Assessment of salivary cadmium levels and breast density in the Marin Women's Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine if salivary cadmium (Cd) levels had any association with breast density, hoping to establish a less invasive cost-effective method of stratifying Cd burden as an environmental breast cancer risk factor. METHODS: Salivary Cd levels were quantified from the Marin Women's Study, a Marin County, California population composite. Volumetric compositional breast density (BDsxa ) data were measured by single x-ray absorptiometry techniques. Digital screening mammography was performed by the San Francisco Mammography Registry. Radiologists reviewed mammograms and assigned a Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System score. Early morning salivary Cd samples were assayed. Association analyses were then performed. RESULTS: Cd was quantifiable in over 90% of saliva samples (mean = 55.7 pg/L, SD = 29). Women with higher saliva Cd levels had a non-significant odds ratio of 1.34 with BI-RAD scores (3 or 4) (95% CI 0.75-2.39, p = 0.329). Cd levels were higher in current smokers (mean = 61.4 pg/L, SD = 34.8) than former smokers or non-smokers. These results were non-significant. Pilot data revealed that higher age and higher BMI were associated with higher BI-RAD scores (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Salivary Cd is a viable quantification source in large epidemiologic studies. Association analyses between Cd levels and breast density may provide additional information for breast cancer risk assessment, risk reduction plans, and future research directions. Further work is needed to demonstrate a more robust testing protocol before the extent of its usefulness can be established.

Assessment of 25-Year Survival of Women With Estrogen Receptor-Positive/ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer Treated With and Without Tamoxifen Therapy: A Secondary Analysis of Data From the Stockholm Tamoxifen Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Clinically used breast cancer markers, such as tumor size, tumor grade, progesterone receptor (PR) status, and Ki-67 status, are known to be associated with short-term survival, but the association of these markers with long-term (25-year) survival is unclear. Objective: To assess the association of clinically used breast cancer markers with long-term survival and treatment benefit among postmenopausal women with lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive and ERBB2-negative breast cancer who received tamoxifen therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a secondary analysis of data from a subset of 565 women with ER-positive/ERBB2-negative breast cancer who participated in the Stockholm tamoxifen (STO-3) randomized clinical trial. The STO-3 clinical trial was conducted from 1976 to 1990 and comprised 1780 postmenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer who were randomized to receive adjuvant tamoxifen therapy or no endocrine therapy. Complete 25-year follow-up data through December 31, 2016, were obtained from Swedish national registers. Immunohistochemical markers were reannotated in 2014. Data were analyzed from April to December 2020. Interventions: Patients in the original STO-3 clinical trial were randomized to receive 2 years of tamoxifen therapy vs no endocrine therapy. In 1983, patients who received tamoxifen therapy without cancer recurrence during the 2-year treatment and who consented to continued participation in the STO-3 study were further randomized to receive 3 additional years of tamoxifen therapy or no endocrine therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) by clinically used breast cancer markers was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses adjusted for age, period of primary diagnosis, tumor size (T1a and T1b [T1a/b], T1c, and T2), tumor grade (1-3), PR status (positive vs negative), Ki-67 status (low vs medium to high), and STO-3 clinical trial arm (tamoxifen treatment vs no adjuvant treatment). A recursive partitioning analysis was performed to evaluate which markers were able to best estimate long-term DRFI. Results: The study population comprised 565 postmenopausal women (mean [SD] age, 62.0 [5.3] years) with lymph node-negative, ER-positive/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. A statistically significant difference in long-term DRFI was observed by tumor size (88% for T1a/b vs 76% for T1c vs 63% for T2 tumors; log-rank P < .001) and tumor grade (81% for grade 1 vs 77% for grade 2 vs 65% for grade 3 tumors; log-rank P = .02) but not by PR status or Ki-67 status. Patients with smaller tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31 [95% CI, 0.17-0.55] for T1a/b tumors and 0.58 [95% CI, 0.38-0.88] for T1c tumors) and grade 1 tumors (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.95) experienced a significant reduction in the long-term risk of distant recurrence compared with patients with larger (T2) tumors and grade 3 tumors, respectively. A significant tamoxifen treatment benefit was observed among patients with larger tumors (HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.32-0.89] for T1c tumors and 0.34 [95% CI, 0.16-0.73] for T2 tumors), lower tumor grades (HR, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.07-0.82] for grade 1 tumors and 0.50 [95% CI, 0.31-0.80] for grade 2 tumors), and PR-positive status (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24-0.62). The recursive partitioning analysis revealed that tumor size was the most important characteristic associated with long-term survival, followed by clinical trial arm among patients with larger tumors. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of data from the STO-3 clinical trial indicated that, among the selected subgroup of patients, tumor size followed by tumor grade were the markers most significantly associated with long-term survival. Furthermore, a significant long-term tamoxifen treatment benefit was observed among patients with larger tumors, lower tumor grades, and PR-positive tumors.

