The PARTNER trial of neoadjuvant olaparib with chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer.

PARTNER is a prospective, phase II-III, randomized controlled clinical trial that recruited patients with triple-negative breast cancer1,2, who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type3. Here we report the results of the trial. Patients (n = 559) were randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive neoadjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel with or without 150 mg olaparib twice daily, on days 3 to 14, of each of four cycles (gap schedule olaparib, research arm) followed by three cycles of anthracycline-based chemotherapy before surgery. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR)4, and secondary end points included event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS)5. pCR was achieved in 51% of patients in the research arm and 52% in the control arm (P = 0.753). Estimated EFS at 36 months in the research and control arms was 80% and 79% (log-rank P > 0.9), respectively; OS was 90% and 87.2% (log-rank P = 0.8), respectively. In patients with pCR, estimated EFS at 36 months was 90%, and in those with non-pCR it was 70% (log-rank P < 0.001), and OS was 96% and 83% (log-rank P < 0.001), respectively. Neoadjuvant olaparib did not improve pCR rates, EFS or OS when added to carboplatin-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03150576 .

Post-diagnosis physical activity and sedentary behaviour and colorectal cancer prognosis: A Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Low physical activity and high sedentary behaviour have been clearly linked with colorectal cancer development, yet data on their potential role in colorectal cancer survival is limited. Better characterisation of these relationships is needed for the development of post-diagnosis physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidance for colorectal cancer survivors. We searched PubMed and Embase through 28 February 2022 for studies assessing post-diagnosis physical activity, and/or sedentary behaviour in relation to all-cause and cause-specific mortality and recurrence after colorectal cancer diagnosis. Total and recreational physical activity were assessed overall and by frequency, duration, intensity, and volume using categorical, linear, and non-linear dose-response random-effects meta-analyses. The Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel interpreted and graded the likelihood of causality. We identified 16 observational studies on 82,220 non-overlapping patients from six countries. Physical activity was consistently inversely associated with colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality outcomes, with 13%-60% estimated reductions in risk. Sedentary behaviour was positively associated with all-cause mortality. The evidence had methodological limitations including potential confounding, selection bias and reverse causation, coupled with a limited number of studies for most associations. The CUP Global Expert panel concluded limited-suggestive evidence for recreational physical activity with all-cause mortality and cancer recurrence. Total physical activity and its specific domains and dimensions, and sedentary behaviour were all graded as limited-no conclusion for all outcomes. Future research should focus on randomised trials, while observational studies should obtain objective and repeated physical activity measures and better adjustment for confounders.

Post-diagnosis adiposity and colorectal cancer prognosis: A Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

The adiposity influence on colorectal cancer prognosis remains poorly characterised. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on post-diagnosis adiposity measures (body mass index [BMI], waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, weight) or their changes and colorectal cancer outcomes. PubMed and Embase were searched through 28 February 2022. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted when at least three studies had sufficient information. The quality of evidence was interpreted and graded by the Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel. We reviewed 124 observational studies (85 publications). Meta-analyses were possible for BMI and all-cause mortality, colorectal cancer-specific mortality, and cancer recurrence/disease-free survival. Non-linear meta-analysis indicated a reverse J-shaped association between BMI and colorectal cancer outcomes (nadir at BMI 28 kg/m2). The highest risk, relative to the nadir, was observed at both ends of the BMI distribution (18 and 38 kg/m2), namely 60% and 23% higher risk for all-cause mortality; 95% and 26% for colorectal cancer-specific mortality; and 37% and 24% for cancer recurrence/disease-free survival, respectively. The higher risk with low BMI was attenuated in secondary analyses of RCTs (compared to cohort studies), among studies with longer follow-up, and in women suggesting potential methodological limitations and/or altered physiological state. Descriptively synthesised studies on other adiposity-outcome associations of interest were limited in number and methodological quality. All the associations were graded as limited (likelihood of causality: no conclusion) due to potential methodological limitations (reverse causation, confounding, selection bias). Additional well-designed observational studies and interventional trials are needed to provide further clarification.

