RESUMEN
Early and late effects of cancer treatment are of increasing concern with growing survivor populations, but relevant data are sparse. We sought to determine the prevalence and hazard ratio of such effects in breast cancer cases. Women with invasive breast cancer and women with no cancer history recruited for a cancer research cohort completed a mailed questionnaire at a median of 10 years post-diagnosis or matched reference year (for the women without cancer). Reported medical conditions including lymphedema, osteopenia, osteoporosis, and heart disease (congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease) were assessed in relation to breast cancer therapy and time since diagnosis using Cox regression. The proportion of women currently receiving treatment for these conditions was calculated. Study participants included 2,535 women with breast cancer and 2,428 women without cancer (response rates 66.0 % and 50.4 %, respectively) Women with breast cancer had an increased risk of lymphedema (Hazard ratio (HR) 8.6; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 6.3-11.6), osteopenia (HR 2.1; 95 % CI 1.8-2.4), and osteoporosis (HR 1.5; 95 % CI 1.2-1.9) but not heart disease, compared to women without cancer Hazard ratios varied by treatment and time since diagnosis. Overall, 49.3 % of breast cancer cases reported at least one medical condition, and at 10 or more years post-diagnosis, 37.7 % were currently receiving condition-related treatment. Responses from survivors a decade following cancer diagnosis demonstrate substantial treatment-related morbidity, and emphasize the need for continued medical surveillance and follow-up care into the second decade post-diagnosis.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Cardiopatías/epidemiología , Linfedema/epidemiología , Osteoporosis/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas/etiología , Femenino , Cardiopatías/etiología , Humanos , Escisión del Ganglio Linfático/efectos adversos , Linfedema/etiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis/etiología , Prevalencia , Radioterapia/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Sobrevivientes/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Knowledge of family cancer history is important for assessing cancer risk and guiding screening recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To quantify how often throughout adulthood clinically significant changes occur in cancer family history that would result in recommendations for earlier or intense screening. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study examining baseline and follow-up family history data from participants in the Cancer Genetics Network (CGN), a US national population-based cancer registry, between 1999 and 2009. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a personal history, family history, or both of cancer enrolled in the CGN through population-based cancer registries. Retrospective colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening-specific analyses included 9861, 2547, and 1817 participants, respectively; prospective analyses included 1533, 617, and 163 participants, respectively. Median follow-up was 8 years (range, 0-11 years). Screening-specific analyses excluded participants with the cancer of interest. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of individuals with clinically significant family histories and rate of change over 2 periods: (1) retrospectively, from birth until CGN enrollment and (2) prospectively, from enrollment to last follow-up. RESULTS: Retrospective analysis revealed that the percentages of participants who met criteria for high-risk screening based on family history at ages 30 and 50 years, respectively, were as follows: for colorectal cancer, 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8%-2.4%) and 7.1% (95% CI, 6.5%-7.6%); for breast cancer, 7.2% (95% CI, 6.1%-8.4%) and 11.4% (95% CI, 10.0%-12.8%); and for prostate cancer, 0.9% (95% CI, 0.5%-1.4%) and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.7%). In prospective analysis, the numbers of participants who newly met criteria for high-risk screening based on family history per 100 persons followed up for 20 years were 2 (95% CI, 0-7) for colorectal cancer, 6 (95% CI, 2-13) for breast cancer, and 8 (95% CI, 3-16) for prostate cancer. The rate of change in cancer family history was similar for colorectal and breast cancer between the 2 analyses. CONCLUSION: Clinically relevant family history of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer that would result in recommendations for earlier or intense cancer screening increases between ages 30 and 50 years, although the absolute rate is low for prostate cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias Colorrectales/genética , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Anamnesis , Neoplasias de la Próstata/genética , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Guías como Asunto , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
