Shari Gelber

Use of alternative medicine by women with early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND We analyzed the use of alternative medicine by women who had received standard therapy for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between September 1993 and September 1995. METHODS A cohort of 480 patients with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer was recruited from a Massachusetts statewide cohort of women participating in a study of how women choose treatment for cancer. Alternative medical treatments, conventional therapies, and health-related quality of life were examined. RESULTS New use of alternative medicine after surgery for breast cancer was common (reported by 28.1 percent of the women); such use was not associated with choices about standard medical therapies after we controlled for clinical and sociodemographic variables. A total of 10.6 percent of the women had used alternative medicine before they were given a diagnosis of breast cancer. Women who initiated the use of alternative medicine after surgery reported a worse quality of life than women who never used alternative medicine. Mental health scores were similar at base line among women who decided to use alternative medicine and those who did not, but three months after surgery the use of alternative medicine was independently associated with depression, fear of recurrence of cancer, lower scores for mental health and sexual satisfaction, and more physical symptoms as well as symptoms of greater intensity. All groups of women reported improving quality of life one year after surgery. CONCLUSIONS Among women with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer who had been treated with standard therapies, new use of alternative medicine was a marker of greater psychosocial distress and worse quality of life.

Web-Based Survey of Fertility Issues in Young Women With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Young women with breast cancer often seek advice about whether treatment will affect their fertility. We sought to gain a better understanding of womens attitudes about fertility and how these concerns affect decision making. PATIENTS AND METHODS We developed a survey about fertility issues for young women with a history of early-stage breast cancer. The survey was e-mailed to all registered Young Survival Coalition survivor members (N = 1,702). E-mail reminders were used. RESULTS Six hundred fifty-seven eligible respondents completed the survey. Mean age at breast cancer diagnosis was 32.9 years; mean current age was 35.8 years. Ninety percent of women were white; 62% were married; 76% were college graduates. Stages at diagnosis were as follows: 0, 10%; I, 27%; II, 47%; III, 13%. Sixty-two percent of women were within 2 years of diagnosis. Fifty-seven percent recalled substantial concern at diagnosis about becoming infertile with treatment. In multivariate logistic regression, greater concern about infertility was associated with wish for children/more children (odds ratio [OR], 120; P < .0001), number of prior pregnancies (OR, 0.78; P = .01), and prior difficulty conceiving (OR, 1.86; P = .08). Twenty-nine percent of women reported that infertility concerns influenced treatment decisions. Seventy-two percent of women reported discussing fertility concerns with their doctors; 51% felt their concerns were addressed adequately. Women seemed to overestimate their risk of becoming postmenopausal with treatment. CONCLUSION Fertility after treatment is a major concern for young women with breast cancer. There is a need to communicate with and educate young patients regarding fertility issues at diagnosis and a need for future research directed at preserving fertility for young breast cancer survivors.

Quality-of-life assessment in clinical trials

Within the context of clinical trials, quality of life (QOL) is a multidimensional concept that encompasses health-related constructs, but excludes other dimensions such as economics, housing, or education. Most QOL research has been based on the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of health [1]: ‘Health is not only the absence of infirmity and disease but also a state of physical, mental and social well-being.’ Thus QOL encompasses all health-related outcomes beyond those of survival and physiological responses. Diseases and their treatments affect not only patients’ physical functioning and level of pain, but also their cognitive, emotional, and social functioning. QOL measures have also included assessments of sexual functioning, family and marital relationships, role performance, vitality, sleep, health perceptions, general life satisfaction, and symptoms such as nausea and fatigue. QOL assessment has been employed in developing individual patient treatment plans, performing cost-benefit analyses, making health policy decisions, and conducting clinical trial evaluations. Health status, functional status, and health-related quality of life have become synonyms for QOL in the clinical trials literature.

Is chemotherapy alone adequate for young women with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer?

