Off-treatment bone mineral density changes in postmenopausal women receiving anastrozole for 5 years: 7-year results from the IBIS-II prevention trial.

BACKGROUND: Anastrozole has been associated with substantial accelerated bone mineral density (BMD) loss during active treatment. METHODS: One thousand four hundred and ten women were included in a BMD substudy and stratified into three strata according to their baseline T-score at spine or femoral neck. The primary objective of this analysis was to investigate whether DXA BMD at the spine and hip changed two years after treatment cessation (between years 5 and 7) in those who did not receive risedronate. RESULTS: Five- and seven-year BMD data were available for a total of 528 women who did not receive risedronate. In women with normal BMD at baseline, an increase in BMD at the lumbar spine after anastrozole withdrawal was observed 1.25% (95% CI 0.73 to 1.77) (P = 0.0004), which was larger than in those on placebo (0.14% (-0.29 to 0.56))). At the hip, BMD remained unchanged between years 5 and 7 for those previously on anastrozole but continued to a decrease in those who had been randomised to placebo (-1.35% (-1.70 to -0.98)). CONCLUSIONS: These are the first results reporting BMD changes after stopping anastrozole in a breast cancer prevention setting. Our results show that the negative effects of anastrozole on BMD in the preventive setting are partially reversible.

Use of anastrozole for breast cancer prevention (IBIS-II): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Two large clinical trials have shown a reduced rate of breast cancer development in high-risk women in the initial 5 years of follow-up after use of aromatase inhibitors (MAP.3 and International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II [IBIS-II]). Here, we report blinded long-term follow-up results for the IBIS-II trial, which compared anastrozole with placebo, with the objective of determining the efficacy of anastrozole for preventing breast cancer (both invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) in the post-treatment period. METHODS: IBIS-II is an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer were recruited and were randomly assigned (1:1) to either anastrozole (1 mg per day, oral) or matching placebo daily for 5 years. After treatment completion, women were followed on a yearly basis to collect data on breast cancer incidence, death, other cancers, and major adverse events (cardiovascular events and fractures). The primary outcome was all breast cancer. FINDINGS: 3864 women were recruited between Feb 2, 2003, and Jan 31, 2012. 1920 women were randomly assigned to 5 years anastrozole and 1944 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 131 months (IQR 105-156), a 49% reduction in breast cancer was observed for anastrozole (85 vs 165 cases, hazard ratio [HR] 0·51, 95% CI 0·39-0·66, p<0·0001). The reduction was larger in the first 5 years (35 vs 89, 0·39, 0·27-0·58, p<0·0001), but still significant after 5 years (50 vs 76 new cases, 0·64, 0·45-0·91, p=0·014), and not significantly different from the first 5 years (p=0·087). Invasive oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer was reduced by 54% (HR 0·46, 95% CI 0·33-0·65, p<0·0001), with a continued significant effect in the period after treatment. A 59% reduction in ductal carcinoma in situ was observed (0·41, 0·22-0·79, p=0·0081), especially in participants known to be oestrogen receptor-positive (0·22, 0·78-0·65, p<0·0001). No significant difference in deaths was observed overall (69 vs 70, HR 0·96, 95% CI 0·69-1·34, p=0·82) or for breast cancer (two anastrozole vs three placebo). A significant decrease in non-breast cancers was observed for anastrozole (147 vs 200, odds ratio 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·91, p=0·0042), owing primarily to non-melanoma skin cancer. No excess of fractures or cardiovascular disease was observed. INTERPRETATION: This analysis has identified a significant continuing reduction in breast cancer with anastrozole in the post-treatment follow-up period, with no evidence of new late side-effects. Further follow-up is needed to assess the effect on breast cancer mortality. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Sanofi Aventis, and AstraZeneca.

