Breast Cancer

SAN ANTONIO — Researchers have likely solved the key problem with using olanzapine to prevent nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients.

Although it’s highly effective in combination with standard antiemetic therapy, olanzapine at the standard dose of 10 mg makes people too drowsy. “This has prevented its widespread use in clinical practice,” medical oncologist Jyoti Bajpai, DM, of Tata Memorial Cancer Centre, Mumbai, India, explained at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

She and her colleagues had a simple idea: Reduce the dose to 2.5 mg instead of 10 mg to prevent the problem. In a randomized trial with 267 patients that Dr. Bajpai presented at the meeting, they found that the lower dose was just as effective for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and it greatly reduced daytime somnolence.

“This merits consideration as an antiemetic regimen of choice for highly emetogenic chemotherapy.” The findings are “practice changing,” Dr. Bajpai, the lead investigator, said.

Laura Huppert, MD, a breast oncologist at the University of California, San Francisco, wasn’t surprised by the finding.

She said she and her colleagues at UCSF use a lot of olanzapine for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. Like the team in India, they have found that 2.5 mg is effective and causes far less sleepiness. Some patients require 5 mg, but the full 10-mg dose is rarely needed.

Although the approach is familiar at UCSF, Dr. Huppert said she doesn’t think a lot of oncologists outside of academic centers know that olanzapine is “really helpful” and that “you don’t need a high dose.” It’s “a very good clinical pearl” and “definitely a new message for some,” she said in an interview.

Over 90% of the subjects in the study were women with breast cancer. Other cancers included sarcoma, germ cell tumors, and head and neck cancer. Subjects were scheduled for their first chemotherapy session with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide and high-dose cisplatin.

The trial randomized 135 patients to 10 mg of olanzapine and 132 to 2.5mg for 5 days, starting the day of their session. They were also on standard triple-antiemetic therapy (selective serotonin receptor (5-HT3) antagonist, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and single-dose dexamethasone).

There were no significant differences between the two arms regarding nausea and vomiting, which patients tracked in daily journals using symptom severity and visual analog scales.

For instance, 44.7% in the 2.5-mg arm and 43.7% in the 10-mg arm reported no vomiting, no use of rescue medications, and no or only mild nausea (P = .87). Results were similar in the first 24 hours as well as on subsequent days.

There was also no difference in the proportion of patients who did have an emetic episode or needed rescue medication: 49.2% in the 2.5-mg arm versus 48.9% with 10 mg (P = .954).

Where the two groups split was on the incidence of daytime somnolence, which was reported by 65.2% of patients in the low-dose arm but 89.6% in the standard-dose group (P < .001). During the first 24 hours, 4.5% of low-dose patients reported severe somnolence versus 40% with 10-mg dosing (P < .001).

The overall incidence declined over the remaining study days, but the differences between the two groups were comparable. On day 5, for instance, 0.8% of low-dose patients but 8.1% of standard-dose patients reported severe somnolence (P = .004).

Low-dose patients also reported less appetite suppression.

The work was supported by the Progressive Ladies Welfare Association. Dr. Bajpai didn’t have any disclosures. Dr. Huppert is an adviser for AstraZeneca.

SAN ANTONIO — Researchers have likely solved the key problem with using olanzapine to prevent nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients.

Although it’s highly effective in combination with standard antiemetic therapy, olanzapine at the standard dose of 10 mg makes people too drowsy. “This has prevented its widespread use in clinical practice,” medical oncologist Jyoti Bajpai, DM, of Tata Memorial Cancer Centre, Mumbai, India, explained at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

She and her colleagues had a simple idea: Reduce the dose to 2.5 mg instead of 10 mg to prevent the problem. In a randomized trial with 267 patients that Dr. Bajpai presented at the meeting, they found that the lower dose was just as effective for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and it greatly reduced daytime somnolence.

“This merits consideration as an antiemetic regimen of choice for highly emetogenic chemotherapy.” The findings are “practice changing,” Dr. Bajpai, the lead investigator, said.

Laura Huppert, MD, a breast oncologist at the University of California, San Francisco, wasn’t surprised by the finding.

She said she and her colleagues at UCSF use a lot of olanzapine for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. Like the team in India, they have found that 2.5 mg is effective and causes far less sleepiness. Some patients require 5 mg, but the full 10-mg dose is rarely needed.

