6 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question
Abstract: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) now represents 20–25% of all ‘breast cancers’ consequent upon detection by population-based breast cancer screening programmes. Currently, all DCIS lesions are treated, and treatment comprises either mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery supplemented with radiotherapy. However, most DCIS lesions remain indolent. Difficulty in discerning harmless lesions from potentially invasive ones can lead to overtreatment of this condition in many patients. To counter overtreatment and to transform clinical practice, a global, comprehensive and multidisciplinary collaboration is required. Here we review the incidence of DCIS, the perception of risk for developing invasive breast cancer, the current treatment options and the known molecular aspects of progression. Further research is needed to gain new insights for improved diagnosis and management of DCIS, and this is integrated in the PRECISION (PREvent ductal Carcinoma In Situ Invasive Overtreatment Now) initiative. This international effort will seek to determine which DCISs require treatment and prevent the consequences of overtreatment on the lives of many women affected by DCIS
Effects of intervention with sulindac and inulin/VSL#3 on mucosal and luminal factors in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis
Contains fulltext :
97862.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND/AIM: In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a single center intervention study. Primary endpoints were the risk parameters cell proliferation and glutathione S-transferase (GST) detoxification capacity in the pouch mucosa; secondary endpoints were the short chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents, pH, and cytotoxicity of fecal water. METHODS: Before the start and at the end of each 4-week intervention period, six biopsies of the pouch were taken and feces was collected during 24 h. Cell proliferation and GST enzyme activity was assessed in the biopsies and pH, SCFA contents, and cytotoxicity were assessed in the fecal water fraction. The three interventions (sulindac, inulin/VSL#3, sulindac/inulin/VSL#3) were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Cell proliferation was lower after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment with sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 showed the opposite. GST enzyme activity was increased after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment showed the opposite effect. However, no significance was reached in all these measures. Cytotoxicity, pH, and SCFA content of fecal water showed no differences at all among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed non-significant decreased cell proliferation and increased detoxification capacity after treatment with sulindac or VSL#3/inulin; however, combining both regimens did not show an additional effect
Microcalcification crystallography as a potential marker of DCIS recurrence
Ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) accounts for 20-25% of all new breast cancer diagnoses. DCIS has an uncertain risk of progression to invasive breast cancer and a lack of predictive biomarkers may result in relatively high levels (~ 75%) of overtreatment. To identify unique prognostic biomarkers of invasive progression, crystallographic and chemical features of DCIS microcalcifications have been explored. Samples from patients with at least 5-years of follow up and no known recurrence (174 calcifications in 67 patients) or ipsilateral invasive breast cancer recurrence (179 microcalcifications in 57 patients) were studied. Significant differences were noted between the two groups including whitlockite relative mass, hydroxyapatite and whitlockite crystal maturity and, elementally, sodium to calcium ion ratio. A preliminary predictive model for DCIS to invasive cancer progression was developed from these parameters with an AUC of 0.797. These results provide insights into the differing DCIS tissue microenvironments, and how these impact microcalcification formation. [Abstract copyright: © 2023. The Author(s).
