Family-building After Breast Cancer: Considering the Effect on Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy.

Adherence to endocrine therapy (ET) is a longstanding problem in breast cancer (BC) survivorship care, particularly among younger women. Younger patients have reported lower ET initiation rates and greater rates of early discontinuation and are considered an "at risk" group for nonadherence. For women who hope to have children in the future, concerns about premature menopause and the implications of postponing childbearing for the 5 to 10 years of ET are widespread. Preliminary evidence suggests that prioritizing fertility, along with concerns about side effects, leads to ET noninitiation and early discontinuation. Clinical efforts to improve adherence might need to consider patients' family-building goals during the course of treatment and to appropriately counsel patients according to their priorities and family-building intentions. Educational materials about family building after cancer are still not consistently available or provided. Helping patients to access trusted informational resources and decision support tools, in conjunction with medical counseling, will promote informed decisions regarding ET adherence and pregnancy that are medically appropriate. Such shared patient-provider decision-making about ET adherence and pregnancy could help to maximize patient autonomy by incorporating their values, preferences, and priorities into decisions, using providers' medical expertise.

Phase III trial of irinotecan/cisplatin compared with etoposide/cisplatin in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: clinical and pharmacogenomic results from SWOG S0124.

PURPOSE: Irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) improved survival over etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in Japanese patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (E-SCLC). To confirm those results and discern the potential role of population-related pharmacogenomics (PG) in outcomes, we conducted a large randomized trial of identical design to the Japanese trial in North American patients with E-SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to IP (irinotecan 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) day 1, every 4 weeks) or EP (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 3; cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks). Blood specimens for genomic DNA analysis were collected before random assignment in 169 patients. RESULTS: Of 671 patients, 651 were eligible (324 and 327 patients in the IP and EP arms, respectively). Response rates with IP and EP were 60% and 57%, respectively (P = .56). Median progression-free survival for IP and EP was 5.8 and 5.2 months, respectively (P = .07). Median overall survival for IP and EP was 9.9 and 9.1 months, respectively (P = .71). Severe diarrhea was more common with IP (19% v 3%); severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher with EP versus IP (68% v 33% and 15% v 4%, respectively). PG analysis showed that ABCB1 (C3435T)T/T (membrane transport) was associated with IP-related diarrhea; UGT1A1 (G-3156A)A/A (drug metabolism) was associated with IP-related neutropenia. CONCLUSION: This large North American trial failed to confirm the previously reported survival benefit observed with IP in Japanese patients. Both regimens produced comparable efficacy, with less hematologic and greater gastrointestinal toxicity with IP. These results emphasize the potential importance of PG in interpreting trials of cancer therapy.