Although the approach is familiar at UCSF, Dr. Huppert said she doesn’t think a lot of oncologists outside of academic centers know that olanzapine is “really helpful” and that “you don’t need a high dose.” It’s “a very good clinical pearl” and “definitely a new message for some,” she said in an interview.

Over 90% of the subjects in the study were women with breast cancer. Other cancers included sarcoma, germ cell tumors, and head and neck cancer. Subjects were scheduled for their first chemotherapy session with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide and high-dose cisplatin.

The trial randomized 135 patients to 10 mg of olanzapine and 132 to 2.5mg for 5 days, starting the day of their session. They were also on standard triple-antiemetic therapy (selective serotonin receptor (5-HT3) antagonist, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and single-dose dexamethasone).

There were no significant differences between the two arms regarding nausea and vomiting, which patients tracked in daily journals using symptom severity and visual analog scales.

For instance, 44.7% in the 2.5-mg arm and 43.7% in the 10-mg arm reported no vomiting, no use of rescue medications, and no or only mild nausea (P = .87). Results were similar in the first 24 hours as well as on subsequent days.

There was also no difference in the proportion of patients who did have an emetic episode or needed rescue medication: 49.2% in the 2.5-mg arm versus 48.9% with 10 mg (P = .954).

Where the two groups split was on the incidence of daytime somnolence, which was reported by 65.2% of patients in the low-dose arm but 89.6% in the standard-dose group (P < .001). During the first 24 hours, 4.5% of low-dose patients reported severe somnolence versus 40% with 10-mg dosing (P < .001).

The overall incidence declined over the remaining study days, but the differences between the two groups were comparable. On day 5, for instance, 0.8% of low-dose patients but 8.1% of standard-dose patients reported severe somnolence (P = .004).

Low-dose patients also reported less appetite suppression.

The work was supported by the Progressive Ladies Welfare Association. Dr. Bajpai didn’t have any disclosures. Dr. Huppert is an adviser for AstraZeneca.

SAN ANTONIO — Researchers have likely solved the key problem with using olanzapine to prevent nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients.

Although it’s highly effective in combination with standard antiemetic therapy, olanzapine at the standard dose of 10 mg makes people too drowsy. “This has prevented its widespread use in clinical practice,” medical oncologist Jyoti Bajpai, DM, of Tata Memorial Cancer Centre, Mumbai, India, explained at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

She and her colleagues had a simple idea: Reduce the dose to 2.5 mg instead of 10 mg to prevent the problem. In a randomized trial with 267 patients that Dr. Bajpai presented at the meeting, they found that the lower dose was just as effective for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and it greatly reduced daytime somnolence.

“This merits consideration as an antiemetic regimen of choice for highly emetogenic chemotherapy.” The findings are “practice changing,” Dr. Bajpai, the lead investigator, said.

Laura Huppert, MD, a breast oncologist at the University of California, San Francisco, wasn’t surprised by the finding.

She said she and her colleagues at UCSF use a lot of olanzapine for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. Like the team in India, they have found that 2.5 mg is effective and causes far less sleepiness. Some patients require 5 mg, but the full 10-mg dose is rarely needed.

Although the approach is familiar at UCSF, Dr. Huppert said she doesn’t think a lot of oncologists outside of academic centers know that olanzapine is “really helpful” and that “you don’t need a high dose.” It’s “a very good clinical pearl” and “definitely a new message for some,” she said in an interview.

Over 90% of the subjects in the study were women with breast cancer. Other cancers included sarcoma, germ cell tumors, and head and neck cancer. Subjects were scheduled for their first chemotherapy session with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide and high-dose cisplatin.

The trial randomized 135 patients to 10 mg of olanzapine and 132 to 2.5mg for 5 days, starting the day of their session. They were also on standard triple-antiemetic therapy (selective serotonin receptor (5-HT3) antagonist, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and single-dose dexamethasone).

There were no significant differences between the two arms regarding nausea and vomiting, which patients tracked in daily journals using symptom severity and visual analog scales.

