333 research outputs found

    The impact of loco-regional recurrences on metastatic progression in early-stage breast cancer: a multistate model

    Get PDF
    To study whether the effects of prognostic factors associated with the occurrence of distant metastases (DM) at primary diagnosis change after the incidence of loco-regional recurrences (LRR) among women treated for invasive stage I or II breast cancer. The study population consisted of 3,601 women, enrolled in EORTC trials 10801, 10854, or 10902 treated for early-stage breast cancer. Data were analysed in a multivariate, multistate model by using multivariate Cox regression models, including a state-dependent covariate. The presence of a LRR in itself is a significant prognostic risk factor (HR: 3.64; 95%-CI: 2.02-6.5) for the occurrence of DM. Main prognostic risk factors for a DM are young age at diagnosis (</=40: HR: 1.79; 95%-CI: 1.28-2.51), larger tumour size (HR: 1.58; 95%-CI: 1.35-1.84) and node positivity (HR: 2.00; 95%-CI: 1.74-2.30). Adjuvant chemotherapy is protective for a DM (HR: 0.66; 95%-CI: 0.55-0.80). After the occurrence of a LRR the latter protective effect has disappeared (P = 0.009). The presence of LRR in itself is a significant risk factor for DM. For patients who are at risk of developing LRR, effective local control should be the main target of therapy

    Clustering of venous thrombosis events at the start of tamoxifen therapy in breast cancer: A population-based experience

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The epidemiology of tamoxifen and venous thromboembolism (VTE) is not well understood, and most data on tamoxifen toxicity are from adjuvant clinical trials. This study examined the relationship between the duration of tamoxifen use in female patients with breast cancer and the risk of VTE in a large population-based setting. Materials and Methods: Retrospective electronic data extraction on tamoxifen utilization was undertaken among a cohort of 3572 women with breast cancer seen at Marshfield Clinic between January 1, 1994 and June 31, 2009. Observational follow-up extended until February, 2010. Results: On initial exposure to tamoxifen, women had a clustering of VTE events. Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for multiple clinically-important covariates including age, body mass index, cancer stage, and concurrent diabetes, demonstrated that as use of tamoxifen continued in those without earlier VTE events, risk of subsequent VTE gradually increased, albeit at a lower rate (hazard ratio per year of tamoxifen duration = 1.225, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: In our study population, initiating tamoxifen coincided with an initial clustering of VTE events, with risks due specifically to tamoxifen, increasing during continued exposure. Evidence suggested that the VTE clustering occurred in high risk individuals at initiation of tamoxifen therapy. Careful selection of patients for whom tamoxifen therapy is appropriate based on susceptibility to VTE is thus required prior to initiation of therapy

    Sequencing chemotherapy and radiotherapy in locoregional advanced breast cancer patients after mastectomy – a retrospective analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Combined chemo- and radiotherapy are established in breast cancer treatment. Chemotherapy is recommended prior to radiotherapy but decisive data on the optimal sequence are rare. This retrospective analysis aimed to assess the role of sequencing in patients after mastectomy because of advanced locoregional disease.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 212 eligible patients had a stage III breast cancer and had adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary dissection between 1996 and 2004. According to concerted multi-modality treatment strategies 86 patients were treated sequentially (chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy) (SEQgroup), 70 patients had a sandwich treatment (SW-group) and 56 patients had simultaneous chemoradiation (SIM-group) during that time period. Radiotherapy comprised the thoracic wall and/or regional lymph nodes. The total dose was 45–50.4 Gray. As simultaneous chemoradiation CMF was given in 95.4% of patients while in sequential or sandwich application in 86% and 87.1% of patients an anthracycline-based chemotherapy was given.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Concerning the parameters nodal involvement, lymphovascular invasion, extracapsular spread and extension of the irradiated region the three treatment groups were significantly imbalanced. The other parameters, e.g. age, pathological tumor stage, grading and receptor status were homogeneously distributed. Looking on those two groups with an equally effective chemotherapy (EC, FEC), the SEQ- and SW-group, the sole imbalance was the extension of LVI (57.1 vs. 25.6%, p < 0.0001).</p> <p>5-year overall- and disease free survival were 53.2%/56%, 38.1%/32% and 64.2%/50%, for the sequential, sandwich and simultaneous regime, respectively, which differed significantly in the univariate analysis (p = 0.04 and p = 0.03, log-rank test). Also the 5-year locoregional or distant recurrence free survival showed no significant differences according to the sequence of chemo- and radiotherapy. In the multivariate analyses the sequence had no independent impact on overall survival (p = 0.2) or disease free survival (p = 0.4). The toxicity, whether acute nor late, showed no significant differences in the three groups. The grade III/IV acute side effects were 3.6%, 0% and 3.5% for the SIM-, SW- and SEQ-group. By tendency the SIM regime had more late side effects.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>No clear advantage can be stated for any radio- and chemotherapy sequence in breast cancer therapy so far. This could be confirmed in our retrospective analysis in high-risk patients after mastectomy. The sequential approach is recommended according to current guidelines considering a lower toxicity.</p