Clinical validity of clinical treatment score 5 (CTS5) for estimating risk of late recurrence in unselected, non-trial patients with early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Clinical Treatment Score at 5 years (CTS5) is a prognostic tool to estimate distant recurrence (DR) risk after 5 years of endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive) breast cancer. METHODS: The validity of CTS5 was tested in a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with early ER-positive breast cancer. The primary endpoint was DR in years 5-10. The primary analysis cohort consisted of postmenopausal women, with premenopausal women as a secondary analysis cohort. Cox regression models were used to determine the prognostic value of CTS5 and Kaplan-Meier curves were used with associated 10-year DR risks (%). RESULTS: 2428 women were included with a median follow-up of 13.4 years. The CTS5 was significantly prognostic in both postmenopausal (N = 1662, HR = 2.18 95% CI (1.78-2.67)) and premenopausal women (N = 766, HR = 1.84 95% CI (1.32-2.56)). The 10-year DR risks were 2.9% (1.9-4.5), 7.2% (5.3-9.9), and 12.9% (10.0-16.7) for low, intermediate and high risk in postmenopausal women and 3.8% (2.2-6.7), 6.9% (4.4-10.8), and 11.1% (7.4-16.5) in premenopausal women, respectively. The number of observed DRs was significantly greater than expected in those predicted to be at high risk by CTS5 but this discordance was lost when those receiving more than 60 months of endocrine therapy were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: The CTS5 demonstrated clinical validity for predicting late DR within a large cohort of unselected postmenopausal patients but less so in premenopausal patients. Calibration of the CTS5 was good in patients who did not receive extended endocrine therapy. The CTS5 low-risk cohort has risk of DR so low as to not warrant extended endocrine therapy.

The impact of body mass index on breast cancer incidence among women at increased risk: an observational study from the International Breast Intervention Studies.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the association between body mass index (BMI) and breast cancer risk in women at increased risk of breast cancer receiving tamoxifen or anastrozole compared with placebo using data from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Studies [IBIS-I (tamoxifen) and IBIS-II (anastrozole)]. METHODS: Baseline BMI was calculated from nurse assessed height and weight measurements for premenopausal (n = 3138) and postmenopausal (n = 3731) women in IBIS-I and postmenopausal women in IBIS-II (n = 3787). The primary endpoint was any breast cancer event (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for risk after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: There were 582 (IBIS-I) and 248 (IBIS-II) breast cancer events [median follow-up = 16.2 years (IQR 14.4-17.7) and 10.9 years (IQR 8.8-13.0), respectively]. In adjusted analysis, women with a higher BMI had an increased breast cancer risk in both IBIS-I [HR = 1.06 per 5 kg/m2 (0.99-1.15), p = 0.114] and in IBIS-II [HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.21 (1.09-1.35), p < 0.001]. In IBIS-I, the association between BMI and breast cancer risk was positive in postmenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.14 (1.03-1.26), p = 0.01] but not premenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 0.97 (0.86-1.09), p = 0.628]. There was no interaction between BMI and treatment group for breast cancer risk in either IBIS-I (p = 0.62) or IBIS-II (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Higher BMI is associated with greater breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women at increased risk of the disease, but no effect was observed in premenopausal women. The lack of interaction between BMI and treatment group on breast cancer risk suggests women are likely to experience benefit from preventive therapy regardless of their BMI. Trial registration Both trials were registered [IBIS-I: ISRCTN91879928 on 24/02/2006, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91879928 ); IBIS-II: ISRCTN31488319 on 07/01/2005, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN31488319 )].

Prediction of chemotherapy benefit by EndoPredict in patients with breast cancer who received adjuvant endocrine therapy plus chemotherapy or endocrine therapy alone.

PURPOSE: EndoPredict (EPclin) is a prognostic test validated to inform decisions on adjuvant chemotherapy to endocrine therapy alone for patients with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Here, we determine the performance of EPclin for estimating 10-year distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) rates for those who received adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) alone compared to those with chemotherapy plus endocrine therapy (ET + C). METHODS: A total of 3746 women were included in this joint analysis. 2630 patients received 5 years of ET alone (ABCSG-6/8, TransATAC) and 1116 patients received ET + C (GEICAM 2003-02/9906). The primary objective was to evaluate the ability of EPclin to provide an estimate of the 10-year DR rate as a continuous function of EPclin separately for ET alone and ET + C. Cox proportional hazard models were used for these analyses. RESULTS: EPclin was highly prognostic for DR in women who received ET alone (HR 2.79 (2.49-3.13), P < 0.0001) as well as in those who received ET + C (HR 2.27 (1.99-2.59), P < 0.0001). Women who received ET + C had significantly smaller increases in 10-year DR rates with the increasing EPclin score than those receiving ET alone (EPclin = 5; 12% ET + C vs. 20% ET alone). We observed a significant positive interaction between EPclin and treatment groups (P-interaction = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative non-randomised analysis, the rate of increase in DR with EPclin score was significantly reduced in women who received ET + C versus ET alone. Our indirect comparisons suggest that a high EPclin score can predict chemotherapy benefit in women with ER-positive, HER2-negative disease.