Assessment of Long-term Distant Recurrence-Free Survival Associated With Tamoxifen Therapy in Postmenopausal Patients With Luminal A or Luminal B Breast Cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer have a long-term risk for fatal disease. However, the tumor biological factors that influence the long-term risk and the benefit associated with endocrine therapy are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term survival from tamoxifen therapy for patients with luminal A or luminal B tumor subtype. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Secondary analysis of patients from the Stockholm Tamoxifen (STO-3) trial conducted from 1976 to 1990, which randomized postmenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer to receive adjuvant tamoxifen or no endocrine therapy. Tumor tissue sections were assessed in 2014 using immunohistochemistry and Agilent microarrays. Only patients with luminal A or B subtype tumors were evaluated. Complete long-term follow-up data up to the end of the STO-3 trial on December 31, 2012, were obtained from the Swedish National registers. Data analysis for the secondary analysis was conducted in 2017 and 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive at least 2 years of tamoxifen therapy or no endocrine therapy; patients without recurrence who reconsented were further randomized to 3 additional years of tamoxifen therapy or no endocrine therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) by luminal A and luminal B subtype and trial arm was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analyses and time-dependent flexible parametric models to estimate time-varying hazard ratios (HRs) that were adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: In the STO-3 treated trial arm, 183 patients had luminal A tumors and 64 patients had luminal B tumors. In the untreated arm, 153 patients had luminal A tumors and 62 had luminal B tumors. Age at diagnosis ranged from 45 to 73 years. A statistically significant difference in DRFI by trial arm was observed (log rank, P < .001 [luminal A subtype, n = 336], P = .04 [luminal B subtype, n = 126]): the 25-year DRFI for luminal A vs luminal B subtypes was 87% (95% CI, 82%-93%) vs 67% (95% CI, 56%-82%) for treated patients, and 70% (95% CI, 62%-79%) vs 54% (95% CI, 42%-70%) for untreated patients, respectively. Patients with luminal A tumors significantly benefited from tamoxifen therapy for 15 years after diagnosis (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35-0.94), and those with luminal B tumors benefited from tamoxifen therapy for 5 years (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24-0.59). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients with luminal A subtype tumors had a long-term risk of distant metastatic disease, which was reduced by tamoxifen treatment, whereas patients with luminal B tumors had an early risk of distant metastatic disease, and tamoxifen benefit attenuated over time.

Optimized high-throughput microRNA expression profiling provides novel biomarker assessment of clinical prostate and breast cancer biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that microRNAs (miRNAs) are mechanistically involved in the development of various human malignancies, suggesting that they represent a promising new class of cancer biomarkers. However, previously reported methods for measuring miRNA expression consume large amounts of tissue, prohibiting high-throughput miRNA profiling from typically small clinical samples such as excision or core needle biopsies of breast or prostate cancer. Here we describe a novel combination of linear amplification and labeling of miRNA for highly sensitive expression microarray profiling requiring only picogram quantities of purified microRNA. RESULTS: Comparison of microarray and qRT-PCR measured miRNA levels from two different prostate cancer cell lines showed concordance between the two platforms (Pearson correlation R2 = 0.81); and extension of the amplification, labeling and microarray platform was successfully demonstrated using clinical core and excision biopsy samples from breast and prostate cancer patients. Unsupervised clustering analysis of the prostate biopsy microarrays separated advanced and metastatic prostate cancers from pooled normal prostatic samples and from a non-malignant precursor lesion. Unsupervised clustering of the breast cancer microarrays significantly distinguished ErbB2-positive/ER-negative, ErbB2-positive/ER-positive, and ErbB2-negative/ER-positive breast cancer phenotypes (Fisher exact test, p = 0.03); as well, supervised analysis of these microarray profiles identified distinct miRNA subsets distinguishing ErbB2-positive from ErbB2-negative and ER-positive from ER-negative breast cancers, independent of other clinically important parameters (patient age; tumor size, node status and proliferation index). CONCLUSION: In sum, these findings demonstrate that optimized high-throughput microRNA expression profiling offers novel biomarker identification from typically small clinical samples such as breast and prostate cancer biopsies.