Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2019

23.02.2019 | Breast Oncology

Prevention Therapy for Breast Cancer: How Can We Do Better?

verfasst von: Marie E. Wood, MD, Melissa Cuke, MSc, Isabelle Bedrosian, MD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 7/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

Despite significant advances in therapy for breast cancer, it remains the most frequently diagnosed cancer and leading cause of death among women worldwide,1 thus underscoring the need for prevention. For many women, the presence of known risk factors, coupled with the availability of proven risk-reducing agents, provides significant opportunity for prevention. The study in this issue by Flanagan and colleagues investigates the uptake of prevention therapy for women with different risk factors, including benign breast disease, family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer, mutation in a known breast cancer-associated gene, or a history of radiation therapy to the chest prior to age 30 years.2 This was a retrospective review of a prospectively accrued cohort of 1506 high-risk women at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The cohort was weighted toward benign breast disease, with 96% of subjects having a biopsy showing either atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH), or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Investigators examined several sources for clarification of prevention therapy use and/or reasons for no use and found that 24% of women had used or were using prevention therapy. They were able to identify reasons for lack of use in only 50% of non-users, finding fear of adverse effects to be the most common reason for refusal. This study has several clinically significant findings. First, low uptake of prevention therapy, and, surprisingly, low uptake for women with some form of benign breast disease. Second, lack of documentation of a discussion of prevention therapy for half of the women not taking prevention therapy. Lastly, and maybe most importantly, the majority of women who started prevention therapy completed 5 years, despite fear of adverse effects being the most common patient-related barrier to use. …
Literatur
1.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.CrossRefPubMed Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Goss PE, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(25):2381–91.CrossRefPubMed Goss PE, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(25):2381–91.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Cuzick J, et al. Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9922):1041–8.CrossRefPubMed Cuzick J, et al. Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9922):1041–8.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverman MG, et al. Association between lowering LDL-C and cardiovascular risk reduction among different therapeutic interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016;316(12):1289–97.CrossRefPubMed Silverman MG, et al. Association between lowering LDL-C and cardiovascular risk reduction among different therapeutic interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016;316(12):1289–97.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.CrossRefPubMed Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(22):1652–62.CrossRefPubMed Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(22):1652–62.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Cigler T, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial (NCIC CTG MAP.2) examining the effects of exemestane on mammographic breast density, bone density, markers of bone metabolism and serum lipid levels in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;126(2):453–61.CrossRefPubMed Cigler T, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial (NCIC CTG MAP.2) examining the effects of exemestane on mammographic breast density, bone density, markers of bone metabolism and serum lipid levels in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;126(2):453–61.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Villani J, Mortensen K. Patient-provider communication and timely receipt of preventive services. Prev Med. 2013;57(5):658–63.CrossRefPubMed Villani J, Mortensen K. Patient-provider communication and timely receipt of preventive services. Prev Med. 2013;57(5):658–63.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Smith SG, et al. Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(4):575–90.CrossRefPubMed Smith SG, et al. Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(4):575–90.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Holmberg C, et al. NRG oncology/national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project decision-making project-1 results: decision making in breast cancer risk reduction. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2017;10(11):625–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Holmberg C, et al. NRG oncology/national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project decision-making project-1 results: decision making in breast cancer risk reduction. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2017;10(11):625–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Trivedi MS, et al. Chemoprevention uptake among women with atypical hyperplasia and lobular and ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2017;10(8):434–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Trivedi MS, et al. Chemoprevention uptake among women with atypical hyperplasia and lobular and ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2017;10(8):434–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Brewster AM, et al. A system-level approach to improve the uptake of antiestrogen preventive therapy among women with atypical hyperplasia and lobular cancer in situ. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2018;11(5):295–302.CrossRefPubMed Brewster AM, et al. A system-level approach to improve the uptake of antiestrogen preventive therapy among women with atypical hyperplasia and lobular cancer in situ. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2018;11(5):295–302.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Heisey R, et al. Women’s views on chemoprevention of breast cancer: qualitative study. Can Fam Phys. 2006;52:624–5.PubMedPubMedCentral Heisey R, et al. Women’s views on chemoprevention of breast cancer: qualitative study. Can Fam Phys. 2006;52:624–5.PubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Visvanathan K, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(23):2942–62.CrossRefPubMed Visvanathan K, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(23):2942–62.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Cuzick J, et al. Preventive therapy for breast cancer: a consensus statement. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(5):496–503.CrossRefPubMed Cuzick J, et al. Preventive therapy for breast cancer: a consensus statement. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(5):496–503.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Prevention Therapy for Breast Cancer: How Can We Do Better?
verfasst von
Marie E. Wood, MD
Melissa Cuke, MSc
Isabelle Bedrosian, MD
Publikationsdatum
23.02.2019
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 7/2019
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07243-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2019

Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.