecologic cancers, deaths due to ovarian cancer account for more than two thirds of deaths due to gynaecologic cancers. Its prevalence is higher in Western Europe and Northern America than Asia and Africa. In sub-Saharan Africa, there is a considerably lower prevalence of ovarian cancer than other parts of Africa. Ovarian cancer is multifaceted, involving many factors, complex biological processes and unpredictable consequences. Unlike other female cancers that have early warning symptoms, ovarian cancer's symptoms are non-specific. As a result, ovarian cancers are normally undetected until advanced stages (III or IV). The major risk factors for ovarian cancer include older age, genetics, family history, hormone replacement therapy, nulliparity, and dietary fat. Controversial factors include obesity, infertility, talc powder, radiation exposure, fertility medications and in vitro fertilization. The current review discusses the aetiology, epidemiology and risk factors for ovarian cancer. Nevertheless, identification of the main risk factors for ovarian cancer may increase the awareness among women of the general population. This should help to decrease the incidence rate of ovarian cancer and increase the five-year survival rate.

Risks of subsequent primary cancers among breast cancer survivors according to hormone receptor status

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed at examining the risks of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among breast cancer survivors by hormone receptor (HR) status and age at diagnosis.

METHODS

Data from 12 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were used to identify 431,222 breast cancer survivors (at least 1 year) diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 84 years from 1992 to 2015. Risks of SPCs were measured as the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and the excess absolute risk (EAR) per 10,000 person-years. Poisson regression was used to test the difference in SIRs by HR status.

RESULTS

In comparison with the general population, the risk of new cancer diagnoses among survivors was 20% higher for those with HR-positive cancers (SIR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.21; EAR, 23.3/10,000 person-years) and 44% higher for those with HR-negative cancers (SIR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.41-1.47; EAR, 45.2/10,000 person-years), with the risk difference between HR statuses statistically significant. The higher risk after HR-negative cancer was driven by acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and breast, ovarian, peritoneal, and lung cancers. By age at diagnosis, the total EAR per 10,000 person-years ranged from 15.8 (95% CI, 14.1-17.5; SIR, 1.11) among late-onset (age, 50-84 years) HR-positive survivors to 69.4 (95% CI, 65.1-73.7; SIR, 2.24) among early-onset (age, 20-49 years) HR-negative survivors, with subsequent breast cancer representing 73% to 80% of the total EAR. After breast cancer, the greatest EARs were for ovarian cancer among early-onset HR-negative survivors, lung cancer among early- and late-onset HR-negative survivors, and uterine corpus cancer among late-onset HR-positive survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

Risks of SPCs after breast cancer differ substantially by subtype and age. This suggests that more targeted approaches for cancer prevention and early-detection strategies are needed in survivorship care planning.

Second Primary Ovarian Epithelial, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancers after Breast Cancer Diagnosis: Korea Central Cancer Registry

Purpose

A prior history of breast cancer is a risk factor for the subsequent development of primary peritoneal, epithelial ovarian, and fallopian tubal (POFT) cancers. This study aimed to estimate the incidence of secondary POFT malignancy in breast cancer patients and the clinical outcomes of primary and secondary POFT cancer.

Materials and Methods

We searched the Korea Central Cancer Registry to find patients with primary and secondary POFT cancer who had breast cancer in 1999–2017. The incidence rate and standardized incidence ratio were calculated. Additionally, we compared the overall survival of patients with primary and secondary POFT cancer.

Results

Based on the age-standardized rate, the incidence of second primary POFT cancer after breast cancer was 0.0763 per 100,000 women, which increased in Korea between 1999 and 2017. Among the 30,366 POFT cancer patients, 25,721 were primary POFT cancer only, and 493 had secondary POFT cancer after a breast cancer diagnosis. Second primary POFT cancer patients were older at the time of diagnosis (55 vs. 53, p < 0.001) and had a larger proportion of serous histology (68.4% vs. 51.2%, p < 0.001) than patients with primary POFT. There were no differences between the two groups in tumor stage at diagnosis. The 5-year overall survival rates were 60.2% and 56.3% for primary and secondary POFT cancer, respectively (p=0.216).

Conclusion

The incidence of second primary POFT cancer after breast cancer increased in Korea between 1999 and 2017. Besides, second primary POFT cancer patients were diagnosed at older ages and had more serous histology.

Temporal trends of subsequent breast cancer among women with ovarian cancer: a population-based study

PURPOSE

To examine trends, characteristics and outcomes of women who develop both ovarian and breast cancers.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study examining the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program from 1973 to 2013. Among ovarian cancer (n = 133,149) and breast cancer (n = 1,143,219) cohorts, women with both diagnoses were identified and temporal trends, tumor characteristics and survival were examined.

