Differences in breast cancer survival and stage by age in off-target screening groups: a population-based retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Age is an important prognostic factor in breast cancer. The target age to screen is under debate. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the influence of age on the diagnosis and survival among women with breast cancer. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of the Population-Based Cancer Registry of Campinas, Brazil, and included all women diagnosed from 2010 to 2014. The outcomes assessed were overall survival and stage. For statistical analyses, the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank tests, and chi-square tests were used. RESULTS: The sample comprised 1741 women aged 40 to 79 years. Diagnoses at stages 0 to II were the more frequent. In the 40 to 49 years and 50 to 59 years age groups, the frequency of stage 0 (in situ) was 20.5% and 14.9% (P=.022), respectively, and the frequency of stage I was 20.2% and 25.8% (P=.042), respectively. The mean overall survival was 8.9 years (8.6-9.2) in the 40 to 49 years age group and 7.7 years (7.3-8.1) in the 70 to 79 years age group. The 5-year overall survival was higher in the 40 to 49 years age group than in the 50 to 59 years age group for stage 0 (in situ) (100.0% vs 95.0%; P=.036) and stage III (77.4% vs 66.2%; P=.046) diagnoses. The 5-year overall survival was higher in 60 to 69 years age group than in the 70 to 79 years age group for stages I (94.6% vs 86.5%; P=.002) and III (83.5% vs 64.9%; P=.010). In all age groups, significant differences in survival were not observed for stage 0 (in situ) vs stage I diagnoses, stage 0 vs stage II diagnoses, and stage I vs stage II diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Women aged 40 to 49 years had the highest proportion of in situ tumors, and stages III and IV accounted for about one-third of the cases in all age groups. There was no difference in the overall survival for stage 0 (in situ) vs stage I or II diagnoses in all age groups.

Postplacental Placement of Intrauterine Devices: Acceptability, Reasons for Refusal and Proposals to Increase its Use.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acceptability of postplacental placement of intrauterine devices (PPIUD), reasons for refusal and suggested policies to increase its use. METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted at the Women Hospital of the Universidade de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil. Postplacental placement of intrauterine devices was offered to women admitted in labor who did not present infections, uterine malformation, twin pregnancy, preterm birth, and were at least 18 years old. In case of refusal, the parturient was asked to give their reasons and the answers were classified as misinformation about contraception or other reasons. The following were considered misinformation: fear of pain, bleeding, contraception failure and future infertility. Bivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: Amongst 241 invited women, the refusal rate was of 41.9%. Misinformation corresponded to 50.5% of all refusals, and the reasons were: fear of pain (39.9%); fear of contraception failure (4.9%); fear of bleeding (3.9%); fear of future infertility (1.9%); other reasons for refusal were 49.5%. Parturients aged between 18 and 27 years old refused the PPIUD more frequently due to misinformation (67.4%), and older parturients (between 28 and 43 years old) refused frequently due to other reasons (63.6%) (p = 0.002). The mean age of those who declined the PPIUD due to misinformation was 27.3 ± 6.4 years old, while those who declined for other reasons had a mean age of 29.9 ± 5.9 years old (p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: The refusal of the PPIUD was high, especially amongst young women and due to misinformation. It is necessary to develop educative measures during antenatal care to counsel women about contraception, reproductive health and consequences of unintended pregnancy.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a taxa de aceitação do dispositivo intrauterino pós-placentário (DIUPP); os motivos de recusa e propor medidas que aumentem sua aceitação. MéTODOS: Estudo de corte transversal realizado no Hospital da Mulher da Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brasil. O DIUPP foi oferecido a mulheres admitidas em trabalho de parto que não apresentavam: infecções, malformação uterina, gravidez gemelar, parto prematuro e com idade mínima de 18 anos. Em caso de recusa, perguntou-se o motivo, e as respostas foram agrupadas em informações equivocadas sobre contracepção ou outros motivos. Considerou-se informação equivocada: medo de dor, sangramentos, falha da contracepção e prejuízo da fertilidade. Análises bivariadas foram realizadas. RESULTADOS: Entre 241 mulheres, a taxa de recusa foi de 41,9%. A desinformação correspondeu a 50,5% de todos os motivos de recusa, que foram: medo da dor (39,9%); medo da falha da contracepção (4,9%); medo de sangramento (3,9%), medo de o dispositivo intrauterino (DIU) prejudicar a fertilidade (1,9%). Outros motivos de recusa atingem 49,5%. Parturientes com idade entre 18 e 27 anos recusaram o PPIUD com mais frequência devido a desinformação (67,4%), e as mais velhas (com idade entre 28 e 43 anos) recusaram com frequência devido a outros motivos (63,6%) (p = 0,002). Houve diferença entre a idade média de quem recusou o PPIUD por desinformação (27,3 ± 6,4 anos) em comparação com outras razões (29,9 ± 5,9 anos), (p = 0,017). Além disso, ambos os grupos apresentaram altas taxas de recusa por desinformação, de 67,4 e 36,4%, respectivamente. CONCLUSãO: A recusa do DIUPP foi alta, principalmente entre as mulheres jovens e por desinformação. Diante disso, é necessário o desenvolvimento de medidas educativas durante o pré-natal e aconselhar as mulheres sobre contracepção, saúde reprodutiva e gravidez indesejada.