Risk stratification in early breast cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal women: integrating genomic assays with clinicopathological features.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is growing consensus that genomic assays provide useful complementary information to clinicopathological features in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. Here, ongoing research with multigene tests used for postmenopausal breast cancer and new emerging prognostic and predictive markers for pre and postmenopausal women are summarised. RECENT FINDINGS: Results of the TAILORx trial have shown that women with an intermediate risk score do not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Prosgina has been further investigated in a contemporary patient population in postmenopausal women and its use has been extended for premenopausal women. The EndoPredict was extensively used in decision-impact studies showing that its use can potentially reduce the need for adjuvant chemotherapy. Several new genomic assays have been developed, with some of them showing promising use for women with early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. SUMMARY: New areas of research for prediction of recurrence and risk stratification involve the development of immune gene signatures that carry modest but significant prognostic value. The recent expansion of high-throughput technology platforms including circulating tumour DNA/RNA and microRNA offer new opportunities to improve prediction models, particularly in women with oestrogen receptor-negative disease and premenopausal women. Genomic assays have clearly improved prognostication of early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer but it is clear that standard clinicopathological parameters are still very important when identifying patient for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Novel 18-gene signature for predicting relapse in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several prognostic signatures for early oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer have been established with a 10-year follow-up. We tested the hypothesis that signatures optimised for 0-5-year and 5-10-year follow-up separately are more prognostic than a single signature optimised for 10 years. METHODS: Genes previously identified as prognostic or associated with endocrine resistance were tested in publicly available microarray data set using Cox regression of 747 ER+/HER2- samples from post-menopausal patients treated with 5 years of endocrine therapy. RNA expression of the selected genes was assayed in primary ER+/HER2- tumours from 948 post-menopausal patients treated with 5 years of anastrozole or tamoxifen in the TransATAC cohort. Prognostic signatures for 0-10, 0-5 and 5-10 years were derived using a penalised Cox regression (elastic net). Signature comparison was performed with likelihood ratio statistics. Validation was done by a case-control (POLAR) study in 422 samples derived from a cohort of 1449. RESULTS: Ninety-three genes were selected by the modelling of microarray data; 63 of these were significantly prognostic in TransATAC, most similarly across each time period. Contrary to our hypothesis, the derived early and late signatures were not significantly more prognostic than the 18-gene 10-year signature. The 18-gene 10-year signature was internally validated in the TransATAC validation set, showing prognostic information similar to that of Oncotype DX Recurrence Score, PAM50 risk of recurrence score, Breast Cancer Index and IHC4 (score based on four IHC markers), as well as in the external POLAR case-control set. CONCLUSIONS: The derived 10-year signature predicts risk of metastasis in patients with ER+/HER2- breast cancer similar to commercial signatures. The hypothesis that early and late prognostic signatures are significantly more informative than a single signature was rejected.

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. METHODS: In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. RESULTS: Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58-1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Breast Cancer Research Fund, AstraZeneca, Sanofi Aventis.

Benefit of low-dose tamoxifen in a large observational cohort of high risk ER positive breast DCIS.

Low-dose tamoxifen has comparable antiproliferative effect to the standard dose of 20 mg/day in biomarker trials, but its clinical efficacy remains unclear. We assessed the effect of low-dose tamoxifen on ipsilateral recurrence in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients treated in a referral Institution between 1996 and 2008. Following conserving surgery, women received radiotherapy and/or low-dose tamoxifen upon clinical judgment and patient preferences. Cox regression analyses were used with and without confounding factors. Among 1,091 women with DCIS and median age 53 years (IQR: 46-62), 544 (49.9%) received radiotherapy. Of the 833 women with oestrogen receptor (ER) positive DCIS, 467 (56.1%) received low-dose tamoxifen. After a median of 7.7 years, 235 ipsilateral recurrences and 62 contralateral breast tumors were observed. Low-dose tamoxifen significantly decreased any breast event (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54-0.91) and ipsilateral DCIS recurrence (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88), but not ipsilateral invasive recurrence or contralateral tumors. Radiotherapy showed a large significant reduction for any breast event (HR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.42-0.72). Tamoxifen was more effective on all breast events in women aged >50 years than in women aged ≤50 (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77 versus HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.60-1.18, p-interaction = 0.03). Age ≤50 years, positive margins, high Ki67, high grade and low BMI were independent predictors of ipsilateral recurrence. No increase of endometrial cancers and fewer deaths (p = 0.015) were observed on tamoxifen. Low-dose tamoxifen seems to be safe and effective in reducing ipsilateral recurrence in ER positive DCIS in women aged >50 years. A randomized trial is underway to confirm these findings.