Post-diagnosis adiposity, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, dietary factors, supplement use and colorectal cancer prognosis: Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) summary of evidence grading.

Based on the World Cancer Research Fund Global Cancer Update Programme, we performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses to investigate the association of post-diagnosis adiposity, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and dietary factors with colorectal cancer prognosis. We searched PubMed and Embase until 28th February, 2022. An independent expert committee and expert panel graded the quality of evidence. A total of 167 unique publications were reviewed, and all but five were observational studies. The quality of the evidence was graded conservatively due to the high risk of several biases. There was evidence of non-linearity in the associations between body mass index and colorectal cancer prognosis. The associations appeared reverse J-shaped, and the quality of this evidence was graded as limited (likelihood of causality: limited-no conclusion). The evidence on recreational physical activity and lower risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] highest vs. lowest: 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.77) and recurrence/disease-free survival (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.92) was graded as limited-suggestive. There was limited-suggestive evidence for the associations between healthy dietary and/or lifestyle patterns (including diets that comprised plant-based foods), intake of whole grains and coffee with lower risk of all-cause mortality, and between unhealthy dietary patterns and intake of sugary drinks with higher risk of all-cause mortality. The evidence for other exposures on colorectal cancer outcomes was sparse and graded as limited-no conclusion. Analyses were conducted excluding cancer patients with metastases without substantial changes in the findings. Well-designed intervention and cohort studies are needed to support the development of lifestyle recommendations for colorectal cancer patients.

Post-diagnosis dietary factors, supplement use and colorectal cancer prognosis: A Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

The role of diet in colorectal cancer prognosis is not well understood and specific lifestyle recommendations are lacking. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal observational studies on post-diagnosis dietary factors, supplement use and colorectal cancer survival outcomes in PubMed and Embase from inception until 28th February 2022. Random-effects dose-response meta-analyses were conducted when at least three studies had sufficient information. The evidence was interpreted and graded by the CUP Global independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel. Five RCTs and 35 observational studies were included (30,242 cases, over 8700 all-cause and 2100 colorectal cancer deaths, 3700 progression, recurrence, or disease-free events). Meta-analyses, including 3-10 observational studies each, were conducted for: whole grains, nuts/peanuts, red and processed meat, dairy products, sugary drinks, artificially sweetened beverages, coffee, alcohol, dietary glycaemic load/index, insulin load/index, marine omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, supplemental calcium, circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and all-cause mortality; for alcohol, supplemental calcium, circulating 25(OH)D and colorectal cancer-specific mortality; and for circulating 25(OH)D and recurrence/disease-free survival. The overall evidence was graded as 'limited'. The inverse associations between healthy dietary and/or lifestyle patterns (including diets that comprised plant-based foods), whole grains, total, caffeinated, or decaffeinated coffee and all-cause mortality and the positive associations between unhealthy dietary patterns, sugary drinks and all-cause mortality provided 'limited-suggestive' evidence. All other exposure-outcome associations provided 'limited-no conclusion' evidence. Additional, well-conducted cohort studies and carefully designed RCTs are needed to develop specific lifestyle recommendations for colorectal cancer survivors.