For instance, 44.7% in the 2.5-mg arm and 43.7% in the 10-mg arm reported no vomiting, no use of rescue medications, and no or only mild nausea (P = .87). Results were similar in the first 24 hours as well as on subsequent days.

There was also no difference in the proportion of patients who did have an emetic episode or needed rescue medication: 49.2% in the 2.5-mg arm versus 48.9% with 10 mg (P = .954).

Where the two groups split was on the incidence of daytime somnolence, which was reported by 65.2% of patients in the low-dose arm but 89.6% in the standard-dose group (P < .001). During the first 24 hours, 4.5% of low-dose patients reported severe somnolence versus 40% with 10-mg dosing (P < .001).

The overall incidence declined over the remaining study days, but the differences between the two groups were comparable. On day 5, for instance, 0.8% of low-dose patients but 8.1% of standard-dose patients reported severe somnolence (P = .004).

Low-dose patients also reported less appetite suppression.

The work was supported by the Progressive Ladies Welfare Association. Dr. Bajpai didn’t have any disclosures. Dr. Huppert is an adviser for AstraZeneca.

Measuring serum hormone concentrations in postmenopausal women at high risk for developing breast cancer may help identify those most likely to benefit from preventive treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, according to findings from a case-control study using data from a large breast cancer prevention trial.

In the randomized, placebo-controlled IBIS-II prevention trial of 3864 women aged 40-70 years at increased risk for developing breast cancer, treatment with the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole was associated with a 49% reduction in breast cancer incidence. At median follow-up of 131 months, breast cancer occurred in 85 (4.4%) versus 165 (8.5%) of patients in the anastrozole and placebo arms, respectively.

A preplanned case-control study involving 212 participants from the anastrozole group (72 cases and 140 controls) and 416 from the placebo group (142 cases and 274 controls), showed a significant trend toward increasing breast cancer risk with increasing estradiol-to-sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) ratio in the placebo group, but not in the anastrozole group (trend per quartile, 1.25 vs 1.06), reported Jack Cuzick, PhD, of the Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK, and colleagues.

A weaker but still significant effect was observed for the testosterone-SHBG ratio in the placebo group (trend, 1.21), but again, no such effect was seen in the anastrozole group (trend, 1.18).

A relative benefit was seen for anastrozole in estradiol concentration quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (relative risk [RR], 0.55, 0.54, and 0.56, respectively), but not in quartile 1.

The findings were published online December 6 in The Lancet Oncology.

Study participants were recruited from 153 breast cancer treatment centers across 18 countries and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 1 mg of oral anastrozole daily or placebo. For the case-control analysis, the investigators looked at the effects of baseline estradiol to SHBG ratio on the development of all breast cancers, including ductal carcinoma in situ. They also assessed the relative benefit of anastrozole versus placebo.

Case patients were those diagnosed with breast cancer after trial entry through data cutoff on October 22, 2019, and who had not used hormone replacement therapy within 3 months of trial entry or during the trial. Controls were participants without breast cancer who were randomly selected and matched according to treatment group, age, and follow-up time.

“Although the association between estradiol and breast cancer risk is well established, less is known about whether the concentrations of these hormones have an effect on the efficacy of preventive therapy with selective estrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors in women at increased risk of developing breast cancer,” the investigators noted, explaining that in the current analysis, they “tested the hypothesis that, for women with a low estradiol–SHBG ratio, anastrozole would provide little or no reduction in the risk of breast cancer.”

The results from the placebo group “confirm the increasing risk of breast cancer associated with higher estradiol and testosterone concentrations, and a decreasing risk associated with increasing SHBG concentrations in women who were not randomly allocated to receive anastrozole,” they said.

“However, to our knowledge, this is the first report of the effect of low concentrations of estradiol or testosterone on a lack of response to aromatase inhibitor treatment, either as a preventive measure or in the adjuvant setting,” they added. “These data provide support for the hypothesis that preventive therapy with an aromatase inhibitor is likely to be most effective for women with higher estradiol-to-SHBG ratios and, conversely, of little or no benefit for those with low estradiol-to-SHBG ratios.”

Thus, measurement of estradiol and SHBG concentrations might be helpful in making decisions about using inhibitors both for treatment and prevention, they continued, underscoring the importance of using assays sensitive enough to measure low estradiol concentrations in the plasma in postmenopausal women.