Retrospective analysis of molecular scores for the prediction of distant recurrence according to baseline risk factors.

Clinical variables and several gene signature profiles have been investigated for the prediction of (distant) recurrence in several trials. These molecular markers are significantly correlated with overall and late distant recurrences. Here, we retrospectively explore whether age and body mass index (BMI) affect the prediction of these molecular scores for distant recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in the transATAC trial. 940 postmenopausal women for whom the Clinical Treatment Score (CTS), immunohistochemical markers (IHC4), Oncotype Recurrence Score (RS), and the Prosigna Risk of Recurrence Score (ROR) were available were included in this retrospective analysis. Conventional BMI groups were used (N = 865), and age was split into equal tertiles (N = 940). Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the effect of a molecular score for the prediction of distant recurrence according to BMI and age groups. In both the univariate and bivariate analyses, the effect size of the IHC4 and RS was strongest in women aged 59.8 years or younger. Trends tests for age were significant for the IHC4 and RS, but not for the CTS and ROR, for which most prognostic information was added in women aged 60 years or older. The CTS and ROR scores added significant prognostic information in all three BMI groups. In both the univariate and bivariate analyses, the IHC4 provided the most prognostic information in women with a BMI lower than 25 kg/m(2), whereas the RS did not add prognostic information for distant recurrence in women with a BMI of 30 kg/m(2) or above. Molecular scores are increasingly used in women with breast cancer to assess recurrence risk. We have shown that the effect size of the molecular scores is significantly different across age groups, but not across BMI groups. The results from this retrospective analysis may be incorporated in the identification of women who may benefit most from the use of these molecular scores, but our findings need further evaluation before these scores can be used in clinical decision making.

Relationship of ZNF423 and CTSO with breast cancer risk in two randomised tamoxifen prevention trials.

A case-control study from two randomised breast cancer prevention trials of tamoxifen and raloxifene (P-1 and P-2) identified single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in or near genes ZNF423 and CTSO as factors which predict which women will derive most anti-cancer benefit from selective oestrogen receptor modulator (SERM) therapy. In this article, we further examine this question using blood samples from two randomised tamoxifen prevention trials: the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study I (IBIS-I) and the Royal Marsden trial (Marsden). A nested case-control study was designed with 2:1 matching in IBIS-I and 1:1 matching in Marsden. The OncoArray was used for genotyping and included two SNPs previously identified (rs8060157 in ZNF423 and rs10030044 near CTSO), and 102 further SNPs within the same regions. Overall, there were 369 cases and 662 controls, with 148 cases and 268 controls from the tamoxifen arms. Odds ratios were estimated by conditional logistic regression, with Wald 95 % confidence intervals. In the tamoxifen arms, the per-allele odds ratio for rs8060157 was 0.99 (95 %CI 0.73-1.34) and 1.00 (95 %CI 0.76-1.33) for rs10030044. In the placebo arm, the odds ratio was 1.10 (95 %CI 0.87-1.40) for rs8060157 and 1.01 (95 %CI 0.79-1.29) for rs10030044. There was no evidence to suggest that other SNPs in the surrounding regions of these SNPs might predict response to tamoxifen. Results from these two prevention trials do not support the earlier findings. rs8060157 in ZNF423 and rs10030044 near CTSO do not appear to predict response to tamoxifen.

Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: extended long-term follow-up of the IBIS-I breast cancer prevention trial.