Global funding for cancer research between 2016 and 2020: a content analysis of public and philanthropic investments.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of disease burden globally, with more than 19·3 million cases and 10 million deaths recorded in 2020. Research is crucial to understanding the determinants of cancer and the effects of interventions, and to improving outcomes. We aimed to analyse global patterns of public and philanthropic investment in cancer research. METHODS: In this content analysis, we searched the UberResearch Dimensions database and Cancer Research UK data for human cancer research funding awards from public and philanthropic funders between Jan 1, 2016, and Dec 31, 2020. Included award types were project and programme grants, fellowships, pump priming, and pilot projects. Awards focused on operational delivery of cancer care were excluded. Awards were categorised by cancer type, cross-cutting research theme, and research phase. Funding amount was compared with global burden of specific cancers, measured by disability-adjusted life-years, years lived with disability, and mortality using data from the Global Burden of Disease study. FINDINGS: We identified 66 388 awards with total investment of about US$24·5 billion in 2016-20. Investment decreased year-on-year, with the largest drop observed between 2019 and 2020. Pre-clinical research received 73·5% of the funding across the 5 years ($18 billion), phase 1-4 clinical trials received 7·4% ($1·8 billion), public health research received 9·4% ($2·3 billion), and cross-disciplinary research received 5·0% ($1·2 billion). General cancer research received the largest investment ($7·1 billion, 29·2% of the total funding). The most highly funded cancer types were breast cancer ($2·7 billion [11·2%]), haematological cancer ($2·3 billion [9·4%]), and brain cancer ($1·3 billion [5·5%]). Analysis by cross-cutting theme revealed that 41·2% of investment ($9·6 billion) went to cancer biology research, 19·6% ($4·6 billion) to drug treatment research, and 12·1% ($2·8 billion) to immuno-oncology. 1·4% of the total funding ($0·3 billion) was spent on surgery research, 2·8% ($0·7 billion) was spent on radiotherapy research, and 0·5% ($0·1 billion) was spent on global health studies. INTERPRETATION: Cancer research funding must be aligned with the global burden of cancer with more equitable funding for cancer research in low-income and middle-income countries (which account for 80% of cancer burden), both to support research relevant to these settings, and build research capacity within these countries. There is an urgent need to prioritise investment in surgery and radiotherapy research given their primacy in the treatment of many solid tumours. FUNDING: None.

Risk-reducing surgery for individuals with cancer-predisposing germline pathogenic variants and no personal cancer history: a review of current UK guidelines.

Identifying healthy carriers of germline pathogenic variants in high penetrance cancer susceptibility genes offers the potential for risk-reducing surgery. The NHS England National Genomic Test Directory offers germline and somatic testing to patients with certain cancers or rare and inherited diseases, or, in some cases, to their relatives. This review summarises current UK guidelines for risk-reducing surgical interventions available for individuals with no personal history of cancer, who are determined to carry germline pathogenic variants. An electronic literature search of NICE guidelines and PubMed citable articles was performed. NICE guidelines are available for bilateral mastectomy and are currently in development for risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Guidelines developed with affiliation to, or through relevant British Surgical Societies or international consensus, are available for risk-reducing hysterectomy, polypectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy. There is a disparity in the development and distribution of national guidelines for interventions amongst tumour types. Whilst we are focusing on UK guidelines, we anticipate they will be relevant much more generally and so of interest to a wider audience including where there are no national guidelines to refer to. We suggest that, as genetic testing becomes rapidly more accessible, guideline development for interventions should be more closely aligned to those for testing.

Bridging pre-surgical endocrine therapy for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the B-MaP-C study.

PURPOSE: The B-MaP-C study investigated changes to breast cancer care that were necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we present a follow-up analysis of those patients commenced on bridging endocrine therapy (BrET), whilst they were awaiting surgery due to reprioritisation of resources. METHODS: This multicentre, multinational cohort study recruited 6045 patients from the UK, Spain and Portugal during the peak pandemic period (Feb-July 2020). Patients on BrET were followed up to investigate the duration of, and response to, BrET. This included changes in tumour size to reflect downstaging potential, and changes in cellular proliferation (Ki67), as a marker of prognosis. RESULTS: 1094 patients were prescribed BrET, over a median period of 53 days (IQR 32-81 days). The majority of patients (95.6%) had strong ER expression (Allred score 7-8/8). Very few patients required expedited surgery, due to lack of response (1.2%) or due to lack of tolerance/compliance (0.8%). There were small reductions in median tumour size after 3 months' treatment duration; median of 4 mm [IQR - 20, 4]. In a small subset of patients (n = 47), a drop in cellular proliferation (Ki67) occurred in 26 patients (55%), from high (Ki67 ≥ 10%) to low (< 10%), with at least one month's duration of BrET. DISCUSSION: This study describes real-world usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy as necessitated by the pandemic. BrET was found to be tolerable and safe. The data support short-term (≤ 3 months) usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy. Longer-term use should be investigated in future trials.

The impact of race and ethnicity in breast cancer-disparities and implications for precision oncology.