BACKGROUND The prognosis of breast cancer in very young women is generally considered to be unfavourable. Therefore, the outcome of adjuvant therapy was analysed in a population of young (<35 years) premenopausal patients treated in four randomised controlled trials. METHODS Between 1978 and 1993 the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) treated 3700 premenopausal and perimenopausal patients with various timing and duration of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF with or without low-dose prednisone and oophorectomy). 314 of these women were less than 35 years old at randomisation. FINDINGS Relapse and death occurred earlier and more often in younger (<35 years) than in older (> or = 35) patients with a 10 year disease-free survival of 35% (SE 3) versus 47% (1) (hazard ratio 1.41 [95% CI 1.22-1.62], p<0.001) and overall survival of 49% (3) versus 62% (1) (1.50 [1.28-1.77], p<0.001). Younger patients with oestrogen-receptor positive tumours had a significantly worse disease-free survival than younger patients with oestrogen-receptor negative tumours. By contrast, among older patients the disease-free survival was similar irrespective of oestrogen-receptor status. INTERPRETATION Young premenopausal breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant CMF chemotherapy had higher risk of relapse and death than older premenopausal patients, especially if their tumours expressed oestrogen receptors. The endocrine effects of chemotherapy alone are insufficient for the younger age group and these patients should strongly consider additional endocrine therapies (tamoxifen or ovarian ablation) if their tumours express oestrogen receptors.

Effect of Pregnancy on Overall Survival After the Diagnosis of Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the impact of subsequent pregnancy on the prognosis of patients with early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred eight patients who became pregnant after diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer were identified in institutions participating in International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) studies. Fourteen had relapse of breast cancer before their first subsequent pregnancy. The remaining 94 patients (including eight who relapsed during pregnancy) formed the study group reported here. A comparison group of 188 was obtained by randomly selecting two patients, matched for nodal status, tumor size, age, and year of diagnosis from the IBCSG database, who were free of relapse for at least as long as the time between breast cancer diagnosis and completion of pregnancy for each pregnant patient. Survival comparison used Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS Overall 5- and 10-year survival percentages (+/- SE) measured from the diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer among the 94 study group patients were 92% +/- 3% and 86% +/- 4%, respectively. For the matched comparison group survival was 85% +/- 3% at 5 years and 74% +/- 4% at 10 years (risk ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.21 to 0.96; P =.04). CONCLUSION Subsequent pregnancy does not adversely affect the prognosis of early-stage breast cancer. The superior survival seen in this and other controlled series may merely reflect a healthy patient selection bias, but is also consistent with an antitumor effect of the pregnancy.

Prognostic Impact of Pregnancy After Breast Cancer According to Estrogen Receptor Status: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

PURPOSE We questioned the impact of pregnancy on disease-free survival (DFS) in women with history of breast cancer (BC) according to estrogen receptor (ER) status. PATIENTS AND METHODS A multicenter, retrospective cohort study in which patients who became pregnant any time after BC were matched (1:3) to patients with BC with similar ER, nodal status, adjuvant therapy, age, and year of diagnosis. To adjust for guaranteed time bias, each nonpregnant patient had to have a disease-free interval at least equal to the time elapsing between BC diagnosis and date of conception of the matched pregnant one. The primary objective was DFS in patients with ER-positive BC. DFS in the ER-negative cohort, whole population, and overall survival (OS) were secondary objectives. Subgroup analyses included DFS according to pregnancy outcome and BC-pregnancy interval. With a two-sided α = 5% and β = 20%, 645 ER-positive patients were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) = 0.65. RESULTS A total of 333 pregnant patients and 874 matched nonpregnant patients were analyzed, of whom 686 patients had an ER-positive disease. No difference in DFS was observed between pregnant and nonpregnant patients in the ER-positive (HR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.24, P = .55) or the ER-negative (HR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08, P = .12) cohorts. However, the pregnant group had better OS (HR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97, P = .03), with no interaction according to ER status (P = .11). Pregnancy outcome and BC-pregnancy interval did not seem to impact the risk of relapse. CONCLUSION Pregnancy after ER-positive BC does not seem to reduce the risk of BC recurrence.

Safety of pregnancy following breast cancer diagnosis: A meta-analysis of 14 studies

