BE-WEL trial (breast: evaluation of weight and exercise for lymphoedema) testing weight control and exercise programmes for women with breast cancer related lymphoedema: a feasibility trial.

PURPOSE: A combined body weight loss and upper body/arm exercise programme is a potential strategy for managing Breast cancer related lymphoedema (BCRL), but there is limited data on the best method for delivery or its potential efficacy. METHODS: Fifty-seven women with overweight/obesity and BCRL were randomised to a 12 week supervised (n = 12) or home-based combined weight loss and upper body/arm exercise programme (n = 16), a home-based upper-body arm exercise only programme (n = 17) or standard care (n = 12). Primary outcomes were uptake, retention and changes in weight and change in Relative Arm Volume Increase (RAVI) using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Sixteen percent of women invited joined the study and 49 completed the trial (85% retention). Reductions in weight occurred in the supervised and home-based weight control and exercise programmes; Mean (95% CI) change compared to standard care - 1.68 (- 4.36 to - 1.00), - 2.47(- 4.99 to - 0.04) Kg. Reductions in perometer assessed RAVI were seen in the supervised and home-based combined weight control and arm exercise groups and the weight stable home-based arm exercise only group: mean (95% CI) change compared to standard care - 2.4 (- 5.0 to + 0.4),- 1.8 (- 4.3 to + 0.7), - 2.5(- 4.9 to - 0.05)%. CONCLUSION: Women with BCRL and overweight and obesity engaged in diet and exercise weight loss programmes. Both weight loss/arm exercise programmes led to modest changes in weight and BCRL. Comparable reductions in BCRL were reported in the weight stable group undertaking arm exercise only. The independent and combined effects of weight loss and exercise on BCRL need further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN86789850 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN86789850 , registered 2011.

Identifying research priorities in breast cancer surgery: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

PURPOSE: A James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership was developed to identify research priorities in breast cancer surgery from individuals with lived experience, at high genetic risk of breast cancer, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS: 'Uncertainties' were collected using an online survey. Following an evidence check and development of summary questions, an interim survey asked participants to rank their top 10 research priorities from the question list. Top-ranked questions from patient/carer, high-risk and professional groups were carried forward for discussion to a final online prioritisation workshop. RESULTS: 260 participants (101 patients/carers, 156 HCPs) submitted 940 uncertainties via the initial survey. These were analysed thematically into 128 summary questions in six topic areas. Following evidence checking, 59 questions were included in the interim survey which was completed by 572 respondents. Marked differences were seen in questions prioritised by patients/carers, HCPs and women at high-risk. The top eight priorities in patient/carer and professional groups and top two priorities for high-risk women were carried forward to the online workshop at which 22 participants discussed and agreed the final top 10. Key themes included de-escalation of breast and axillary surgery, factors impacting the development/detection of locoregional recurrence and optimal provision of support for informed treatment decision-making. CONCLUSION: The top 10 research priorities in breast cancer surgery have been agreed. However, the observed differences in research priorities identified by patients and professional groups were not anticipated. Top priorities from both groups should inform future UK breast cancer surgical research, to ensure that it addresses questions that are important to breast cancer community as a whole.

Randomised controlled trial of intermittent vs continuous energy restriction during chemotherapy for early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Excess adiposity at diagnosis and weight gain during chemotherapy is associated with tumour recurrence and chemotherapy toxicity. We assessed the efficacy of intermittent energy restriction (IER) vs continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight control and toxicity reduction during chemotherapy. METHODS: One hundred and seventy-two women were randomised to follow IER or CER throughout adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were weight and body fat change. Secondary endpoints included chemotherapy toxicity, cardiovascular risk markers, and correlative markers of metabolism, inflammation and oxidative stress. RESULTS: Primary analyses showed non-significant reductions in weight (-1.1 (-2.4 to +0.2) kg, p = 0.11) and body fat (-1.0 (-2.1 to +0.1) kg, p = 0.086) in IER compared with CER. Predefined secondary analyses adjusted for body water showed significantly greater reductions in weight (-1.4 (-2.5 to -0.2) kg, p = 0.024) and body fat (-1.1 (-2.1 to -0.2) kg, p = 0.046) in IER compared with CER. Incidence of grade 3/4 toxicities were comparable overall (IER 31.0 vs CER 36.5%, p = 0.45) with a trend to fewer grade 3/4 toxicities with IER (18%) vs CER (31%) during cycles 4-6 of primarily taxane therapy (p = 0.063). CONCLUSIONS: IER is feasible during chemotherapy. The potential efficacy for weight control and reducing toxicity needs to be tested in future larger trials. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN04156504.