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide and is one of the leading causes of cancer death. The incidence, pathological features, and clinical outcomes in breast cancer differ by geographical distribution and across racial and ethnic populations. Importantly, racial and ethnic diversity in breast cancer clinical trials is lacking, with both Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented. In this forum article, breast cancer researchers from across the globe discuss the factors contributing to racial and ethnic breast cancer disparities and highlight specific implications of precision oncology approaches for equitable provision of breast cancer care to improve outcomes and address disparities.

Cancer survivorship, excess body fatness and weight-loss intervention-where are we in 2020?

Earlier diagnosis and more effective treatments mean that the estimated number of cancer survivors in the United Kingdom is expected to reach 4 million by 2030. However, there is an increasing realisation that excess body fatness (EBF) is likely to influence the quality of cancer survivorship and disease-free survival. For decades, the discussion of weight management in patients with cancer has been dominated by concerns about unintentional weight loss, low body weight and interventions to increase weight, often re-enforced by the existence of the obesity paradox, which indicates that high body weight is associated with survival benefits for some types of cancer. However, observational evidence provides strong grounds for testing the hypothesis that interventions for promoting intentional loss of body fat and maintaining skeletal muscle in overweight and obese cancer survivors would bring important health benefits in terms of survival outcomes and long-term impact on treatment-related side effects. In this paper, we outline the need for studies to improve our understanding of the health benefits of weight-loss interventions, such as hypocaloric healthy-eating plans combined with physical activity. In particular, complex intervention trials that are pragmatically designed are urgently needed to develop effective, clinically practical, evidence-based strategies for reducing EBF and optimising body composition in people living with and beyond common cancers.

Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.

BACKGROUND: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. METHODS: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated 'standard' or 'COVID-altered', in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. FINDINGS: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had 'COVID-altered' management. 'Bridging' endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2-9%) using 'NHS Predict'. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of 'COVID-altered' management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown.

Survival and disease characteristics of de novo versus recurrent metastatic breast cancer in a cohort of young patients.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear how the pathology, presentation and outcome for patients who present with de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) compare with those who later develop distant metastases. DnMBC is uncommon in younger patients. We describe these differences within a cohort of young patients in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Women aged 40 years or younger with a first invasive breast cancer were recruited to the prospective POSH national cohort study. Baseline clinicopathological data were collected, with annual follow-up. Overall survival (OS) and post-distant relapse-free survival (PDRS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: In total, 862 patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease. DnMBC prevalence was 2.6% (76/2977). Of those with initially localised disease, 27.1% (786/2901) subsequently developed a distant recurrence. Median follow-up was 11.00 years (95% CI 10.79-11.59). Patients who developed metastatic disease within 12 months had worse OS than dnMBC patients (HR 2.64; 1.84-3.77). For PDRS, dnMBC was better than all groups, including those who relapsed after 5 years. Of dnMBC patients, 1.3% had a gBRCA1, and 11.8% a gBRCA2 mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Young women with dnMBC have better PDRS than those who develop relapsed metastatic breast cancer. A gBRCA2 mutation was overrepresented in dnMBC.

Development of Breast Cancer Choices: a decision support tool for young women with breast cancer deciding whether to have genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations.

PURPOSE: To develop a decision support tool for young women with breast cancer considering genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations soon after cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A four-stage iterative development process was employed; stage 1, literature review exploring the availability and efficacy of empirically tested decision support tools; stage 2, in-depth interviews with 29 young women (< 50 years) recently diagnosed with breast cancer, exploring information requirements and experiences of genetic testing decision making; stage 3, three focus groups (N = 21) exploring preferences for information presentation and prioritisation of content; stage 4, think-aloud interviews to refine the prototype (N = 16). RESULTS: Participants wanted information regarding the pros and cons of testing, the testing process and implications for their family, presented in a way that allowed them to choose the level of detail they required. They preferred the term 'altered gene', valued a medical word definition function and warnings before accessing sensitive information. CONCLUSION: Participants valued the decision support tool, the accessibility of the information and its clinical endorsement. The decision support tool has considerable clinical utility as an adjunct to genetic counselling or for use in busy oncology clinics where formal genetic counselling may be unavailable.