BACKGROUND Due to the rising trend of delaying pregnancy to later in life, more women are diagnosed with breast cancer before completing their families. Therefore, enquiry into the feasibility and safety of pregnancy following breast cancer diagnosis is on the rise. Available evidence suggests that women with a history of breast cancer are frequently advised against future conception for fear that pregnancy could adversely affect their breast cancer outcome. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to understand the effect of pregnancy on overall survival of women with a history of breast cancer. METHODS Two of the authors independently performed a literature search up to September 2009 with no language restrictions. Eligible studies were published retrospective control-matched, population-based and hospital-based studies that have addressed the impact of pregnancy on the overall survival of women with history of breast cancer. Pooling of data was done using the random effect model. Unpublished statistics from three studies were obtained to perform further subgroup and sensitivity analyses. This included examining the effect of pregnancy according to age at diagnosis, healthy mother effect, type of study, nodal status and other parameters. RESULTS Fourteen studies were included in this meta-analysis (1244 cases and 18,145 controls). Women who got pregnant following breast cancer diagnosis had a 41% reduced risk of death compared to women who did not get pregnant [PRR: 0.59 (90% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.70)]. This difference was seen irrespective of the type of the study and particularly in women with history of node-negative disease. In a subgroup analysis, we compared the outcome of women with history of breast cancer who became pregnant to breast cancer patients who did not get pregnant and were known to be free of relapse. In this analysis, we did not find significant differences in survival between either group [PRR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.53-1.35]. CONCLUSIONS This study confirms that pregnancy in women with history of breast cancer is safe and does not compromise their overall survival. Hence, breast cancer survivors should not be denied the opportunity of future conception.

Prospective Study of Fertility Concerns and Preservation Strategies in Young Women With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Most research regarding fertility in young women with breast cancer has focused on long-term survivors. Little is known about how fertility concerns affect treatment decisions or fertility preservation strategies at the time of initial cancer diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS As part of an ongoing prospective multicenter cohort study, we surveyed women with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer at age ≤ 40 years. The baseline survey included sociodemographic, medical, and treatment data as well as a modified Fertility Issues Survey, including fertility concern and preservation items. Univariable and multivariable modeling were used to investigate predictors of greater fertility concern. RESULTS Among the first 620 eligible respondents included in this analysis, median age was 37 years (range, 17 to 40 years); 425 women (68%) discussed fertility issues with their physicians before starting therapy, and 319 (51%) were concerned about becoming infertile after treatment. Because of concerns about fertility, four women (1%) chose not to receive chemotherapy, 12 (2%) chose one chemotherapy regimen over another, six (1%) considered not receiving endocrine therapy, 19 (3%) decided not to receive endocrine therapy, and 71 (11%) considered receiving endocrine therapy for < 5 years; 65 (10%) used fertility preservation strategies. Greater concern about fertility was associated with younger age, nonwhite race, not having children, and receipt of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION Many young women with newly diagnosed breast cancer have concerns about fertility, and for some, these substantially affect their treatment decisions. Only a minority of women currently pursue available fertility preservation strategies in this setting.

Ovarian reserve in women who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer

OBJECTIVE To compare markers of ovarian reserve between women exposed to cytotoxic chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer and matched controls. DESIGN Cross-sectional evaluation of markers of ovarian reserve. SETTING Dana-Farber/Brigham and Womens Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Faulkner Hospital in Boston, MA. PATIENT(S) Breast cancer survivors with continued menses after chemotherapy were compared with age-matched, gravidity-matched controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Antral follicle count (AFC), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), FSH, inhibin B (InB), and E(2) on day 2, 3, or 4 of the menstrual cycle. A Bonferroni correction was performed to correct for multiple comparisons. RESULT(S) Twenty survivors and 20 controls were evaluated; 50% of survivors were currently on tamoxifen. Median AFC was 6 for survivors and 9.5 for controls. There were significant differences between the two groups in AFC, AMH, and nonsignificant differences in FSH and InB, all indicating better ovarian reserve in controls. The AFC and AMH levels were highly correlated (r = 0.72). Survivors on tamoxifen had lower AFC, AMH, InB, and higher E(2) than nontamoxifen-treated survivors. CONCLUSION(S) Premenopausal breast cancer survivors have diminished ovarian reserve compared with controls.

Comparing Treatments Using Quality-Adjusted Survival: The Q-TWiST Method

Abstract The quality of life of patients is an important component of evaluation of therapies. We present an overview of a statistical method called Q-TWiST (Quality-Adjusted Time Without Symptoms and Toxicity) which incorporates quality-of-life considerations into treatment comparisons. Multivariate censored survival data are used to partition the overall survival time into periods of time spent in a set of progressive clinical health states which may differ in quality of life. Mean health state durations, restricted to the follow-up limits of the clinical trial, are derived from the data and combined with value weights to estimate quality-adjusted survival. The methodology emphasizes treatment comparisons based on threshold utility analyses that highlight trade-offs between different health state durations; it is not intended to provide a unique result combining quality and quantity of life. We also describe three recent extensions of the methodology: covariates can be included using proportional hazard...