Prediction Models and Decision Aids for Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Systematic Literature Review
Even though Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS) can potentially be an invasive breast cancer (IBC) precursor, most DCIS lesions never will progress to IBC if left untreated. Because we cannot predict yet which DCIS lesions will and which will not progress, almost all women with DCIS are treated by breast-conserving surgery +/− radiotherapy, or even mastectomy. As a consequence, many women with non-progressive DCIS carry the burden of intensive treatment without any benefit. Multiple decision support tools have been developed to optimize DCIS management, aiming to find the balance between over- and undertreatment. In this systematic review, we evaluated the quality and added value of such tools. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline(ovid), Embase(ovid), Scopus and TRIP. Following the PRISMA guidelines, publications were selected. The CHARMS (prediction models) or IPDAS (decision aids) checklist were used to evaluate the tools’ methodological quality. Thirty-three publications describing four decision aids and six prediction models were included. The decision aids met at least 50% of the IPDAS criteria. However, most lacked tools to facilitate discussion of the information with healthcare providers. Five prediction models quantify the risk of an ipsilateral breast event after a primary DCIS, one estimates the risk of contralateral breast cancer, and none included active surveillance. Good quality and external validations were lacking for all prediction models. There remains an unmet clinical need for well-validated, good-quality DCIS risk prediction models and decision aids in which active surveillance is included as a management option for low-risk DCIS
Recommended from our members
Mechanisms that clear mutations drive field cancerization in mammary tissue
Acknowledgements: We thank the laboratories of van Rheenen and Scheele for critically reading the manuscript, and the Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI) Animal facility, NKI BioImaging facility and the NKI genomics core facility for their technical support. This work was supported by the Boehringer Ingelheim Foundation (PhD Fellowship to C.L.G.J.S.), a Federation of European Biochemical Societies excellence award (to C.L.G.J.S.), the Research Foundation Flanders (PhD grant fundamental research no. 11L7222N to M.C.), EMBO (postdoctoral fellowship grant nos. ALTF 452-2019 to H.A.M. and ALTF 1035-2020 to C.L.G.J.S.) and the European Research Council (consolidator grant no. 648804 to J.v.R.), the Doctor Josef Steiner Foundation (to J.v.R.), the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO) (Vici grant no. 09150182110004 to J.v.R., and Veni grant no. 09150161910151 to H.A.M.) and a joint grant of the Cancer Research UK and KWF Kankerbestrijding (ref. C38317/A24043). B.D.S. acknowledges funding from the Royal Society E.P. Abraham Research Professorship (grant nos. RP\R1\180165 and RSRP\R\231004) and Wellcome (grant nos. 098357/Z/12/Z and 219478/Z/19/Z). We regret that we could not cite all the important contributions in this field due to the constraint of being limited to citing only 60 studies. This research was funded, in part, by the Wellcome Trust (098357/Z/12/Z and 219478/Z/19/Z). For the purpose of Open Access, the authors have applied a CC BY public copyright license to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.AbstractOncogenic mutations are abundant in the tissues of healthy individuals, but rarely form tumours1–3. Yet, the underlying protection mechanisms are largely unknown. To resolve these mechanisms in mouse mammary tissue, we use lineage tracing to map the fate of wild-type and Brca1−/−;Trp53−/− cells, and find that both follow a similar pattern of loss and spread within ducts. Clonal analysis reveals that ducts consist of small repetitive units of self-renewing cells that give rise to short-lived descendants. This offers a first layer of protection as any descendants, including oncogenic mutant cells, are constantly lost, thereby limiting the spread of mutations to a single stem cell-descendant unit. Local tissue remodelling during consecutive oestrous cycles leads to the cooperative and stochastic loss and replacement of self-renewing cells. This process provides a second layer of protection, leading to the elimination of most mutant clones while enabling the minority that by chance survive to expand beyond the stem cell-descendant unit. This leads to fields of mutant cells spanning large parts of the epithelial network, predisposing it for transformation. Eventually, clone expansion becomes restrained by the geometry of the ducts, providing a third layer of protection. Together, these mechanisms act to eliminate most cells that acquire somatic mutations at the expense of driving the accelerated expansion of a minority of cells, which can colonize large areas, leading to field cancerization.</jats:p
Genomic analysis defines clonal relationships of ductal carcinoma in situ and recurrent invasive breast cancer.
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is the most common form of preinvasive breast cancer and, despite treatment, a small fraction (5-10%) of DCIS patients develop subsequent invasive disease. A fundamental biologic question is whether the invasive disease arises from tumor cells in the initial DCIS or represents new unrelated disease. To address this question, we performed genomic analyses on the initial DCIS lesion and paired invasive recurrent tumors in 95 patients together with single-cell DNA sequencing in a subset of cases. Our data show that in 75% of cases the invasive recurrence was clonally related to the initial DCIS, suggesting that tumor cells were not eliminated during the initial treatment. Surprisingly, however, 18% were clonally unrelated to the DCIS, representing new independent lineages and 7% of cases were ambiguous. This knowledge is essential for accurate risk evaluation of DCIS, treatment de-escalation strategies and the identification of predictive biomarkers