Alcohol use and breast cancer risk: A qualitative study of women's perspectives to inform the development of a preventative intervention in breast clinics.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore women's views about breast cancer risk and alcohol use, to inform the design of a prototype for an intervention in breast clinics about alcohol as a modifiable risk factor for breast cancer. METHODS: Women recruited in NHS breast screening and symptomatic clinics in Southampton, UK, were invited to take part in semi-structured telephone interviews or a focus group to discuss their perspectives of breast cancer risk, alcohol consumption and their information needs about these topics. Data were analysed thematically. Twenty-eight women took part in telephone interviews, and 16 attended one of three focus groups. RESULTS: While most women reported a personal responsibility for their health and were interested in advice about modifiable risk factors, few without (or prior to) experience of breast symptoms independently sought information. Many considered alcohol advice irrelevant as the association with breast cancer was largely unknown, and participants did not consider their drinking to be problematic. Women reported trusting information from health organisations like the NHS, but advice needs to be sensitive and non-blaming. CONCLUSION: NHS breast screening and symptomatic clinics offer a "teachable moment" to engage women with context-specific advice about alcohol and cancer risk that, if targeted correctly, may assist them in making informed lifestyle choices.

Germline BRCA mutation and outcome in young-onset breast cancer (POSH): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies provide conflicting interpretations of the effect of inherited genetic factors on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. The primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation on breast cancer outcomes in patients with young-onset breast cancer. METHODS: We did a prospective cohort study of female patients recruited from 127 hospitals in the UK aged 40 years or younger at first diagnosis (by histological confirmation) of invasive breast cancer. Patients with a previous invasive malignancy (except non-melanomatous skin cancer) were excluded. Patients were identified within 12 months of initial diagnosis. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were identified using blood DNA collected at recruitment. Clinicopathological data, and data regarding treatment and long-term outcomes, including date and site of disease recurrence, were collected from routine medical records at 6 months, 12 months, and then annually until death or loss to follow-up. The primary outcome was overall survival for all BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-positive) versus all non-carriers (BRCA-negative) at 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after diagnosis. A prespecified subgroup analysis of overall survival was done in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Recruitment was completed in 2008, and long-term follow-up is continuing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2000, and Jan 24, 2008, we recruited 2733 women. Genotyping detected a pathogenic BRCA mutation in 338 (12%) patients (201 with BRCA1, 137 with BRCA2). After a median follow-up of 8·2 years (IQR 6·0-9·9), 651 (96%) of 678 deaths were due to breast cancer. There was no significant difference in overall survival between BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative patients in multivariable analyses at any timepoint (at 2 years: 97·0% [95% CI 94·5-98·4] vs 96·6% [95·8-97·3]; at 5 years: 83·8% [79·3-87·5] vs 85·0% [83·5-86·4]; at 10 years: 73·4% [67·4-78·5] vs 70·1% [67·7-72·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·76-1·22]; p=0·76). Of 558 patients with triple-negative breast cancer, BRCA mutation carriers had better overall survival than non-carriers at 2 years (95% [95% CI 89-97] vs 91% [88-94]; HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·047) but not 5 years (81% [73-87] vs 74% [70-78]; HR 1·13 [0·70-1·84]; p=0·62) or 10 years (72% [62-80] vs 69% [63-74]; HR 2·12 [0·82-5·49]; p= 0·12). INTERPRETATION: Patients with young-onset breast cancer who carry a BRCA mutation have similar survival as non-carriers. However, BRCA mutation carriers with triple-negative breast cancer might have a survival advantage during the first few years after diagnosis compared with non-carriers. Decisions about timing of additional surgery aimed at reducing future second primary-cancer risks should take into account patient prognosis associated with the first malignancy and patient preferences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the UK National Cancer Research Network, the Wessex Cancer Trust, Breast Cancer Now, and the PPP Healthcare Medical Trust Grant.