Increases in arm volume predict lymphoedema and quality of life deficits after axillary surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema develops after axillary clearance (ANC) in 25% of patients. This prospective, multi-centre study compared multi-frequency bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) with arm volume measurement to: (1) determine which test has better diagnostic accuracy, (2) identify factors predicting development of lymphoedema, and its effect on quality-of-life. METHODS: Participants (N = 1100) underwent measurements pre and post-ANC surgery for breast cancer. Relative arm volume increase (RAVI) of >10% diagnosed lymphoedema. Predictors of lymphoedema were determined using logistic regression. Optimal diagnostic method was assessed using diagnostic accuracy. Quality-of-life was assessed using the FACT B + 4 questionnaire. RESULTS: Lymphoedema was diagnosed in 22.8% women using RAVI > 10%, 45.6% using BIS criteria, while 24.5% underwent compression sleeve application by 24 months. BMI > 30 was an independent factor for both development (p = 0.005) and progression (p = 0.015) of lymphoedema. RAVI at 1 month, BMI > 30 and number of involved nodes contributed to a novel scoring model to predict lymphoedema by 36 months. Larger decreases in QoL scores post-surgery occurred in lymphoedema patients (p < 0.001). Progression to moderate lymphoedema occurred in 15% patients after sleeve application. CONCLUSIONS: RAVI measurement was the best diagnostic tool for lymphoedema. BIS alone is not appropriate for lymphoedema screening or diagnosis. BMI > 30 predicted lymphoedema diagnosis and progression.

The effectiveness of home versus community-based weight control programmes initiated soon after breast cancer diagnosis: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer diagnosis may be a teachable moment for lifestyle behaviour change and to prevent adjuvant therapy associated weight gain. We assessed the acceptability and effectiveness of two weight control programmes initiated soon after breast cancer diagnosis to reduce weight amongst overweight or obese women and prevent gains in normal-weight women. METHODS: Overweight or obese (n = 243) and normal weight (n = 166) women were randomised to a three-month unsupervised home (home), a supervised community weight control programme (community) or to standard written advice (control). Primary end points were change in weight and body fat at 12 months. Secondary end points included change in insulin, cardiovascular risk markers, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the programmes. RESULTS: Forty-three percent of eligible women were recruited. Both programmes reduced weight and body fat: home vs. control mean (95% CI); weight -2.3 (-3.5, -1.0) kg, body fat -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7) kg, community vs. control; weight -2.4 (-3.6, -1.1) kg, body fat -1.4 (-2.4, -0.5) kg (all p < 0.001). The community group increased physical activity, reduced insulin, cardiovascular disease risk markers, increased QOL and was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: The programmes were equally effective for weight control, but the community programme had additional benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN68576140.

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.