RESULTS

There were 6446 women with both malignancies, representing 4.8% of the ovarian cancer cohort and 0.6% of the breast cancer cohort. Women with ovarian cancer who had secondary breast cancer were younger than those without secondary breast cancer early in the study period (52.3 versus 59.2 in 1973) but older in more recent years (68.5 versus 62.1 in 2013, P < 0.001). The number of breast cancer survivors who developed postcedent ovarian cancer decreased from 1.5 to 0.2% from 1979 to 2008 (relative risk reduction 90.0%, P < 0.05). Similarly, the number of ovarian cancer survivors who developed postcedent breast cancer decreased from 7.2 to 2.0% from 1973 to 2008 (relative risk reduction 72.4%, P < 0.05). Tumor characteristics were more likely to be favorable in women with ovarian cancer who developed postcedent breast cancer but unfavorable in those who had antecedent breast cancer (all, P < 0.05). Women with ovarian cancer who had secondary breast cancer had superior cause-specific survival compared to those who did not develop breast cancer regardless of breast cancer timing (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that the demographics of women who develop breast cancer and ovarian cancer have changed over time and diagnosis of secondary breast cancer after ovarian cancer has decreased.

Challenges and opportunities in the care of survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer are an understudied group. Much of what is known about long-term outcomes after AYA cancer has been derived from cohorts of childhood cancer survivors, which seldom include patients at the older end of the AYA age spectrum. In general, AYA cancer survivors have a lower risk for premature mortality, subsequent primary neoplasms and chronic health conditions than childhood cancer survivors. However, AYA cancer survivors are vulnerable to psychosocial challenges, concerns about fertility and relationships and financial toxicity. No single model is optimal for the care of these survivors, but it is generally agreed that all survivors require a survivor care plan that promotes their adherence to evidence-based surveillance guidelines. There is a need to create survivor cohorts that include the full range of AYA ages and diagnoses to be able to address the many pressing questions that remain unanswered in this vulnerable population.

Risk of subsequent primary neoplasms in survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer (Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Survivor Study): a population-based, cohort study

Background

Few studies have investigated the risks of subsequent primary neoplasms after adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer. We investigated the risks of specific subsequent primary neoplasms after each of 16 types of AYA cancer.

Methods

The Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Survivor Study is a population-based cohort of 200 945 survivors of cancer diagnosed when aged 15–39 years in England and Wales from Jan 1, 1971, to Dec 31, 2006. The cohort was established using cancer registrations from the Office for National Statistics and the Welsh Cancer registry. Follow-up was from 5-year survival until the first occurrence of death, emigration, or study end date (Dec 31, 2012). In this analysis, we focus on the risk of specific subsequent primary neoplasms after 16 types of AYA cancer: breast; cervical; testicular; Hodgkin lymphoma (female); Hodgkin lymphoma (male); melanoma; CNS (intracranial); colorectal; non-Hodgkin lymphoma; thyroid; soft-tissue sarcoma; ovarian; bladder; other female genital; leukaemia; and head and neck cancer. We report absolute excess risks (AERs; per 10 000 person-years) and cumulative incidence of specific types of subsequent primary neoplasm after each type of AYA cancer.

Findings

During the 2 631 326 person-years of follow-up (median follow-up 16·8 years, IQR 10·5–25·2), 12 321 subsequent primary neoplasms were diagnosed in 11 565 survivors, most frequently among survivors of breast cancer, cervical cancer, testicular cancer, and Hodgkin lymphoma. AERs of any subsequent primary neoplasms were 19·5 per 10 000 person-years (95% CI 17·4–21·5) in survivors of breast cancer, 10·2 (8·0–12·4) in survivors of cervical cancer, 18·9 (16·6–21·1) in survivors of testicular cancer, 55·7 (50·4–61·1) in female survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma, and 29·9 (26·3–33·6) in male survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma. The cumulative incidence of all subsequent primary neoplasms 35 years after diagnosis was 11·9% (95% CI 11·3–12·6) in survivors of breast cancer, 15·8% (14·8–16·7) in survivors of cervical cancer, 20·2% (18·9–21·5) in survivors of testicular cancer, 26·6% (24·7–28·6) in female survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma, and 16·5% (15·2–18·0) in male survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma. In patients who had survived at least 30 years from diagnosis of cervical cancer, testicular cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma in women, breast cancer, and Hodgkin lymphoma in men, we identified a small number of specific subsequent primary neoplasms that account for 82%, 61%, 58%, 45%, and 41% of the total excess number of neoplasms, respectively. Lung cancer accounted for a notable proportion of the excess number of neoplasms across all AYA groups investigated.

Interpretation

Our finding that a small number of specific subsequent primary neoplasms account for a large percentage of the total excess number of neoplasms in long-term survivors of cervical, breast, and testicular cancer, and Hodgkin lymphoma provides an evidence base to inform priorities for clinical long-term follow-up. The prominence of lung cancer after each of these AYA cancers indicates the need for further work aimed at preventing and reducing the burden of this cancer in future survivors of AYA cancer.

