Preoperative considerations and benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy: insights from a 12-year review of the Hong Kong Breast Cancer Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was initially used for locally advanced or inoperable breast cancers. Its extension to early disease has facilitated breast-conserving surgery (BCS). This study investigated the use of NAC in patients registered with the Hong Kong Breast Cancer Registry (HKBCR); it also assessed NAC effectiveness according to rates of pathological complete response (pCR) and BCS. METHODS: Records were retrieved from the HKBCR regarding 13 435 women who had been diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during the period of 2006 to 2017, including 1084 patients who received NAC. RESULTS: The proportion of patients treated with NAC nearly doubled from 5.6% in 2006-2011 to 10.3% in 2012-2017. The increase was most pronounced among patients with stage II or III disease. In terms of biological subtype, substantial increases in the receipt of NAC were evident among patients with triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive (non-luminal) tumours. The best rates of pCR were observed in patients with HER2-positive (non-luminal) [46.0%] tumours, followed by patients with luminal B (HER2-positive) [29.4%] and triple-negative (29.3%) tumours. After NAC, the rate of BCS was 53.9% in patients with clinical stage IIA disease, compared with 38.2% in patients with pathological stage IIA disease who did not receive NAC. CONCLUSION: The use of NAC in Hong Kong increased from 2006 to 2017. The findings regarding rates of pCR and BCS indicate that NAC is an effective treatment; it should be considered in patients with stage ≥II disease, as well as patients with HER2- positive (non-luminal) or triple-negative breast cancers.

Evaluation of contemporary olanzapine- and netupitant/palonosetron-containing antiemetic regimens for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

INTRODUCTION: This post-hoc analysis retrospectively assessed data from two recent studies of antiemetic regimens for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The primary objective was to compare olanzapine-based versus netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA)-based regimens in terms of controlling CINV during cycle 1 of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy; secondary objectives were to assess quality of life (QOL) and emesis outcomes over four cycles of AC. METHODS: This study included 120 Chinese patients with early-stage breast cancer who were receiving AC; 60 patients received the olanzapine-based antiemetic regimen, whereas 60 patients received the NEPA-based antiemetic regimen. The olanzapine-based regimen comprised aprepitant, ondansetron, dexamethasone, and olanzapine; the NEPA-based regimen comprised NEPA and dexamethasone. Patient outcomes were compared in terms of emesis control and QOL. RESULTS: During cycle 1 of AC, the olanzapine group exhibited a higher rate of 'no use of rescue therapy' in the acute phase (olanzapine vs NEPA: 96.7% vs 85.0%, P=0.0225). No parameters differed between groups in the delayed phase. The olanzapine group had significantly higher rates of 'no use of rescue therapy' (91.7% vs 76.7%, P=0.0244) and 'no significant nausea' (91.7% vs 78.3%, P=0.0408) in the overall phase. There were no differences in QOL between groups. Multiple cycle assessment revealed that the NEPA group had higher rates of total control in the acute phase (cycles 2 and 4) and the overall phase (cycles 3 and 4). CONCLUSION: These results do not conclusively support the superiority of either regimen for patients with breast cancer who are receiving AC.

Effects of primary granulocyte-colony stimulating factor prophylaxis on neutropenic toxicity and chemotherapy dose delivery in Chinese patients with breast cancer who received adjuvant docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: This study was performed to examine the effects of primary granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis on neutropenic toxicity, chemotherapy delivery, and hospitalisation among Chinese patients with breast cancer in Hong Kong. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with breast cancer who received adjuvant docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy from November 2007 to October 2013 at Princess Margaret Hospital. Data were collected regarding the usage of G-CSF prophylaxis; incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, non-neutropenic fever, and infection; hospital admissions, and chemotherapy dose delivery. Patients who began to receive G-CSF prophylaxis during the first cycle of chemotherapy and continued such prophylaxis in subsequent cycles were regarded as the primary G-CSF prophylaxis group. RESULTS: In total, 231 female Chinese patients with breast cancer were included in the analysis. Overall, 193 (83.5%) patients received primary G-CSF prophylaxis. The demographics and tumour characteristics were comparable between patients with and without primary G-CSF prophylaxis. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis significantly reduced febrile neutropenia incidence from 31.6% to 14.5% (relative risk=0.45, 95% confidence interval=0.25-0.81). Primary G-CSF prophylaxis also significantly reduced the incidence of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia from 57.9% to 24.7% (relative risk=0.43, 95% confidence interval=0.30-0.62) and the incidence of febrile neutropenia-related hospital admission from 31.6% to 12.4% (P=0.025). Finally, it enabled more patients to receive adequate chemotherapy dose delivery. CONCLUSION: Primary G-CSF prophylaxis effectively reduced the incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, while enabling adequate chemotherapy dose delivery and reducing hospital admissions among Chinese patients with breast cancer who received adjuvant docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy.

A meta-analysis on dose-response relationship between night shift work and the risk of breast cancer.

This study aimed to conduct a systematic review to sum up evidence of the associations between different aspects of night shift work and female breast cancer using a dose-response meta-analysis approach. We systematicly searched all cohort and case-control studies published in English on MEDLINE, Embase, PSYCInfo, APC Journal Club and Global Health, from January 1971 to May 2013. We extracted effect measures (relative risk, RR; odd ratio, OR; or hazard ratio, HR) from individual studies to generate pooled results using meta-analysis approaches. A log-linear dose-response regression model was used to evaluate the relationship between various indicators of exposure to night shift work and breast cancer risk. Downs and Black scale was applied to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. A pooled adjusted relative risk for the association between 'ever exposed to night shift work' and breast cancer was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.35]. Further meta-analyses on dose-response relationship showed that every 5-year increase of exposure to night shift work would correspondingly enhance the risk of breast cancer of the female by 3% (pooled RR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05; Pheterogeneity < 0.001). Our meta-analysis also suggested that an increase in 500-night shifts would result in a 13% (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.21; Pheterogeneity = 0.06) increase in breast cancer risk. This systematic review updated the evidence that a positive dose-response relationship is likely to present for breast cancer with increasing years of employment and cumulative shifts involved in the work.