Comparison of Local Recurrence After Simple and Skin-Sparing Mastectomy Performed in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is increasing with the use of screening mammography, and approximately 30% of all women diagnosed with DCIS are treated by mastectomy. There is increasing use of a skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) approach to surgically excise DCIS as this facilitates immediate breast reconstruction. The rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR) after simple mastectomy performed for pure DCIS are historically reported as 1%; however, international data suggest that LRR after SSM may be higher. METHODS: To determine our rates of LRR and compare the effect of the type of mastectomy performed, we undertook a retrospective review of all patients who underwent a mastectomy for pure DCIS at our institution between 2000 and 2010. RESULTS: In total, 199 patients underwent a mastectomy for pure DCIS (with eight local recurrences), all of which were invasive ductal carcinoma. The recurrences all occurred after SSM, which was associated with a higher 5-year LRR of 5.9% (5/102) compared with 0% in the simple mastectomy group (0/97; p = 0.012), log-rank. Univariate analysis showed the two factors that predicted the risk of recurrence were a young age at mastectomy and close or involved margins. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight the importance of achieving clear margins, especially in young women with estrogen receptor-negative DCIS who have a higher risk of invasive recurrence. Women undergoing a mastectomy for DCIS should be counseled as to the importance of achieving clear margins and the potential increased need for further excision, post-mastectomy radiotherapy and post-reconstruction mammography in order to prevent LRR after SSM.

Focal adhesion kinase and Wnt signaling regulate human ductal carcinoma in situ stem cell activity and response to radiotherapy.

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) can avoid or efficiently repair DNA damage from radio and chemotherapy, which suggests they play a role in disease recurrence. Twenty percentage of patients treated with surgery and radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast recur and our previous data show that high grade DCIS have increased numbers of CSCs. Here, we investigate the role of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) and Wnt pathways in DCIS stem cells and their capacity to survive irradiation. Using DCIS cell lines and patient samples, we demonstrate that CSC-enriched populations are relatively radioresistant and possess high FAK activity. Immunohistochemical studies of active FAK in DCIS tissue show high expression was associated with a shorter median time to recurrence. Treatment with a FAK inhibitor or FAK siRNA in nonadherent and three-dimensional matrigel culture reduced mammosphere formation, and potentiated the effect of 2 Gy irradiation. Moreover, inhibition of FAK in vitro and in vivo decreased self-renewal capacity, levels of Wnt3a and B-Catenin revealing a novel FAK-Wnt axis regulating DCIS stem cell activity. Overall, these data establish that the FAK-Wnt axis is a promising target to eradicate self-renewal capacity and progression of human breast cancers.

Comparison of multi-frequency bioimpedance with perometry for the early detection and intervention of lymphoedema after axillary node clearance for breast cancer.

The importance of early detection of lymphoedema by arm volume measurements before surgery and repeated measurements after surgery in women undergoing axillary node clearance (ANC) in order to enable early intervention is recognised. A prospective multi-centre study was performed which studied the difference between multi-frequency bioimpedance electrical analysis (BIS) and perometer arm measurement in predicting the development of lymphoedema. Women undergoing ANC underwent pre-operative and regular post-operative measurements of arm volume by both methods. The primary endpoint is the incidence of lymphoedema (≥10 % arm volume increase compared to contralateral arm by perometer) at 2 and 5 years after ANC. The threshold for intervention in lymphoedema was also assessed. Out of 964 patients recruited, 612 had minimum 6 months follow-up data. Using 1-month post-operative measurements as baseline, perometer detected 31 patients with lymphoedema by 6 months (BIS detected 53). By 6 months, 89 % of those with no lymphoedema reported at least one symptom. There was moderate correlation between perometer and BIS at 3 months (r = 0.40) and 6 months (r = 0.60), with a sensitivity of 73 % and specificity of 84 %. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed a threshold for early intervention of ≥5 to <10 % (p = 0.03). Threshold for early intervention to prevent progression to lymphoedema is ≥5 to <10 % but symptoms alone do not predict lymphoedema. The modest correlation between methods at 6 months indicates arm volume measurements remain gold standard, although longer term follow-up is required.

Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: If treatment of the axilla is indicated in patients with breast cancer who have a positive sentinel node, axillary lymph node dissection is the present standard. Although axillary lymph node dissection provides excellent regional control, it is associated with harmful side-effects. We aimed to assess whether axillary radiotherapy provides comparable regional control with fewer side-effects. METHODS: Patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy were enrolled in the randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive either axillary lymph node dissection or axillary radiotherapy in case of a positive sentinel node, stratified by institution. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of 5-year axillary recurrence, considered to be not more than 4% for the axillary radiotherapy group compared with an expected 2% in the axillary lymph node dissection group. Analyses were by intention to treat and per protocol. The AMAROS trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00014612. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2001, and April 29, 2010, 4823 patients were enrolled at 34 centres from nine European countries, of whom 4806 were eligible for randomisation. 2402 patients were randomly assigned to receive axillary lymph node dissection and 2404 to receive axillary radiotherapy. Of the 1425 patients with a positive sentinel node, 744 had been randomly assigned to axillary lymph node dissection and 681 to axillary radiotherapy; these patients constituted the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·1-8·0) for the patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes. In the axillary lymph node dissection group, 220 (33%) of 672 patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection had additional positive nodes. Axillary recurrence occurred in four of 744 patients in the axillary lymph node dissection group and seven of 681 in the axillary radiotherapy group. 5-year axillary recurrence was 0·43% (95% CI 0·00-0·92) after axillary lymph node dissection versus 1·19% (0·31-2·08) after axillary radiotherapy. The planned non-inferiority test was underpowered because of the low number of events. The one-sided 95% CI for the underpowered non-inferiority test on the hazard ratio was 0·00-5·27, with a non-inferiority margin of 2. Lymphoedema in the ipsilateral arm was noted significantly more often after axillary lymph node dissection than after axillary radiotherapy at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years. INTERPRETATION: Axillary lymph node dissection and axillary radiotherapy after a positive sentinel node provide excellent and comparable axillary control for patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy. Axillary radiotherapy results in significantly less morbidity. FUNDING: EORTC Charitable Trust.

Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer remains a significant scientific, clinical and societal challenge. This gap analysis has reviewed and critically assessed enduring issues and new challenges emerging from recent research, and proposes strategies for translating solutions into practice. METHODS: More than 100 internationally recognised specialist breast cancer scientists, clinicians and healthcare professionals collaborated to address nine thematic areas: genetics, epigenetics and epidemiology; molecular pathology and cell biology; hormonal influences and endocrine therapy; imaging, detection and screening; current/novel therapies and biomarkers; drug resistance; metastasis, angiogenesis, circulating tumour cells, cancer 'stem' cells; risk and prevention; living with and managing breast cancer and its treatment. The groups developed summary papers through an iterative process which, following further appraisal from experts and patients, were melded into this summary account. RESULTS: The 10 major gaps identified were: (1) understanding the functions and contextual interactions of genetic and epigenetic changes in normal breast development and during malignant transformation; (2) how to implement sustainable lifestyle changes (diet, exercise and weight) and chemopreventive strategies; (3) the need for tailored screening approaches including clinically actionable tests; (4) enhancing knowledge of molecular drivers behind breast cancer subtypes, progression and metastasis; (5) understanding the molecular mechanisms of tumour heterogeneity, dormancy, de novo or acquired resistance and how to target key nodes in these dynamic processes; (6) developing validated markers for chemosensitivity and radiosensitivity; (7) understanding the optimal duration, sequencing and rational combinations of treatment for improved personalised therapy; (8) validating multimodality imaging biomarkers for minimally invasive diagnosis and monitoring of responses in primary and metastatic disease; (9) developing interventions and support to improve the survivorship experience; (10) a continuing need for clinical material for translational research derived from normal breast, blood, primary, relapsed, metastatic and drug-resistant cancers with expert bioinformatics support to maximise its utility. The proposed infrastructural enablers include enhanced resources to support clinically relevant in vitro and in vivo tumour models; improved access to appropriate, fully annotated clinical samples; extended biomarker discovery, validation and standardisation; and facilitated cross-discipline working. CONCLUSIONS: With resources to conduct further high-quality targeted research focusing on the gaps identified, increased knowledge translating into improved clinical care should be achievable within five years.

