Awareness and Candidacy for Endocrine Prevention and Risk Reducing Mastectomy in Unaffected High-Risk Women Referred for Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Primary prevention of breast cancer in women at elevated risk includes several strategies such as endocrine prevention and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). The objective of this study was to evaluate awareness of different preventive strategies across high-risk subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women referred for high risk evaluation between 2020 and 2023 completed an initial risk-assessment questionnaire that included questions around perceived lifetime risk and consideration of preventive strategies. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-squared tests were used to compare differences across different high-risk subgroups. RESULTS: 482 women with a median age of 43 years (20-79 years) met inclusion criteria; 183 (38.0%) germline pathogenic variant carriers (GPV), 90 (18.7%) with high-risk lesions (HRL) on breast biopsy, and 209 (43.4%) with strong family history (FH) without a known genetic predisposition. Most high-risk women reported that they had considered increased screening and surveillance (83.7%) and lifestyle strategies (80.6%), while fewer patients had considered RRM (39.8%) and endocrine prevention (27.0%). Prior to initial consultation, RRM was more commonly considered in GPV carriers (59.4%) relative to those with HRL (33.3%) or strong FH (26.3%, p < 0.001). Based on current guidelines, 206 (43%) patients were deemed eligible for endocrine prevention, including 80.5% with HRL and 39.0% with strong FH. Prior consideration of endocrine prevention was highest in patients with HRL and significantly lower in those with strong FH (47.2% HRL versus 31.1% GPV versus 18.7% FH, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Endocrine prevention is the least considered preventive option for high-risk women, despite eligibility in a significant proportion of those presenting with HRL or strong FH.

Phosphodiesterase Type 5 Inhibitors and the Risk of Melanoma Skin Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The association between phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is), drugs used in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), and melanoma skin cancer is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the use of PDE5-Is is associated with an increased risk of melanoma skin cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we assembled a cohort of men newly diagnosed with ED between 1998 and 2014 and followed until 2015. PDE5-I exposure was considered as a time-varying variable lagged by 1 yr for latency purposes. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of incident melanoma associated with PDE5-I use overall and by number of prescriptions and pills received. Identical analyses were conducted for basal and squamous cell carcinoma, two cancers for which PDE5-related pathways are not thought to be involved. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The cohort included 142 983 patients, of whom 440 were newly diagnosed with melanoma during follow-up (rate: 63.0 per 100 000 person-years). Compared with nonuse, PDE5-I use was not associated with an overall increased risk of melanoma (rates: 66.7 vs 54.1 per 100 000 person-years; HR: 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95-1.47). The risk was significantly increased among those who had received seven or more prescriptions and ≥25 pills (HR: 1.30 [95% CI, 1.01-1.69] and 1.34 [95% CI, 1.04-1.72], respectively). In contrast, there was no overall association with basal and squamous cell carcinoma, with an unclear association with numbers of prescriptions and pills received. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PDE5-Is was not associated with an overall increased risk of melanoma skin cancer. The increased risks observed in the highest prescription and pill categories require further validation. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, the use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors was not associated with an increased risk of melanoma skin cancer.

Assessment of the prognostic and predictive utility of the Breast Cancer Index (BCI): an NCIC CTG MA.14 study.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers that can be used to accurately assess the residual risk of disease recurrence in women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer are clinically valuable. We evaluated the prognostic value of the Breast Cancer Index (BCI), a continuous risk index based on a combination of HOXB13:IL17BR and molecular grade index, in women with early breast cancer treated with either tamoxifen alone or tamoxifen plus octreotide in the NCIC MA.14 phase III clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00002864; registered 1 November 1999). METHODS: Gene expression analysis of BCI by real-time polymerase chain reaction was performed blinded to outcome on RNA extracted from archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples of 299 patients with both lymph node-negative (LN-) and lymph node-positive (LN+) disease enrolled in the MA.14 trial. Our primary objective was to determine the prognostic performance of BCI based on relapse-free survival (RFS). MA.14 patients experienced similar RFS on both treatment arms. Association of gene expression data with RFS was evaluated in univariate analysis with a stratified log-rank test statistic, depicted with a Kaplan-Meier plot and an adjusted Cox survivor plot. In the multivariate assessment, we used stratified Cox regression. The prognostic performance of an emerging, optimized linear BCI model was also assessed in a post hoc analysis. RESULTS: Of 299 samples, 292 were assessed successfully for BCI for 146 patients accrued in each MA.14 treatment arm. BCI risk groups had a significant univariate association with RFS (stratified log-rank p = 0.005, unstratified log-rank p = 0.007). Adjusted 10-year RFS in BCI low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups was 87.5 %, 83.9 %, and 74.7 %, respectively. BCI had a significant prognostic effect [hazard ratio (HR) 2.34, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.33-4.11; p = 0.004], although not a predictive effect, on RFS in stratified multivariate analysis, adjusted for pathological tumor stage (HR 2.22, 95 % CI 1.22-4.07; p = 0.01). In the post hoc multivariate analysis, higher linear BCI was associated with shorter RFS (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: BCI had a strong prognostic effect on RFS in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with tamoxifen alone or with tamoxifen and octreotide. BCI was prognostic in both LN- and LN+ patients. This retrospective study is an independent validation of the prognostic performance of BCI in a prospective trial.