    BCL2 in breast cancer: a favourable prognostic marker across molecular subtypes and independent of adjuvant therapy received

    Get PDF
    Background: Breast cancer is heterogeneous and the existing prognostic classifiers are limited in accuracy, leading to unnecessary treatment of numerous women. B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2), an antiapoptotic protein, has been proposed as a prognostic marker, but this effect is considered to relate to oestrogen receptor (ER) status. This study aimed to test the clinical validity of BCL2 as an independent prognostic marker. Methods: Five studies of 11 212 women with early-stage breast cancer were analysed. Individual patient data included tumour size, grade, lymph node status, endocrine therapy, chemotherapy and mortality. BCL2, ER, progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) levels were determined in all tumours. A Cox model incorporating the time-dependent effects of each variable was used to explore the prognostic significance of BCL2. Results: In univariate analysis, ER, PR and BCL2 positivity was associated with improved survival and HER2 positivity with inferior survival. For ER and PR this effect was time dependent, whereas for BCL2 and HER2 the effect persisted over time. In multivariate analysis, BCL2 positivity retained independent prognostic significance (hazard ratio (HR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.88, P<0.001). BCL2 was a powerful prognostic marker in ER (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54-0.74, P<0.001) and ER disease (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48-0.65, P<0.001), and in HER2 (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.49-0.61, P<0.001) and HER2 disease (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.85, P<0.001), irrespective of the type of adjuvant therapy received. Addition of BCL2 to the Adjuvant! Online prognostic model, for a subset of cases with a 10-year follow-up, improved the survival prediction (P<0.0039). Conclusions: BCL2 is an independent indicator of favourable prognosis for all types of early-stage breast cancer. This study establishes the rationale for introduction of BCL2 immunohistochemistry to improve prognostic stratification. Further work is now needed to ascertain the exact way to apply BCL2 testing for risk stratification and to standardise BCL2 immunohistochemistry for this application. © 2010 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved

    Siah1 proteins enhance radiosensitivity of human breast cancer cells

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Siah proteins play an important role in cancer progression. We evaluated the effect of Siah1, its splice variants Siah1L and the Siah1 mutant with the RING finger deleted (Siah1ΔR) on radiosensitization of human breast cancer cells.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The status of Siah1 and Siah1L was analysed in five breast cancer cell lines. To establish stable cells, SKBR3 cells were transfected with Siah1, Siah-1L and Siah1ΔR. Siah1 function was suppressed by siRNA in MCF-7 cells. The impact of Siah1 overexpression and silencing on apoptosis, proliferation, survival, invasion ability and DNA repair was assessed in SKBR3 and MCF-7 cells, also in regards to radiation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Siah1 and Siah1L mRNA expression was absent in four of five breast cancer cells lines analysed. Overexpression of Siah1 and Siah1L enhanced radiation-induced apoptosis in stable transfected SKBR3 cells, while Siah1ΔR failed to show this effect. In addition, Siah1 and Siah1L significantly reduced cell clonogenic survival and proliferation. Siah1L sensitization enhancement ratio values were over 1.5 and 4.0 for clonogenic survival and proliferation, respectively, pointing to a highly cooperative and potentially synergistic fashion with radiation. Siah1 or Siah1L significantly reduced invasion ability of SKBR3 and suppressed Tcf/Lef factor activity. Importantly, Siah1 siRNA demonstrated opposite effects in MCF-7 cells. Siah1 and Siah1L overexpression resulted in inhibition of DNA repair as inferred by increased levels of DNA double-strand breaks in irradiated SKBR3 cells.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results reveal for the first time how overexpression of Siah1L and Siah1 can determine radiosensitivity of breast cancer cells. These findings suggest that development of drugs augmenting Siah1 and Siah1L activity could be a novel approach in improving tumor cell kill.</p
    corecore