Are symptomatic guidelines for chemotherapy appropriate to ER-positive screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC)?

Oncologists recommend chemotherapy to postmenopausal women with adverse prognostic factors, but predictors of the benefit of chemotherapy are mainly based on mortality from symptomatic cancer trials. From 1990 to 1998, 1475 breast cancers (875 screen detected cancers [SDBCs]: 600 symptomatic) were treated in women aged 50-65 years and prognostic factors compared with cancer mortality. Median follow-up was 110 months. The Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) was calculated for 6737 breast cancers which were part of the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) 2001/2002 Audit of SDBCs to validate survival figures. Ten year survival was 92.1% for SDBC and 77.6% for symptomatic cancers. Adjusting for baseline factors, SDBCs had a reduced mortality (RR = 0.42 (0.31-0.57), independent of grade, node status and tumour size. Oestrogen receptor (ER) positive SDBC had a lower annual mortality rate (0.6%) compared with symptomatic (4.3%: P < 0.001) or ER negative SDBC (1.8%). Epithelial proliferation was lower in SDBC in all NPI groups compared with symptomatic cancers (P ≤ 0.001). Grade, node status, ER status, size and mode of detection predicted survival. Survival for each NPI group was better for SDBC. For ER positive SDBC in the Moderate Prognostic Group 1 (MPG1), 10 year mortality was 6.4% compared with 17.6% in symptomatic (P = 0.001). NPI on 6,737 operable SDBC confirmed similar mortality in all groups (4% mortality in MPG1 group). SDBC have lower mortality than symptomatic due to a lower proliferative index. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy is over-treatment for ER positive SDBCs with Good Prognostic Group (GPG) and MPG1 NPI scores.

Evaluation of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of the PARP inhibitor olaparib: a phase I multicentre trial in patients scheduled for elective breast cancer surgery.

Olaparib (AZD2281) is an oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor with antitumour activity in cancer patients with BRCA1/2 germline mutations and in patients with homologous recombination deficiency. In this dose-finding study, patients were randomized to olaparib 10, 30, 100, 200 or 400 mg (capsule formulation) twice daily for the 4-5 days preceding breast cancer surgery. The primary objective was to identify an effective biological dose of olaparib for future trials. Secondary endpoints included evaluation of PARP-1 inhibition dose/exposure-response, and safety. Olaparib plasma pharmacokinetics (PK) and the pharmacodynamics (PD) in tumour and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were evaluated. Population PK/PD modelling was performed on pooled data from this study and a previously reported study. Sixty patients were randomized (n = 12, each dose). Dose-dependent increases in exposure to olaparib were observed, but at ~50 % lower plasma exposure levels than seen in advanced disease studies. The mean maximal extent of PARP inhibition in PBMCs and tumour tissue was 50.6 % and 70.0 %, respectively, and was similar to inhibitory levels reported previously. No PARP inhibition-dose relationship was observed. Due to the unexpectedly low olaparib exposure, we were unable to determine an effective biological dose. Common adverse events included procedural pain (n = 31 patients), nausea, asthenia, malaise and increased blood creatinine (n = 6, each); these were of mild-to-moderate intensity, and all were manageable. Despite low olaparib exposure, PARP inhibition was consistent with previous reports. Reasons for the inter-study differences in exposure are unclear. The tolerability profile of olaparib was consistent with previous studies.

Prevention of lymphoedema after axillary clearance by external compression sleeves PLACE randomised trial results. Effects of high BMI.