Assessment of osteopontin in early breast cancer: correlative study in a randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Osteopontin (OPN) is a malignancy-associated glycoprotein that contributes functionally to tumor aggressiveness. In metastatic breast cancer, we previously demonstrated that elevated OPN in primary tumor and blood was associated with poor prognosis. METHODS: We measured OPN in plasma by ELISA, and in tumors by immunohistochemistry, in 624 (94%) and 462 (69%), respectively, of 667 postmenopausal women with hormone responsive early breast cancer treated by surgery followed by adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen +/- octreotide in a randomized trial (NCIC CTG MA.14; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Mammary.14). RESULTS: Plasma OPN was measured in 2,540 samples; 688 at baseline and 1,852 collected during follow-up. Mean baseline plasma OPN was 46 ng/ml (range 22.6 to 290) which did not differ from normal levels. Mean percentage OPN tumor cell positivity was 33.9 (95% CI: 30.2 to 37.9). There was no correlation between plasma and tumor OPN values. In multivariate analysis, neither was associated with event-free survival (EFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), bone RFS or non-bone RFS. An exploratory analysis in patients with recurrence showed higher mean OPN plasma levels 60.7 ng/ml (23.9 to 543) in the recurrence period compared with baseline levels. CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis that OPN tumor expression would have independent prognostic value in early breast cancer was not supported by multivariate analysis of this study population. Plasma OPN levels in women with hormone responsive early breast cancer in the MA.14 trial were not elevated and there was no evidence for prognostic value of plasma OPN in this defined group of patients. However, our finding of elevated mean OPN plasma level around the time of recurrence warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00002864, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00002864.

Comprehensive assessment of candidate genes and serological markers for the detection of prostate cancer.

We examined whether selected polymorphisms in 11 candidate genes and serum levels of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) help predict the presence of prostate cancer among patients prescreened with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal exam (DRE). We studied 1031 consecutive men who underwent one or more prostate biopsies because of an elevated PSA level (>4 ng/ml) or an abnormal DRE. Eleven candidate genes were examined, including the androgen receptor, SRD5A2, CYP17, CYP3A4, vitamin D receptor, PSA, GST-T1, GST-M1, GST-P1, IGF-I, and IGF binding protein 3. We also measured serum IGF-I levels before biopsy. Of the 1031 men, 483 had cancer on any biopsy (cases) and 548 men had no cancer (controls). Age, ethnicity, total PSA, and DRE result were strongly predictive of the presence of prostate cancer. The mean IGF-I level for cases (119.4 ng/ml) was lower than for controls (124.4 ng/ml, P = 0.05) and were not predictive for the presence of prostate cancer. We found no associations between the androgen receptor, SRD5A2, CYP17, CYP3A4, vitamin D receptor, GST-M1, GST-P1, and IGF binding protein 3 genotypes and prostate cancer risk. The adjusted odds ratios for having prostate cancer for patients with the GST-T1 and IGF-I variant alleles were 1.64 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.4; P = 0.01) and 1.70 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.7; P = 0.02), respectively. Nine of 11 candidate genes were not significantly predictive for prostate cancer in a clinical setting. The GST-T1 and IGF-I polymorphisms demonstrated modest associations with prostate cancer risk. IGF-I levels were not helpful in identifying patients with prostate cancer at the time of biopsy.

Challenges to cancer control by screening.

Population-based screening seems to be a common-sense strategy for controlling cancer, but recent reports have raised controversy concerning the benefits of common screening procedures. Intense efforts to develop and evaluate novel screening technologies are underway; however, effective use of any screening method must take into account any underlying biological considerations. What are these biological issues, and what challenges do clinicians face in screening for common cancers?