Increased circulating resistin levels in early-onset breast cancer patients of normal body mass index correlate with lymph node negative involvement and longer disease free survival: a multi-center POSH cohort serum proteomics study.

BACKGROUND: Early-onset breast cancer (EOBC) affects about one in 300 women aged 40 years or younger and is associated with worse outcomes than later onset breast cancer. This study explored novel serum proteins as surrogate markers of prognosis in patients with EOBC. METHODS: Serum samples from EOBC patients (stages 1-3) were analysed using agnostic high-precision quantitative proteomics. Patients received anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The discovery cohort (n = 399) either had more than 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (good outcome group, n = 203) or DFS of less than 2 years (poor outcome group, n = 196). Expressed proteins were assessed for differential expression between the two groups. Bioinformatics pathway and network analysis in combination with literature research were used to determine clinically relevant proteins. ELISA analysis against an independent sample set from the Prospective study of Outcomes in Sporadic versus Hereditary breast cancer (POSH) cohort (n = 181) was used to validate expression levels of the selected target. Linear and generalized linear modelling was applied to determine the effect of target markers, body mass index (BMI), lymph node involvement (LN), oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status on patients' outcome. RESULTS: A total of 5346 unique proteins were analysed (peptide FDR p ≤ 0.05). Of these, 812 were differentially expressed in the good vs poor outcome groups and showed significant enrichment for the insulin signalling (p = 0.01) and the glycolysis/gluconeogenesis (p = 0.01) pathways. These proteins further correlated with interaction networks involving glucose and fatty acid metabolism. A consistent nodal protein to these metabolic networks was resistin (upregulated in the good outcome group, p = 0.009). ELISA validation demonstrated resistin to be upregulated in the good outcome group (p = 0.04), irrespective of BMI and ER status. LN involvement was the only covariate with a significant association with resistin measurements (p = 0.004). An ancillary in-silico observation was the induction of the inflammatory response, leucocyte infiltration, lymphocyte migration and recruitment of phagocytes (p < 0.0001, z-score > 2). Survival analysis showed that resistin overexpression was associated with improved DFS. CONCLUSIONS: Higher circulating resistin correlated with node-negative patients and longer DFS independent of BMI and ER status in women with EOBC. Overexpression of serum resistin in EOBC may be a surrogate indicator of improved prognosis.

Local Recurrence and Breast Oncological Surgery in Young Women With Breast Cancer: The POSH Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess clinical and surgical factors affecting local recurrence and survival in young breast cancer patients in the Prospective study of Outcomes in Sporadic versus Hereditary breast cancer (POSH). BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest young age is a predictor of increased local recurrence. METHODS: POSH is a prospective cohort of 3024 women of 18 to 40 years with breast cancer. Cohort characteristics were grouped by mastectomy or BCS. Endpoints were local-recurrence interval (LRI), distant disease-free interval (DDFI), and overall survival (OS); described using cumulative-hazard and Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable analyses by Flexible Parametric and Cox regression models. RESULTS: Mastectomy was performed in 1464 patients and breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in 1395. Patients undergoing mastectomy had larger tumors and higher proportions of positive family history, estrogen receptor+, progesterone receptor+, and/or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2+ tumors. Local events accounted for 15% of recurrences. LRI by surgical type varied over time with LRI similar at 18 months (1.0% vs 1.0%, P = 0.348) but higher for BCS at 5 and 10 years (5.3% vs 2.6%, P < 0.001; and 11.7% vs 4.9%, P < 0.001, respectively). Similar results were found in the adjusted model. Conversely, distant-metastases and deaths were lower for BCS but not after adjusting for prognostic factors. After mastectomy chest-wall radiotherapy was associated with improved LRI (hazard ratio, HR = 0.46, P = 0.015). Positive surgical margins, and development of local recurrence predicted for reduced DDFI (HR = 0.50, P < 0.001; and HR = 0.29, P = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical extent appears less important for DDFI than completeness of excision or, where appropriate, chest-wall radiotherapy. Despite higher local-recurrence rates for BCS, surgical type does not influence DDFI or OS after adjusting for known prognostic factors in young breast cancer patients.