Around 25% of women undergoing Axillary Clearance (ANC) develop lymphedema (LE). Intervention with a compression garment is recommended to prevent LE but no randomised evidence exists to support this strategy. METHODS: A randomised trial tested standard management versus application of graduated compression garments (20-24 mmHg) to affected arm, for 1 year. Women with node positive breast cancer (n = 1300) undergoing ANC consented to arm volume measurements and those developing a 4-9% relative arm volume increase (RAVI) (subclinical LE) within 9 months post-surgery were randomised. Primary outcome was proportion of patients developing LE (RAVI > 10%) by 24-months in each group. Secondary endpoints included Quality of life in each group. RESULTS: In total 143 patients were randomised (74 no sleeve: 69 compression sleeve) between October 2010 and November 2015. The lymphoedema rate at 24 months in the 'no sleeve' group was at 41%, similar to the 'sleeve' group (30%: p = 0.32). Thirtytwo patients randomised to the 'no sleeve' group had a sleeve applied within 24 months. Body Mass Index (BMI) at randomisation predicted LE at any time point HR 1.04 (CI 1.01-1.08; p = 0.01). Patients with obesity (BMI > 30) had higher rates of LE in both groups (46%) compared to those with BMI < 30 (24%). No difference between patients was found in either group in changes in QoL. Compression sleeves applied after development of LE improved QoL scores (FACT-B p = 0.007:TOI p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Early intervention with External Compression garments does not prevent clinical LE, particularly in women with a high BMI > 30. The use of prophylactic garments in subclinical LE (RAVI < 9%) is unwarranted.

Radiotherapy or Surgery of the Axilla After a Positive Sentinel Node in Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Controlled EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS Trial.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10981-22023 AMAROS trial evaluated axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus axillary radiotherapy (ART) in patients with cT1-2, node-negative breast cancer and a positive sentinel node (SN) biopsy. At 5 years, both modalities showed excellent and comparable axillary control, with significantly less morbidity after ART. We now report the preplanned 10-year analysis of the axillary recurrence rate (ARR), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS), and an updated 5-year analysis of morbidity and quality of life. METHODS: In this open-label multicenter phase III noninferiority trial, 4,806 patients underwent SN biopsy; 1,425 were node-positive and randomly assigned to either ALND (n = 744) or ART (n = 681). RESULTS: Per intention-to-treat analysis, 10-year ARR cumulative incidence was 0.93% (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.68; seven events) after ALND and 1.82% (95% CI, 0.74 to 2.94; 11 events) after ART (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% CI, 0.67 to 4.39). There were no differences in OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.52) or DFS (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.46). ALND was associated with a higher lymphedema rate in updated 5-year analyses (24.5% v 11.9%; P < .001). Quality-of-life scales did not differ by treatment through 5 years. Exploratory analysis showed a 10-year cumulative incidence of second primary cancers of 12.1% (95% CI, 9.6 to 14.9) after ART and 8.3% (95% CI, 6.3 to 10.7) after ALND. CONCLUSION: This 10-year analysis confirms a low ARR after both ART and ALND with no difference in OS, DFS, and locoregional control. Considering less arm morbidity, ART is preferred over ALND for patients with SN-positive cT1-2 breast cancer.

Tibolone increases bone mineral density but also relapse in breast cancer survivors: LIBERATE trial bone substudy.