Real-world data on neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) has been shown to be effective in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer in clinical trials. However, adoption in clinical practice is still limited. Real-world data may provide useful insights into effectiveness, toxicities and quality of care, potentially rendering clinical trial results to the real-world setting. Our purpose was to report real-world data of a cohort of postmenopausal patients submitted to NET. METHODS: This prospective cohort study evaluated 146 postmenopausal female patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer treated with NET at three tertiary hospitals between 2016 and 2018. Clinicopathological information were collected prospectively. Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index (PEPI) score was calculated for tumors submitted to at least 16 weeks of NET. RESULTS: Median age was 67 years old, and 87.8% had stage I-II disease. Most tumors had histological grade II (76.1%). Median pretreatment Ki67 expression was 10%. Aromatase inhibitor was used in 99.5% of patients, and median treatment duration was 21.0 weeks. No tumor progressed during NET. Breast-conserving surgery was performed in the majority of patients (63.0%), as well as sentinel lymph-node biopsy (76.7%). Pathological complete response rate was 1.0%. 43 patients (29.5%) had PEPI score 0, and 26% had PEPI scores 4-5. Posttreatment Ki67 median expression was 3.0%, and only five tumors (3.4%) showed marked increase in Ki67 expression during treatment. Seven patients (4.8%) had HER2-positive residual disease, and were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world data shows that NET is effective and safe in postmenopausal patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer. Postmenopausal status and low-risk luminal tumor features (luminal A-like) should be used as selection criteria to ensure the best results with NET.

ESR1 Mutations Are Not a Common Mechanism of Endocrine Resistance in Patients With Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy.

Introduction: Mutations in the ESR1 gene (ESR1m) are important mechanisms of resistance to endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) metastatic breast cancer and have been studied as a potential therapeutic target, as well as a predictive and prognostic biomarker. Nonetheless, the role of ESR1m as a possible mechanism of primary endocrine resistance, as well as whether it also occurs in tumors that are resistant to ET administered in early-stage disease as (neo)adjuvant, has not been adequately studied. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of ESR1m in tumor samples from patients with ER+ breast cancer resistant to neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy. Methods: We followed a prospective cohort of patients with ER+ HER2- stages II and III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET). Tumor samples from patients with a pattern of primary endocrine resistance [defined as a Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index (PEPI) score of ≥4] were identified and analyzed for the presence of ESR1m. Results: One hundred twenty-seven patients were included in the cohort, of which 100 (79%) had completed NET and underwent surgery. Among these patients, the PEPI score ranged from 0 to 3 in 70% (70/100), whereas 30% (30/100) had a PEPI score of 4 or more. Twenty-three of these patients were included in the analysis. ESR1 mutations were not identified in any of the 23 patients with early-stage ER+ breast cancer resistant to NET. Discussion: Growing evidence supports the notion that there are different mechanisms for primary and secondary endocrine resistance. Our study suggests that ESR1 mutations do not evolve rapidly and do not represent a common mechanism of primary endocrine resistance in the neoadjuvant setting. Therefore, ESR1m should be considered a mechanism of acquired endocrine resistance in the context of advanced disease. Further research should be conducted to identify factors associated with intrinsic resistance to ET.