BACKGROUND: Four previously published randomised clinical trials have shown that tamoxifen can reduce the risk of breast cancer in healthy women at increased risk of breast cancer in the first 10 years of follow-up. We report the long-term follow-up of the IBIS-I trial, in which the participants and investigators remain largely masked to treatment allocation. METHODS: In the IBIS-I randomised controlled trial, premenopausal and postmenopausal women 35-70 years of age deemed to be at an increased risk of developing breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral tamoxifen 20 mg daily or matching placebo for 5 years. Patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment groups by telephone or fax according to a block randomisation schedule (permuted block sizes of six or ten). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by use of central randomisation and coded drug supply. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of breast cancer (invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess breast cancer occurrence and mortality. The trial is closed to recruitment and active treatment is completed, but long-term follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with controlledtrials.com, number ISRCTN91879928. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 1992, and March 30, 2001, 7154 eligible women recruited from genetics clinics and breast care clinics in eight countries were enrolled into the IBIS-I trial and were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups: 3579 to tamoxifen and 3575 to placebo. After a median follow up of 16.0 years (IQR 14.1-17.6), 601 breast cancers have been reported (251 [7.0%] in 3579 patients in the tamoxifen group vs 350 [9.8%] in 3575 women in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.71 [95% CI 0.60-0.83], p<0.0001). The risk of developing breast cancer was similar between years 0-10 (226 [6.3%] in 3575 women in the placebo group vs 163 [4.6%] in 3579 women in the tamoxifen group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72 [95% CI 0.59-0.88], p=0.001) and after 10 years (124 [3.8%] in 3295 women vs 88 [2.6%] in 3343, respectively; HR 0.69 [0.53-0.91], p=0.009). The greatest reduction in risk was seen in invasive oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.54-0.81], p<0.0001) and ductal carcinoma in situ (0.65 [0.43-1.00], p=0.05), but no effect was noted for invasive oestrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.71-1.57], p=0.8). INTERPRETATION: These results show that tamoxifen offers a very long period of protection after treatment cessation, and thus substantially improves the benefit-to-harm ratio of the drug for breast cancer prevention. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK (UK) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia).

Markers for the identification of late breast cancer recurrence.

Postmenopausal women with early breast cancer are at an ongoing risk of relapse, even after successful surgery and treatment of the primary tumor. The treatment of breast cancer has changed in the past few years because of the discovery of prognostic and predictive biomarkers that allow individualized breast cancer treatment. However, it is still not clear how to identify women that are at high risk of a late recurrence. Clinical parameters are good prognostic markers for early recurrence, but only nodal status and, to a lesser extent, tumor size have proven to be strong prognostic markers for late recurrence. Multi-gene signatures have become widely used for the prediction of overall recurrence risk and tailoring administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, but only a few have been shown to be prognostic for late (distant) relapse. There is a need to accurately identify women who may benefit from extended endocrine therapy but also those who may be spared any additional treatment. Recent results from large clinical trials have shown that the research is going in the right direction, and these results might help to optimize extended endocrine therapy for patients with early breast cancer. However, further research is needed to select individual biomarkers or multi-gene signatures that offer identification of late recurrence specifically and thus justify routine use of these tests in the clinical setting.

Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors effectively prevent breast cancer recurrence and development of new contralateral tumours in postmenopausal women. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women who are at high risk of the disease. METHODS: Between Feb 2, 2003, and Jan 31, 2012, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 40-70 years from 18 countries into an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. To be eligible, women had to be at increased risk of breast cancer (judged on the basis of specific criteria). Eligible women were randomly assigned (1:1) by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or matching placebo every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by country and was done with blocks (size six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation; only the trial statistician was unmasked. The primary endpoint was histologically confirmed breast cancer (invasive cancers or non-invasive ductal carcinoma in situ). Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN31488319. FINDINGS: 1920 women were randomly assigned to receive anastrozole and 1944 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 5·0 years (IQR 3·0-7·1), 40 women in the anastrozole group (2%) and 85 in the placebo group (4%) had developed breast cancer (hazard ratio 0·47, 95% CI 0·32-0·68, p<0·0001). The predicted cumulative incidence of all breast cancers after 7 years was 5·6% in the placebo group and 2·8% in the anastrozole group. 18 deaths were reported in the anastrozole group and 17 in the placebo group, and no specific causes were more common in one group than the other (p=0·836). INTERPRETATION: Anastrozole effectively reduces incidence of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women. This finding, along with the fact that most of the side-effects associated with oestrogen deprivation were not attributable to treatment, provides support for the use of anastrozole in postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Sanofi-Aventis, and AstraZeneca.

