Kelly-Anne Phillips

Cognitive Function in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Chemotherapy

PURPOSE Breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy have complained of difficulties in their ability to remember, think, and concentrate. This study assessed whether there are differences in cognitive function between breast cancer patients treated with standard-dose adjuvant chemotherapy compared with healthy controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS The High Sensitivity Cognitive Screen and the Profile of Mood States (POMS) were used to assess cognitive function and mood in a group of 107 women. The women consisted of 31 breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (group A), 40 breast cancer patients who had completed adjuvant chemotherapy a median of 2 years earlier (group B), and 36 healthy controls (group C). RESULTS Univariate analysis showed statistically significant differences (P =.009) in overall cognitive function scores between groups A and C, with poorer function in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. These differences remained significant (P =.046) when controlling for age, education level, and menopausal status. More patients had moderate or severe cognitive impairment in groups A and B than in controls (P </=.002). There were no significant differences in POMS scores between the groups, suggesting that the differences seen in cognitive scores were unlikely to be because of mood disturbance. CONCLUSION Cognitive differences were observed in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy compared with healthy controls. These differences did not seem to be caused by significant differences in mood disturbance between the two groups. If confirmed, these results have substantial implications for informed consent, counseling, and psychosocial support of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

The nature and severity of cognitive impairment associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast cancer: A meta-analysis of the current literature

OBJECTIVE Several studies have identified that adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer is associated with cognitive impairment; however, the magnitude of this impairment is unclear. This study assessed the severity and nature of cognitive impairment associated with adjuvant chemotherapy by conducting a meta-analysis of the published literature to date. METHOD Six studies (five cross-sectional and one prospective) meeting the inclusion criteria provided a total of 208 breast cancer patients who had undergone adjuvant chemotherapy, 122 control participants and 122 effect sizes (Cohens d) falling into six cognitive domains. First, the mean of all the effect sizes within each cognitive domain was calculated (separately for cross-sectional and prospective studies); second, a mean effect size was calculated for all of the effect sizes in each cross-sectional study; and third, regression analyses were conducted to determine any relationships between effect size for each study and four different variables. RESULTS For the cross-sectional studies, each of the cognitive domains assessed (besides attention) showed small to moderate effect sizes (-0.18 to -0.51). The effect sizes for each study were small to moderate (-0.07 to -0.50) and regression analysis detected a significant negative logarithmic relationship (R2 = .63) between study effect size and the time since last receiving chemotherapy. For the prospective study, effect sizes ranged from small to large (0.11-1.09) and indicated improvements in cognitive function from the beginning of chemotherapy treatment to 3 weeks and even 1 year following treatment. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis suggests that cognitive impairment occurs reliably in women who have undergone adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer but that the magnitude of this impairment depends on the type of design that was used (i.e., cross-sectional or prospective). Thus, more prospective studies are required before definite conclusions about the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on cognition can be made.

Obesity and outcomes in premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer.

Purpose: Obesity is associated with adverse outcomes in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. In premenopausal women, the association is less clear. Methods: A population-based sample of 1,360 Australian women with breast cancer before the age of 60 years, 47% diagnosed before age 40, and 74% premenopausal, was studied prospectively for a median of 5 years (range, 0.2-10.8 years). Obesity was defined as a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2. The hazard ratio (HR) for adverse clinical outcome associated with obesity was estimated using Cox proportional hazard survival models. Results: Obesity increased with age (P < 0.001) and was associated with increased breast cancer recurrence (P = 0.02) and death (P = 0.06), larger tumors (P = 0.002), and more involved axillary nodes (P = 0.003) but not with hormone receptor status (P ≥ 0.6) or with first cycle adjuvant chemotherapy dose reductions (P = 0.1). Adjusting for number of axillary nodes, age at diagnosis, tumor size, grade, and hormone receptor status, obese women of all ages were more likely than nonobese women to have disease recurrence [HR, 1.57; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.11-2.22; P = 0.02] and to die from any cause during follow-up (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.01-2.40; P = 0.05). In premenopausal women, the adjusted HRs were 1.50 (95% CI, 1.00-2.26; P = 0.06) and 1.71 (95% CI, 1.05-2.77; P = 0.04), respectively. Conclusions: Obesity is independently associated with poorer outcomes in premenopausal women, as it is in postmenopausal women, and this is not entirely explained by differences in tumor size or nodal status. Given the high and increasing prevalence of obesity in western countries, more research on improving the treatment of obese breast cancer patients is warranted.