“We used a very sensitive liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectroscopy assay (lower limit of sensitivity of 3 pmol/L), which allowed us to accurately measure the low concentrations of estradiol and SHBG in the serum samples from our population of postmenopausal women. Wider use of this type of assay or a similar assay will be necessary to implement any of the actions suggested by this study,” they explained.

The findings “suggest a potential role for measuring estradiol, testosterone, and SHBG more widely, both in determining which individuals are at high risk and the likely response to endocrine treatment,” they concluded, noting that measuring serum hormones is inexpensive and, if used more routinely in high-risk clinics and for treatment of early breast cancer, could “substantially improve disease management.”

This study was funded by Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and DaCosta Fund. Dr. Cuzick reported receiving royalties from Cancer Research UK for commercial use of the IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzick) breast cancer risk evaluation software.

Measuring serum hormone concentrations in postmenopausal women at high risk for developing breast cancer may help identify those most likely to benefit from preventive treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, according to findings from a case-control study using data from a large breast cancer prevention trial.

In the randomized, placebo-controlled IBIS-II prevention trial of 3864 women aged 40-70 years at increased risk for developing breast cancer, treatment with the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole was associated with a 49% reduction in breast cancer incidence. At median follow-up of 131 months, breast cancer occurred in 85 (4.4%) versus 165 (8.5%) of patients in the anastrozole and placebo arms, respectively.

A preplanned case-control study involving 212 participants from the anastrozole group (72 cases and 140 controls) and 416 from the placebo group (142 cases and 274 controls), showed a significant trend toward increasing breast cancer risk with increasing estradiol-to-sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) ratio in the placebo group, but not in the anastrozole group (trend per quartile, 1.25 vs 1.06), reported Jack Cuzick, PhD, of the Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK, and colleagues.

A weaker but still significant effect was observed for the testosterone-SHBG ratio in the placebo group (trend, 1.21), but again, no such effect was seen in the anastrozole group (trend, 1.18).

A relative benefit was seen for anastrozole in estradiol concentration quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (relative risk [RR], 0.55, 0.54, and 0.56, respectively), but not in quartile 1.

The findings were published online December 6 in The Lancet Oncology.

Study participants were recruited from 153 breast cancer treatment centers across 18 countries and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 1 mg of oral anastrozole daily or placebo. For the case-control analysis, the investigators looked at the effects of baseline estradiol to SHBG ratio on the development of all breast cancers, including ductal carcinoma in situ. They also assessed the relative benefit of anastrozole versus placebo.

Case patients were those diagnosed with breast cancer after trial entry through data cutoff on October 22, 2019, and who had not used hormone replacement therapy within 3 months of trial entry or during the trial. Controls were participants without breast cancer who were randomly selected and matched according to treatment group, age, and follow-up time.

“Although the association between estradiol and breast cancer risk is well established, less is known about whether the concentrations of these hormones have an effect on the efficacy of preventive therapy with selective estrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors in women at increased risk of developing breast cancer,” the investigators noted, explaining that in the current analysis, they “tested the hypothesis that, for women with a low estradiol–SHBG ratio, anastrozole would provide little or no reduction in the risk of breast cancer.”

The results from the placebo group “confirm the increasing risk of breast cancer associated with higher estradiol and testosterone concentrations, and a decreasing risk associated with increasing SHBG concentrations in women who were not randomly allocated to receive anastrozole,” they said.

“However, to our knowledge, this is the first report of the effect of low concentrations of estradiol or testosterone on a lack of response to aromatase inhibitor treatment, either as a preventive measure or in the adjuvant setting,” they added. “These data provide support for the hypothesis that preventive therapy with an aromatase inhibitor is likely to be most effective for women with higher estradiol-to-SHBG ratios and, conversely, of little or no benefit for those with low estradiol-to-SHBG ratios.”

Thus, measurement of estradiol and SHBG concentrations might be helpful in making decisions about using inhibitors both for treatment and prevention, they continued, underscoring the importance of using assays sensitive enough to measure low estradiol concentrations in the plasma in postmenopausal women.

“We used a very sensitive liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectroscopy assay (lower limit of sensitivity of 3 pmol/L), which allowed us to accurately measure the low concentrations of estradiol and SHBG in the serum samples from our population of postmenopausal women. Wider use of this type of assay or a similar assay will be necessary to implement any of the actions suggested by this study,” they explained.