Purpose: Women at familial/genetic ovarian cancer risk often undergo screening despite unproven efficacy. Research suggests each woman has her own CA125 baseline; significant increases above this level may identify cancers earlier than standard 6- to 12-monthly CA125 > 35 U/mL.Experimental Design: Data from prospective Cancer Genetics Network and Gynecologic Oncology Group trials, which screened 3,692 women (13,080 woman-screening years) with a strong breast/ovarian cancer family history or BRCA1/2 mutations, were combined to assess a novel screening strategy. Specifically, serum CA125 q3 months, evaluated using a risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA), detected significant increases above each subject's baseline, which triggered transvaginal ultrasound. Specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were compared with levels derived from general population screening (specificity 90%, PPV 10%), and stage-at-detection was compared with historical high-risk controls.Results: Specificity for ultrasound referral was 92% versus 90% (P = 0.0001), and PPV was 4.6% versus 10% (P > 0.10). Eighteen of 19 malignant ovarian neoplasms [prevalent = 4, incident = 6, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) = 9] were detected via screening or RRSO. Among incident cases (which best reflect long-term screening performance), three of six invasive cancers were early-stage (I/II; 50% vs. 10% historical BRCA1 controls; P = 0.016). Six of nine RRSO-related cases were stage I. ROCA flagged three of six (50%) incident cases before CA125 exceeded 35 U/mL. Eight of nine patients with stages 0/I/II ovarian cancer were alive at last follow-up (median 6 years).Conclusions: For screened women at familial/genetic ovarian cancer risk, ROCA q3 months had better early-stage sensitivity at high specificity, and low yet possibly acceptable PPV compared with CA125 > 35 U/mL q6/q12 months, warranting further larger cohort evaluation. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3628-37. ©2017 AACR.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/sangre , Antígeno Ca-125/sangre , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Proteínas de la Membrana/sangre , Neoplasias Ováricas/sangre , Adulto , Anciano , Algoritmos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Ováricas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Ováricas/genética , Neoplasias Ováricas/patología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Previous screening trials for early detection of ovarian cancer in postmenopausal women have used the standard CA125 cut-point of 35 U/mL, the 98th percentile in this population yielding a 2% false positive rate, whereas the same cut-point in trials of premenopausal women results in substantially higher false positive rates. We investigated demographic and clinical factors predicting CA125 distributions, including 98th percentiles, in a large population of high-risk women participating in two ovarian cancer screening studies with common eligibility criteria and screening protocols. Baseline CA125 values and clinical and demographic data from 3,692 women participating in screening studies conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Cancer Genetics Network and Gynecologic Oncology Group were combined for this preplanned analysis. Because of the large effect of menopausal status on CA125 levels, statistical analyses were conducted separately in pre- and postmenopausal subjects to determine the impact of other baseline factors on predicted CA125 cut-points on the basis of 98th percentile. The primary clinical factor affecting CA125 cut-points was menopausal status, with premenopausal women having a significantly higher cut-point of 50 U/mL, while in postmenopausal subjects the standard cut-point of 35 U/mL was recapitulated. In premenopausal women, current oral contraceptive (OC) users had a cut-point of 40 U/mL. To achieve a 2% false positive rate in ovarian cancer screening trials and in high-risk women choosing to be screened, the cut-point for initial CA125 testing should be personalized primarily for menopausal status (50 for premenopausal women, 40 for premenopausal on OC, and 35 for postmenopausal women).
Asunto(s)
Antígeno Ca-125/biosíntesis , Neoplasias Ováricas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Ováricas/metabolismo , Adulto , Anciano , Anticonceptivos Orales/farmacología , Etnicidad , Femenino , Humanos , Menopausia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Neoplasias Ováricas/sangre , Posmenopausia , Premenopausia , Estudios Prospectivos , RiesgoRESUMEN
Present investigations suggest that approximately 30% of colorectal cancer cases arise on the basis of inherited factors. We hypothesize that the majority of inherited factors are moderately penetrant genes, common in the population. We use an affected sibling pair approach to identify genetic regions that are coinherited by siblings with colorectal cancer. Individuals from families with at least two siblings diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma or high-grade dysplasia were enrolled. Known familial colorectal cancer syndromes were excluded. A genome-wide scan on 151 DNA samples from 70 kindreds was completed using deCODE 1100 short tandem repeat marker set at an average 4-cM density. Fine mapping on a total of 184 DNAs from 83 kindreds was done in regions suggesting linkage. Linkage analysis was accomplished with Merlin analysis package. Nonparametric linkage analysis revealed three genetic regions with logarithm of the odds (LOD) scores >or=2.0: Ch. 3q29, LOD 2.61 (P = 0.0003); Ch. 4q31.3, LOD 2.13 (P = 0.0009); and Ch. 7q31.31, LOD 3.08 (P = 0.00008). Affected siblings with increased sharing at the 7q31 locus have a 3.8-year (+/- 3.5) earlier age of colorectal cancer onset although this is not statistically significant (P = 0.11). No significant linkage was found near genes causing known syndromes or regions previously reported (8q24, 9q22, and 11q23). The chromosome 3q21-q24 region reported to be linked in colorectal cancer relative pairs is supported by our study, albeit a minor peak (LOD 0.9; P = 0.02). No known familial cancer genes reside in the 7q31 locus, and thus the identified region may contain a novel susceptibility gene responsible for common familial colorectal cancer.