Progesterone receptor A predominance is a discriminator of benefit from endocrine therapy in the ATAC trial.

Progesterone receptor (PR) function, while essential in normal human breast, is also implicated in breast cancer risk. The two progesterone receptors, PRA and PRB, are co-expressed at equivalent levels in normal breast, but early in carcinogenesis normal levels of PRA:PRB are frequently disrupted, and predominance of one isoform, usually PRA, results. In model systems, PRA and PRB have different activities, and altering the PRA:PRB ratio in cell lines alters PR signaling. The purpose of this study was to determine whether hormonal or reproductive factors contribute to imbalanced PRA:PRB expression in breast tumors and the impact of PRA:PRB imbalance on disease outcome. The relative expression of PRA and PRB proteins was determined by dual immunofluorescence histochemistry in archival breast tumors and associations with clinical and reproductive history assessed. PRA:PRB expression was not influenced by reproductive factors, whereas exogenous hormone use (menopausal hormone treatment, MHT) favored PRB expression (p < 0.035). The PRA:PRB ratio may be a discriminator of response to endocrine therapy in the TransATAC sample collection, with high PRA:PRB ratio predicting earlier relapse for women on tamoxifen, but not anastrozole (mean lnPRA:PRB ratio; HR (95 % CI) tamoxifen 2.45 (1.20-4.99); p value 0.02; anastrozole 0.80 (0.36-1.78); p value 0.60). The results of this study show that PRA:PRB imbalance in breast cancers is not associated with lifetime endogenous endocrine and reproductive factors, but is associated with MHT use, and that PRA predominance can discriminate those women who will relapse earlier on tamoxifen treatment. These data support a role for imbalanced PRA:PRB expression in breast cancer progression and relative benefit from endocrine treatment.

Update on breast cancer risk prediction and prevention.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. This review will focus on current prevention strategies for women at high risk. RECENT FINDINGS: The identification of women who are at high risk of developing breast cancer is key to breast cancer prevention. Recent findings have shown that the inclusion of breast density and a panel of low-penetrance genetic polymorphisms can improve risk estimation compared with previous models. Preventive therapy with aromatase inhibitors has produced large reductions in breast cancer incidence in postmenopausal women. Tamoxifen confers long-term protection and is the only proven preventive treatment for premenopausal women. Several other agents, including metformin, bisphosphonates, aspirin and statins, have been found to be effective in nonrandomized settings. SUMMARY: There are many options for the prevention of oestrogen-positive breast cancer, in postmenopausal women who can be given a selective oestrogen receptor modulator or an aromatase inhibitor. It still remains unclear how to prevent oestrogen-negative breast cancer, which occurs more often in premenopausal women. Identification of women at high risk of the disease is crucial, and the inclusion of breast density and a panel of genetic polymorphisms, which individually have low penetrance, can improve risk assessment.