The findings “suggest a potential role for measuring estradiol, testosterone, and SHBG more widely, both in determining which individuals are at high risk and the likely response to endocrine treatment,” they concluded, noting that measuring serum hormones is inexpensive and, if used more routinely in high-risk clinics and for treatment of early breast cancer, could “substantially improve disease management.”

This study was funded by Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and DaCosta Fund. Dr. Cuzick reported receiving royalties from Cancer Research UK for commercial use of the IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzick) breast cancer risk evaluation software.

Measuring serum hormone concentrations in postmenopausal women at high risk for developing breast cancer may help identify those most likely to benefit from preventive treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, according to findings from a case-control study using data from a large breast cancer prevention trial.

In the randomized, placebo-controlled IBIS-II prevention trial of 3864 women aged 40-70 years at increased risk for developing breast cancer, treatment with the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole was associated with a 49% reduction in breast cancer incidence. At median follow-up of 131 months, breast cancer occurred in 85 (4.4%) versus 165 (8.5%) of patients in the anastrozole and placebo arms, respectively.

A preplanned case-control study involving 212 participants from the anastrozole group (72 cases and 140 controls) and 416 from the placebo group (142 cases and 274 controls), showed a significant trend toward increasing breast cancer risk with increasing estradiol-to-sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) ratio in the placebo group, but not in the anastrozole group (trend per quartile, 1.25 vs 1.06), reported Jack Cuzick, PhD, of the Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK, and colleagues.

A weaker but still significant effect was observed for the testosterone-SHBG ratio in the placebo group (trend, 1.21), but again, no such effect was seen in the anastrozole group (trend, 1.18).

A relative benefit was seen for anastrozole in estradiol concentration quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (relative risk [RR], 0.55, 0.54, and 0.56, respectively), but not in quartile 1.

The findings were published online December 6 in The Lancet Oncology.

Study participants were recruited from 153 breast cancer treatment centers across 18 countries and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 1 mg of oral anastrozole daily or placebo. For the case-control analysis, the investigators looked at the effects of baseline estradiol to SHBG ratio on the development of all breast cancers, including ductal carcinoma in situ. They also assessed the relative benefit of anastrozole versus placebo.

Case patients were those diagnosed with breast cancer after trial entry through data cutoff on October 22, 2019, and who had not used hormone replacement therapy within 3 months of trial entry or during the trial. Controls were participants without breast cancer who were randomly selected and matched according to treatment group, age, and follow-up time.

“Although the association between estradiol and breast cancer risk is well established, less is known about whether the concentrations of these hormones have an effect on the efficacy of preventive therapy with selective estrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors in women at increased risk of developing breast cancer,” the investigators noted, explaining that in the current analysis, they “tested the hypothesis that, for women with a low estradiol–SHBG ratio, anastrozole would provide little or no reduction in the risk of breast cancer.”

The results from the placebo group “confirm the increasing risk of breast cancer associated with higher estradiol and testosterone concentrations, and a decreasing risk associated with increasing SHBG concentrations in women who were not randomly allocated to receive anastrozole,” they said.

“However, to our knowledge, this is the first report of the effect of low concentrations of estradiol or testosterone on a lack of response to aromatase inhibitor treatment, either as a preventive measure or in the adjuvant setting,” they added. “These data provide support for the hypothesis that preventive therapy with an aromatase inhibitor is likely to be most effective for women with higher estradiol-to-SHBG ratios and, conversely, of little or no benefit for those with low estradiol-to-SHBG ratios.”

Thus, measurement of estradiol and SHBG concentrations might be helpful in making decisions about using inhibitors both for treatment and prevention, they continued, underscoring the importance of using assays sensitive enough to measure low estradiol concentrations in the plasma in postmenopausal women.

“We used a very sensitive liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectroscopy assay (lower limit of sensitivity of 3 pmol/L), which allowed us to accurately measure the low concentrations of estradiol and SHBG in the serum samples from our population of postmenopausal women. Wider use of this type of assay or a similar assay will be necessary to implement any of the actions suggested by this study,” they explained.