INTRODUCTION: The Livial Intervention Following Breast Cancer: Efficacy, Recurrence and Tolerability Endpoints (LIBERATE: Clinical http://Trials.gov number NCT00408863), a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that demonstrated that tibolone (Livial), a tissue-selective hormone-replacement therapy (HRT), increased breast cancer (BC) recurrence HR 1.40 (95% CI, 1.14 to 1.70; P = 0.001). A subgroup of women was entered into a study of bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: Women with surgically excised primary BC (T1-3, N0-2, M-0) within the last 5 years, complaining of vasomotor symptoms, were assigned to tibolone, 2.5 mg daily, or placebo treatment for a maximum of 5 years. The BMD substudy enrolled 763 patients, using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning at baseline and at 2 years. RESULTS: In the bone substudy, 699 of 763 women were eligible (345 allocated to tibolone, and 354, to placebo). After undergoing DXA scans, 300 (43%) women had normal BMD; 317 (45%), osteopenia; and 82 (11.7%), osteoporosis. Low body-mass index (P < 0.001), Asian race (P < 0.001), and late age at menarche (P < 0.04) predicted low bone mass at baseline. Tibolone increased BMD by 3.2% at the lumbar spine and 2.9% at the hip compared with placebo (both P < 0.001). The majority of fractures (55%) occurred in osteopenic patients. Women with normal BMD had increased recurrence with tibolone, 22 (15.6%) of 141 compared with placebo, 11 (6.9%) of 159 (P = 0.016), whereas no increased BC recurrence was seen in women with low BMD; 15 (7.4%) of 204 taking tibolone versus 13 (6.7%) of 195 taking placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tibolone is contraindicated after BC treatment, as it increases BMD and BC recurrence. Risk of BC recurrence was elevated in BC women with normal BMD (compared with low) who took tibolone.

Effect of tamoxifen and radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ: long-term results from the UK/ANZ DCIS trial.

BACKGROUND: Initial results of the UK/ANZ DCIS (UK, Australia, and New Zealand ductal carcinoma in situ) trial suggested that radiotherapy reduced new breast events of ipsilateral invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) compared with no radiotherapy, but no significant effects were noted with tamoxifen. Here, we report long-term results of this trial. METHODS: Women with completely locally excised DCIS were recruited into a randomised 2×2 factorial trial of radiotherapy, tamoxifen, or both. Randomisation was independently done for each of the two treatments (radiotherapy and tamoxifen), stratified by screening assessment centre, and blocked in groups of four. The recommended dose for radiation was 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (2 Gy per day on weekdays), and tamoxifen was prescribed at a dose of 20 mg daily for 5 years. Elective decision to withhold or provide one of the treatments was permitted. The endpoints of primary interest were invasive ipsilateral new breast events for the radiotherapy comparison and any new breast event, including contralateral disease and DCIS, for tamoxifen. Analysis of each of the two treatment comparisons was restricted to patients who were randomly assigned to that treatment. Analyses were by intention to treat. All trial drugs have been completed and this study is in long-term follow-up. This study is registered, number ISRCTN99513870. FINDINGS: Between May, 1990, and August, 1998, 1701 women were randomly assigned to radiotherapy and tamoxifen, radiotherapy alone, tamoxifen alone, or to no adjuvant treatment. Seven patients had protocol violations and thus 1694 patients were available for analysis. After a median follow-up of 12·7 years (IQR 10·9-14·7), 376 (163 invasive [122 ipsilateral vs 39 contralateral], 197 DCIS [174 ipsilateral vs 17 contralateral], and 16 of unknown invasiveness or laterality) breast cancers were diagnosed. Radiotherapy reduced the incidence of all new breast events (hazard ratio [HR] 0·41, 95% CI 0·30-0·56; p<0·0001), reducing the incidence of ipsilateral invasive disease (0·32, 0·19-0·56; p<0·0001) as well as ipsilateral DCIS (0·38, 0·22-0·63; p<0·0001), but having no effect on contralateral breast cancer (0·84, 0·45-1·58; p=0·6). Tamoxifen reduced the incidence of all new breast events (HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·58-0·88; p=0·002), reducing recurrent ipsilateral DCIS (0·70, 0·51-0·86; p=0·03) and contralateral tumours (0·44, 0·25-0·77; p=0·005), but having no effect on ipsilateral invasive disease (0·95, 0·66-1·38; p=0·8). No data on adverse events except cause of death were collected for this trial. INTERPRETATION: This updated analysis confirms the long-term beneficial effect of radiotherapy and reports a benefit for tamoxifen in reducing local and contralateral new breast events for women with DCIS treated by complete local excision. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.