Changes in bone mineral density at 3 years in postmenopausal women receiving anastrozole and risedronate in the IBIS-II bone substudy: an international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women at high risk of the disease but are associated with accelerated bone loss. We assessed effectiveness of oral risedronate for prevention of reduction in bone mineral density (BMD) after 3 years of follow-up in a subset of patients in the IBIS-II trial. METHODS: The double-blind IBIS-II trial recruited 3864 healthy, postmenopausal women at increased risk of breast cancer and randomly allocated them oral anastrozole (1 mg/day) or matched placebo. 1410 (36%) postmenopausal women were then enrolled in a bone substudy and stratified at baseline according to their lowest baseline T score at spine or femoral neck (stratum I: T score at least -1·0; stratum II: T score at least -2·5 but less than -1·0; stratum III: T score less than -2·5 but greater than -4·0). Women in stratum I were monitored only; women in stratum III were all given risedronate (35 mg/week). Women in stratum II were randomly assigned (1:1) to risedronate (35 mg/week) or matched placebo by use of a block randomisation schedule via a web-based programme. The primary outcome of this per-protocol analysis (done with all women with a baseline and 3 year DXA assessment) was the effect of risedronate versus placebo for osteopenic women in stratum II randomly allocated to anastrozole (1 mg/day). Secondary outcomes included effect of anastrozole (1 mg/day) on BMD in women not receiving risedronate (strata I and II) and in osteoporotic women who were all treated with risedronate (stratum III). The trial is ongoing, but no longer recruiting. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN31488319. FINDINGS: Between Feb 2, 2003, and Sept 30, 2010, 150 (58%) of 260 women in stratum II who had been randomly allocated to anastrozole and either risedronate or placebo had baseline and 3 year assessments. At the lumbar spine, 3 year mean BMD change for the 77 women receiving anastrozole/risedronate was 1·1% (95% CI 0·2 to 2·1) versus -2·6% (-4·0 to -1·3) for the 73 women receiving anastrozole/placebo (p<0·0001). For the total hip, 3 year mean BMD change for women receiving anastrozole/risedronate was -0·7% (-1·6 to 0·2) versus -3·5% (-4·6 to -2·3) for women receiving anastrozole/placebo (p=0·0001). 652 (65%) of 1008 women in strata I and II who were not randomly allocated to risedronate had both baseline and 3 year assessments. Women not receiving risedronate in stratum I and II who received anastrozole (310 women) had a significant BMD decrease after 3 years of follow-up compared with women who received placebo (342 women) at the lumbar spine (-4·0% [-4·5 to -3·4] vs -1·2% [-1·7 to -0·7], p<0·0001) and total hip (-4·0% [-4·4 to -3·6] vs -1·8% [-2·1 to -1·4], p<0·0001). 106 (79%) of 149 women in stratum III had a baseline and a 3 year assessment. The 46 women allocated to anastrozole had a modest BMD increase of 1·2% (-0·1 to 2·6) at the spine compared with a 3·9% (2·6 to 5·2) increase for the 60 women allocated to placebo (p=0·006). For the total hip, a small 0·3% (-0·9 to 1·5) increase was noted for women allocated anastrozole compared with a 1·5% (0·5 to 2·5) increase for women allocated placebo, but the difference was not significant (p=0·12). The most common adverse event reported was arthralgia (stratum I: 94 placebo and 114 anastrozole; stratum II: 39 placebo/placebo, 25 placebo/risedronate, 34 anastrozole/placebo, and 34 anastrozole/risedronate; stratum III: 21 placebo/risedronate, 17 anastrozole/risedronate). Other adverse events included hot flushes, alopecia, abdominal pain, and back pain. INTERPRETATION: Risedronate counterbalances the effect of anastrozole-induced bone loss in osteopenic and osteoporotic women and might be offered in combination with anastrozole treatment to provide an improved risk-benefit profile. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK (C569/A5032), National Health and Medical Research Council Australia (GNT300755, GNT569213), Sanofi-Aventis, and AstraZeneca.

Selective oestrogen receptor modulators in prevention of breast cancer: an updated meta-analysis of individual participant data.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen and raloxifene reduce the risk of breast cancer in women at elevated risk of disease, but the duration of the effect is unknown. We assessed the effectiveness of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) on breast cancer incidence. METHODS: We did a meta-analysis with individual participant data from nine prevention trials comparing four selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs; tamoxifen, raloxifene, arzoxifene, and lasofoxifene) with placebo, or in one study with tamoxifen. Our primary endpoint was incidence of all breast cancer (including ductal carcinoma in situ) during a 10 year follow-up period. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: We analysed data for 83,399 women with 306,617 women-years of follow-up. Median follow-up was 65 months (IQR 54-93). Overall, we noted a 38% reduction (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62, 95% CI 0·56-0·69) in breast cancer incidence, and 42 women would need to be treated to prevent one breast cancer event in the first 10 years of follow-up. The reduction was larger in the first 5 years of follow-up than in years 5-10 (42%, HR 0·58, 0·51-0·66; p<0·0001 vs 25%, 0·75, 0·61-0·93; p=0·007), but we noted no heterogeneity between time periods. Thromboembolic events were significantly increased with all SERMs (odds ratio 1·73, 95% CI 1·47-2·05; p<0·0001). We recorded a significant reduction of 34% in vertebral fractures (0·66, 0·59-0·73), but only a small effect for non-vertebral fractures (0·93, 0·87-0·99). INTERPRETATION: For all SERMs, incidence of invasive oestrogen (ER)-positive breast cancer was reduced both during treatment and for at least 5 years after completion. Similar to other preventive interventions, careful consideration of risks and benefits is needed to identify women who are most likely to benefit from these drugs. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Localisation microscopy with quantum dots using non-negative matrix factorisation.