Funding

Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, Academy of Medical Sciences, and Children with Cancer UK.

Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy Versus GnRH Analogue in the Adjuvant Treatment of Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients: Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Breast Cancer Outcome, Ovarian Cancer Prevention and Treatment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is no available evidence to recommend gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue-based ovarian suppression versus bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer, since the two approaches are considered equivalent in terms of oncologic outcome. The role of surgical ovarian ablation has been revitalized based on the advances of minimally invasive surgery, and a better understanding of clinical and molecular basis of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer syndromes. The aim of this study is to analyze the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic BSO and GnRH analogue administration in patients aged 40-49 years with hormone-sensitive breast cancer.

METHODS

A probabilistic decision tree model was developed to evaluate costs and outcomes of ovarian ablation through laparoscopic BSO, or ovarian suppression through monthly injections of GnRH analogue. Results were expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic BSO strategy was associated with a lower mean total cost per patient than GnRH treatment, and considering the difference in terms of QALYs, the incremental effectiveness did not demonstrate a notable difference between the two approaches. From the National Health Service perspective, and for a time horizon of 5 years, laparoscopic BSO was the dominant option compared to GnRH treatment; laparoscopic BSO was less expensive than GnRH, €2385 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2044, 2753] vs €7093 (95% CI = 3409, 12,105), respectively, and more effective.

CONCLUSION

Surgical ovarian ablation is more cost-effective than GnRH administration in the adjuvant treatment of hormone-sensitive breast cancer patients aged 40-49 years, and the advantage of preventing ovarian cancer through laparoscopic BSO should be considered.

Identifying post-menopausal women at elevated risk for epithelial ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

We developed and validated a hybrid risk classifier combining serum markers and epidemiologic risk factors to identify post-menopausal women at elevated risk for invasive fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, and ovarian epithelial carcinoma.

METHODS

To select epidemiologic risk factors for use in the classifier, Cox proportional hazards analyses were conducted using 74,786 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Observational Study (OS) participants. To construct a combination classifier, 210 WHI OS cases and 536 matched controls with serum marker measurements were analyzed; validation employed 143 cases and 725 matched controls from the WHI Clinical Trial (CT) with similar data.

RESULTS

Analyses identified a combination risk classifier composed of two elevated-risk groups: 1) women with CA125 or HE4 exceeding a 98% specificity threshold; and 2) women with intact fallopian tubes, prior use of menopausal hormone therapy for at least two years, and either a first degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer or a personal history of breast cancer. In the WHI OS population, it classified 13% of women as elevated risk, identifying 30% of ovarian cancers diagnosed up to 7.8years post-enrollment (Hazard Ratio [HR]=2.6, p<0.001). In the WHI CT validation population, it classified 8% of women as elevated risk, identifying 31% of cancers diagnosed within 7years of enrollment (HR=4.6, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

CA125 and HE4 contributed significantly to a risk prediction classifier combining serum markers with epidemiologic risk factors. The hybrid risk classifier may be useful to identify post-menopausal women who would benefit from timely surgical intervention to prevent epithelial ovarian cancer.

Elevated risks of subsequent endometrial cancer development among breast cancer survivors with different hormone receptor status: a SEER analysis

Estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen are known to have an elevated risk of subsequent endometrial cancer. However, it is unclear if ER-negative patients also have a higher risk of endometrial cancer. This population-based study aims to evaluate whether breast cancer patients with distinctive ER and PR status possess differential risks in developing delayed endometrial malignancy. Data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program (1992-2009). Standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was calculated as the observed cases of endometrial cancers among breast cancer survivors compared with the expected cases in the general population. Data were stratified by latency periods, race, age, and calendar year of breast cancer diagnosis. We identified 2044 patients who developed a second primary endometrial cancer among 289,933 breast cancer survivors. The overall SIRs for subsequent endometrial cancers were increased in all of the four subtypes (ER+PR+, ER+PR-, ER-PR+, and ER-PR-) of breast cancer. SIR was increased for all latency periods except for the initial 6-11 months after breast cancer diagnosis. Stratifying by age of diagnosis, elevated SIRs in all ER/PR groups were statistically significant among patients diagnosed with breast cancer after the age of 40. Demographically, non-Hispanic whites had increased SIRs in all subtypes of breast cancer, while Hispanic whites had no statistically elevated SIRs. Here we showed that patients with invasive breast cancer have a higher risk of developing subsequent endometrial cancer regardless of ER or PR status. The increased risk among hormone receptor-negative breast cancer survivors raises concerns whether common etiological factors among these breast cancer subtypes increase the susceptibility to develop endometrial cancer. Lower threshold for routine endometrial cancer surveillance may be warranted.