46 research outputs found

    Fenretinide (4-HPR): A Preventive Chance for Women at Genetic and Familial Risk?

    Get PDF
    The incidence and mortality of breast cancer have been recently influenced by several new therapeutic strategies. In particular our knowledge on cancer precursors, risk biomarkers, and genetics has considerably increased, and prevention strategies are being successfully explored. Since their discovery, retinoids, the natural and synthetic derivatives of vitamin A, have been known to play a crucial role in cell and tissue differentiation and their ability to inhibit carcinogenesis has made them the ideal chemopreventive agents studied in several preclinical and clinical trials. Fenretinide (4-HPR) is the most studied retinoid in breast cancer chemoprevention clinical trials due to its selective accumulation in breast tissue and its favorable toxicological profile. This agent showed a significative reduction of the incidence of second breast tumors in premenopausal women confirmed after 15-year followups. Considering Fenretinide protective action, a similar trend on ovarian cancer, this drug warrants reevaluations as a preventive agent for high-risk young women, such as BRCA-1 and 2 mutation carriers or with a high familial risk. This favorable effect therefore provides a strong rationale for a primary prevention trial in these unaffected cohort of women

    Hormonal Therapy and Chemoprevention.

    Get PDF
    Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) can increase the quality as well as the length of life, but a prolonged use can also increase the risk of breast cancer. The combination of HRT and a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) such as tamoxifen may retain the benefits while reducing the risks of either agent. A post hoc analysis of the Italian Tamoxifen Prevention Study showed a borderline significant reduction of breast cancer among women who were on HRT continuously and tamoxifen as compared with continuous HRT users who received placebo. Recent studies suggest that the standard dose of tamoxifen may be reduced to one-quarter (i.e., 10 mg every other day) without loss of its beneficial biological effects. Since the endometrial effect of tamoxifen seems to be both dose and time dependent, a dose reduction could substantially reduce the risk of endometrial cancer while retaining its preventive efficacy. On the other hand, the addition of HRT containing progestins could also minimize the risk of endometrial cancer associated with tamoxifen. Moreover, estrogen should reduce the incidence of vasomotor and urogenital symptoms, which are a major reason for tamoxifen withdrawal in prevention studies. Notably, in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) P-1 trial, women ages 50 or younger had no increased incidence of adverse events, including endometrial cancer and venous thromboembolic events. One possible explanation for the lack of toxicity in premenopause is the presence of adequate circulating estrogen levels which prevent tamoxifen to act as an estrogen agonist at these target tissues. Moreover, data from the current Italian tamoxifen prevention trial indicate that the compliance was substantially higher for de novo and current HRT users as compared to women who never received HRT during the study. The combination of HRT and tamoxifen at low doses could thus reduce the risks and side effects while retaining the benefits of either agent

    Association of CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen metabolites with breast cancer recurrence in a low-dose trial

    Get PDF
    Low-dose tamoxifen halves recurrence in non-invasive breast cancer without significant adverse events. Some adjuvant trials with tamoxifen 20 mg/day had shown an association between low endoxifen levels (9–16 nM) and recurrence, but no association with CYP2D6 was shown in the NSABP P1 and P2 prevention trials. We studied the association of CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen metabolites with tumor biomarkers and recurrence in a randomized phase III trial of low-dose tamoxifen. Median (IQR) endoxifen levels at year 1 were 8.4 (5.3–11.4) in patients who recurred vs 7.5 (5.1–10.2) in those who did not recur (p = 0.60). Tamoxifen and metabolites significantly decreased C-reactive protein (CRP, p < 0.05), and a CRP increase after 3 years was associated with higher risk of recurrence (HR = 4.37, 95% CI, 1.14–16.73, P = 0.03). In conclusion, endoxifen is below 9 nM in most subjects treated with 5 mg/day despite strong efficacy and there is no association with recurrence, suggesting that the reason for tamoxifen failure is not poor drug metabolism.publishedVersio

    Large scale multifactorial likelihood quantitative analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants: An ENIGMA resource to support clinical variant classification

    Get PDF
    The multifactorial likelihood analysis method has demonstrated utility for quantitative assessment of variant pathogenicity for multiple cancer syndrome genes. Independent data types currently incorporated in the model for assessing BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants include clinically calibrated prior probability of pathogenicity based on variant location and bioinformatic prediction of variant effect, co-segregation, family cancer history profile, co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant in the same gene, breast tumor pathology, and case-control information. Research and clinical data for multifactorial likelihood analysis were collated for 1,395 BRCA1/2 predominantly intronic and missense variants, enabling classification based on posterior probability of pathogenicity for 734 variants: 447 variants were classified as (likely) benign, and 94 as (likely) pathogenic; and 248 classifications were new or considerably altered relative to ClinVar submissions. Classifications were compared with information not yet included in the likelihood model, and evidence strengths aligned to those recommended for ACMG/AMP classification codes. Altered mRNA splicing or function relative to known nonpathogenic variant controls were moderately to strongly predictive of variant pathogenicity. Variant absence in population datasets provided supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. These findings have direct relevance for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant evaluation, and justify the need for gene-specific calibration of evidence types used for variant classification

    Large scale multifactorial likelihood quantitative analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants: An ENIGMA resource to support clinical variant classification

    Get PDF
    Abstract The multifactorial likelihood analysis method has demonstrated utility for quantitative assessment of variant pathogenicity for multiple cancer syndrome genes. Independent data types currently incorporated in the model for assessing BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants include clinically calibrated prior probability of pathogenicity based on variant location and bioinformatic prediction of variant effect, co-segregation, family cancer history profile, co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant in the same gene, breast tumor pathology, and case-control information. Research and clinical data for multifactorial likelihood analysis were collated for 1395 BRCA1/2 predominantly intronic and missense variants, enabling classification based on posterior probability of pathogenicity for 734 variants: 447 variants were classified as (likely) benign, and 94 as (likely) pathogenic; 248 classifications were new or considerably altered relative to ClinVar submissions. Classifications were compared to information not yet included in the likelihood model, and evidence strengths aligned to those recommended for ACMG/AMP classification codes. Altered mRNA splicing or function relative to known non-pathogenic variant controls were moderately to strongly predictive of variant pathogenicity. Variant absence in population datasets provided supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. These findings have direct relevance for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant evaluation, and justify the need for gene-specific calibration of evidence types used for variant classification. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

    Metformin and Breast Cancer Risk

    No full text
    corecore