We propose non-negative matrix factorisation with iterative restarts (iNMF) to model a noisy dataset of highly overlapping fluorophores with intermittent intensities. We can recover high-resolution images of individual sources from the optimised model, despite their high mutual overlap in the original data. Each source can have an arbitrary, unknown shape of the PSF and blinking behaviour. This allows us to use quantum dots as bright and stable fluorophores for localisation microscopy. We compare the iNMF results to CSSTORM, 3B and bSOFI. iNMF shows superior performance in the challenging task of super-resolution imaging using quantum dots. We can also retrieve axial localisation of the sources from the shape of the recovered PSF.

Prediction of late distant recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: a prospective comparison of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score, and IHC4 in the TransATAC study population.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers to improve the risk-benefit of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer would be clinically valuable. We compared the prognostic ability of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score (Oncotype DX), and an immunohistochemical prognostic model (IHC4) for both early and late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, node-negative (N0) disease who took part in the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) clinical trial. METHODS: In this prospective comparison study, we obtained archival tumour blocks from the TransATAC tissue bank from all postmenopausal patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer from whom the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4 values had already been derived. We did BCI analysis in matched samples with sufficient residual RNA using two BCI models-cubic (BCI-C) and linear (BCI-L)-using previously validated cutoffs. We assessed prognostic ability of BCI for distant recurrence over 10 years (the primary endpoint) and compared it with that of the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4. We also tested the ability of the assays to predict early (0-5 years) and late (5-10 years) distant recurrence. To assess the ability of the biomarkers to predict recurrence beyond standard clinicopathological variables, we calculated the change in the likelihood-ratio χ(2) (LR-Δχ(2)) from Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS: Suitable tissue was available from 665 patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, N0 breast cancer for BCI analysis. The primary analysis showed significant differences in risk of distant recurrence over 10 years in the categorical BCI-C risk groups (p<0·0001) with 6·8% (95% CI 4·4-10·0) of patients in the low-risk group, 17·3% (12·0-24·7) in the intermediate group, and 22·2% (15·3-31·5) in the high-risk group having distant recurrence. The secondary analysis showed that BCI-L was a much stronger predictor for overall (0-10 year) distant recurrence compared with BCI-C (interquartile HR 2·30 [95% CI 1·62-3·27]; LR-Δχ(2)=22·69; p<0·0001). When compared with BCI-L, the 21-gene recurrence score was less predictive (HR 1·48 [95% CI 1·22-1·78]; LR-Δχ(2)=13·68; p=0·0002) and IHC4 was similar (HR 1·69 [95% CI 1·51-2·56]; LR-Δχ(2)=22·83; p<0·0001). All further analyses were done with the BCI-L model. In a multivariable analysis, all assays had significant prognostic ability for early distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 2·77 [95% CI 1·63-4·70], LR-Δχ(2)=15·42, p<0·0001; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·80 [1·42-2·29], LR-Δχ(2)=18·48, p<0·0001; IHC4 HR 2·90 [2·01-4·18], LR-Δχ(2)=29·14, p<0·0001); however, only BCI-L was significant for late distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 1·95 [95% CI 1·22-3·14], LR-Δχ(2)=7·97, p=0·0048; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·13 [0·82-1·56], LR-Δχ(2)=0·48, p=0·47; IHC4 HR 1·30 [0·88-1·94], LR-Δχ(2)=1·59, p=0·20). INTERPRETATION: BCI-L was the only significant prognostic test for risk of both early and late distant recurrence and identified two risk populations for each timeframe. It could help to identify patients at high risk for late distant recurrence who might benefit from extended endocrine or other therapy. FUNDING: Avon Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Breast Cancer Foundation, US Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breakthrough Breast Cancer through the Mary-Jean Mitchell Green Foundation, AstraZeneca, Cancer Research UK, and the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden (London, UK).