Fertility- and Menopause-Related Information Needs of Younger Women With a Diagnosis of Early Breast Cancer

PURPOSE The use of chemotherapy and endocrine therapies in the treatment of premenopausal women carries with it reproductive and gynecologic implications that young women may find distressing and discordant with plans for childbearing. This multicenter study aimed to investigate fertility- and menopause-related information needs among young women with a diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred twenty-eight women with a diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer who were aged 40 years or younger at diagnosis and who were 6 to 60 months after diagnosis were entered onto the trial. Participants completed a mailed self-report questionnaire that included a purposely designed fertility- and menopause-related information needs survey and standardized measures of distress, anxiety, quality of life, menopausal symptoms, and information-seeking style. RESULTS Seventy-one percent of participants discussed fertility-related issues with a health professional as part of their breast cancer treatment, and 86% discussed menopause-related issues. Consultation with a fertility or menopause specialist was the most preferred method of obtaining this information. Receiving fertility-related information was rated as being significantly more important than receiving menopause-related information at time of diagnosis (P < .001) and at treatment decision making (P = .058). Receiving menopause-related information was rated as being significantly more important than receiving fertility-related information during adjuvant treatment (P < .05), at completion of adjuvant treatment (P < .001), and during follow-up (P < .001). Common questions, sources of information, and correlates of perceived importance were identified. CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that younger women have unmet needs for fertility- and menopause-related information and provide preliminary empirical data to guide the development of better fertility- and menopause-related patient education materials for younger women with a diagnosis of early breast cancer.

Goserelin for ovarian protection during breast-cancer adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Ovarian failure is a common toxic effect of chemotherapy. Studies of the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to protect ovarian function have shown mixed results and lack data on pregnancy outcomes. METHODS We randomly assigned 257 premenopausal women with operable hormone-receptor-negative breast cancer to receive standard chemotherapy with the GnRH agonist goserelin (goserelin group) or standard chemotherapy without goserelin (chemotherapy-alone group). The primary study end point was the rate of ovarian failure at 2 years, with ovarian failure defined as the absence of menses in the preceding 6 months and levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in the postmenopausal range. Rates were compared with the use of conditional logistic regression. Secondary end points included pregnancy outcomes and disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS At baseline, 218 patients were eligible and could be evaluated. Among 135 with complete primary end-point data, the ovarian failure rate was 8% in the goserelin group and 22% in the chemotherapy-alone group (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04). Owing to missing primary end-point data, sensitivity analyses were performed, and the results were consistent with the main findings. Missing data did not differ according to treatment group or according to the stratification factors of age and planned chemotherapy regimen. Among the 218 patients who could be evaluated, pregnancy occurred in more women in the goserelin group than in the chemotherapy-alone group (21% vs. 11%, P=0.03); women in the goserelin group also had improved disease-free survival (P=0.04) and overall survival (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS Although missing data weaken interpretation of the findings, administration of goserelin with chemotherapy appeared to protect against ovarian failure, reducing the risk of early menopause and improving prospects for fertility. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; POEMS/S0230 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00068601.).

Analysis of cancer risk and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation prevalence in the kConFab familial breast cancer resource.

IntroductionThe Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab) is a multidisciplinary, collaborative framework for the investigation of familial breast cancer. Based in Australia, the primary aim of kConFab is to facilitate high-quality research by amassing a large and comprehensive resource of epidemiological and clinical data with biospecimens from individuals at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer, and from their close relatives.MethodsEpidemiological, family history and lifestyle data, as well as biospecimens, are collected from multiple-case breast cancer families ascertained through family cancer clinics in Australia and New Zealand. We used the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithms to assess the prospective risk of breast cancer in women in the kConFab cohort who were unaffected with breast cancer at the time of enrolment in the study.ResultsOf kConFabs first 822 families, 518 families had multiple cases of female breast cancer alone, 239 had cases of female breast and ovarian cancer, 37 had cases of female and male breast cancer, and 14 had both ovarian cancer as well as male and female breast cancer. Data are currently held for 11,422 people and germline DNAs for 7,389. Among the 812 families with at least one germline sample collected, the mean number of germline DNA samples collected per family is nine. Of the 747 families that have undergone some form of mutation screening, 229 (31%) carry a pathogenic or splice-site mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Germline DNAs and data are stored from 773 proven carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA1 mutations. kConFabs fresh tissue bank includes 253 specimens of breast or ovarian tissue – both normal and malignant – including 126 from carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.ConclusionThese kConFab resources are available to researchers anywhere in the world, who may apply to kConFab for biospecimens and data for use in ethically approved, peer-reviewed projects. A high calculated risk from the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithms correlated closely with the subsequent occurrence of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation positive families, but this was less evident in families in which no pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation has been detected.

Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Importance The clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers requires accurate, prospective cancer risk estimates. Objectives To estimate age-specific risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for mutation carriers and to evaluate risk modification by family cancer history and mutation location. Design, Setting, and Participants Prospective cohort study of 6036 BRCA1 and 3820 BRCA2 female carriers (5046 unaffected and 4810 with breast or ovarian cancer or both at baseline) recruited in 1997-2011 through the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study, the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, with ascertainment through family clinics (94%) and population-based studies (6%). The majority were from large national studies in the United Kingdom (EMBRACE), the Netherlands (HEBON), and France (GENEPSO). Follow-up ended December 2013; median follow-up was 5 years. Exposures BRCA1/2 mutations, family cancer history, and mutation location. Main Outcomes and Measures Annual incidences, standardized incidence ratios, and cumulative risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer. Results Among 3886 women (median age, 38 years; interquartile range [IQR], 30-46 years) eligible for the breast cancer analysis, 5066 women (median age, 38 years; IQR, 31-47 years) eligible for the ovarian cancer analysis, and 2213 women (median age, 47 years; IQR, 40-55 years) eligible for the contralateral breast cancer analysis, 426 were diagnosed with breast cancer, 109 with ovarian cancer, and 245 with contralateral breast cancer during follow-up. The cumulative breast cancer risk to age 80 years was 72% (95% CI, 65%-79%) for BRCA1 and 69% (95% CI, 61%-77%) for BRCA2 carriers. Breast cancer incidences increased rapidly in early adulthood until ages 30 to 40 years for BRCA1 and until ages 40 to 50 years for BRCA2 carriers, then remained at a similar, constant incidence (20-30 per 1000 person-years) until age 80 years. The cumulative ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years was 44% (95% CI, 36%-53%) for BRCA1 and 17% (95% CI, 11%-25%) for BRCA2 carriers. For contralateral breast cancer, the cumulative risk 20 years after breast cancer diagnosis was 40% (95% CI, 35%-45%) for BRCA1 and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) for BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] for comparing BRCA2 vs BRCA1, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P=.001 for difference). Breast cancer risk increased with increasing number of first- and second-degree relatives diagnosed as having breast cancer for both BRCA1 (HR for ≥2 vs 0 affected relatives, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.41-2.82; P<.001 for trend) and BRCA2 carriers (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.08-3.37; P=.02 for trend). Breast cancer risk was higher if mutations were located outside vs within the regions bounded by positions c.2282-c.4071 in BRCA1 (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P=.007) and c.2831-c.6401 in BRCA2 (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.36-2.74; P<.001). Conclusions and Relevance These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.

Putting the Risk of Breast Cancer in Perspective

Educating the public about the risk of breast cancer promises to contribute to the prevention or early detection of the disease. Data on the risk of breast cancer are widely available to physicians...

Tamoxifen and Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

PURPOSE To determine whether adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer (BC) is associated with reduced contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers. METHODS Analysis of pooled observational cohort data, self-reported at enrollment and at follow-up from the International BRCA1, and BRCA2 Carrier Cohort Study, Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, and Breast Cancer Family Registry. Eligible women were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers diagnosed with unilateral BC since 1970 and no other invasive cancer or tamoxifen use before first BC. Hazard ratios (HRs) for CBC associated with tamoxifen use were estimated using Cox regression, adjusting for year and age of diagnosis, country, and bilateral oophorectomy and censoring at contralateral mastectomy, death, or loss to follow-up. RESULTS Of 1,583 BRCA1 and 881 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 383 (24%) and 454 (52%), respectively, took tamoxifen after first BC diagnosis. There were 520 CBCs over 20,104 person-years of observation. The adjusted HR estimates were 0.38 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.55) and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.50) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. After left truncating at recruitment to the cohort, adjusted HR estimates were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.13) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.22 to 1.05) based on 657 BRCA1 and 426 BRCA2 mutation carriers with 100 CBCs over 4,392 person-years of prospective follow-up. HRs did not differ by estrogen receptor status of the first BC (missing for 56% of cases). CONCLUSION This study provides evidence that tamoxifen use is associated with a reduction in CBC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further follow-up of these cohorts will provide increased statistical power for future prospective analyses.

Somatic mutations of KIT in familial testicular germ cell tumours

Somatic mutations of the KIT gene have been reported in mast cell diseases and gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Recently, they have also been found in mediastinal and testicular germ cell tumours (TGCTs), particularly in cases with bilateral disease. We screened the KIT coding sequence (except exon 1) for germline mutations in 240 pedigrees with two or more cases of TGCT. No germline mutations were found. Exons 10, 11 and 17 of KIT were examined for somatic mutations in 123 TGCT from 93 multiple-case testicular cancer families. Five somatic mutations were identified; four were missense amino-acid substitutions in exon 17 and one was a 12 bp in-frame deletion in exon 11. Two of seven TGCT from cases with bilateral disease carried KIT mutations compared with three out of 116 unilateral cases (P=0.026). The results indicate that somatic KIT mutations are implicated in the development of a minority of familial as well as sporadic TGCT. They also lend support to the hypothesis that KIT mutations primarily take place during embryogenesis such that primordial germ cells with KIT mutations are distributed to both testes.