The findings “suggest a potential role for measuring estradiol, testosterone, and SHBG more widely, both in determining which individuals are at high risk and the likely response to endocrine treatment,” they concluded, noting that measuring serum hormones is inexpensive and, if used more routinely in high-risk clinics and for treatment of early breast cancer, could “substantially improve disease management.”

This study was funded by Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and DaCosta Fund. Dr. Cuzick reported receiving royalties from Cancer Research UK for commercial use of the IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzick) breast cancer risk evaluation software.

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy failed to show long-term survival benefits in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) invasive lobular breast cancer (BC) treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive chemotherapy had comparable recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 0.63-2.31), breast cancer-specific survival (HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.60-2.58), and overall survival (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.56-1.66) outcomes.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective cohort study including 520 women with ER+/HER2− invasive lobular BC treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy who had an indication for chemotherapy, 379 of whom received chemotherapy.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. JWM Martens declared receiving grants from and serving as a consultant for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Öztekin S et al. The effect of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy on long-term survival outcomes in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy: A retrospective cohort study. Cancer. 2023 (Nov 20). doi: 10.1002/cncr.35125

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy failed to show long-term survival benefits in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) invasive lobular breast cancer (BC) treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive chemotherapy had comparable recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 0.63-2.31), breast cancer-specific survival (HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.60-2.58), and overall survival (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.56-1.66) outcomes.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective cohort study including 520 women with ER+/HER2− invasive lobular BC treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy who had an indication for chemotherapy, 379 of whom received chemotherapy.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. JWM Martens declared receiving grants from and serving as a consultant for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Öztekin S et al. The effect of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy on long-term survival outcomes in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy: A retrospective cohort study. Cancer. 2023 (Nov 20). doi: 10.1002/cncr.35125

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy failed to show long-term survival benefits in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) invasive lobular breast cancer (BC) treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive chemotherapy had comparable recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 0.63-2.31), breast cancer-specific survival (HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.60-2.58), and overall survival (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.56-1.66) outcomes.

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective cohort study including 520 women with ER+/HER2− invasive lobular BC treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy who had an indication for chemotherapy, 379 of whom received chemotherapy.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. JWM Martens declared receiving grants from and serving as a consultant for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Öztekin S et al. The effect of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy on long-term survival outcomes in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy: A retrospective cohort study. Cancer. 2023 (Nov 20). doi: 10.1002/cncr.35125

Key clinical point: The combination of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (nIO) and chemotherapy led to significant improvements in survival outcomes and should be administered as the standard treatment in patients with stages II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive nIO had ~40% lower odds of disease recurrence or death (event-free survival: hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; P < .001) or only death (overall survival: HR 0.62; P < 0.001).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials including patients with stages II-III TNBC who were randomly assigned to receive either chemotherapy plus nIO or treatment without nIO.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. Some authors declared serving in consulting or advisory roles, receiving educational or financial support, research or travel grant, research funding, speaker fees, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Cunha MT et al. Long-term outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: An extracted individual patient data and trial-level meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2023 (Nov 27). doi: 10.1038/s41416-023-02501-w

Key clinical point: The combination of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (nIO) and chemotherapy led to significant improvements in survival outcomes and should be administered as the standard treatment in patients with stages II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive nIO had ~40% lower odds of disease recurrence or death (event-free survival: hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; P < .001) or only death (overall survival: HR 0.62; P < 0.001).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials including patients with stages II-III TNBC who were randomly assigned to receive either chemotherapy plus nIO or treatment without nIO.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. Some authors declared serving in consulting or advisory roles, receiving educational or financial support, research or travel grant, research funding, speaker fees, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Cunha MT et al. Long-term outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: An extracted individual patient data and trial-level meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2023 (Nov 27). doi: 10.1038/s41416-023-02501-w

Key clinical point: The combination of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (nIO) and chemotherapy led to significant improvements in survival outcomes and should be administered as the standard treatment in patients with stages II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: Patients who did vs did not receive nIO had ~40% lower odds of disease recurrence or death (event-free survival: hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; P < .001) or only death (overall survival: HR 0.62; P < 0.001).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials including patients with stages II-III TNBC who were randomly assigned to receive either chemotherapy plus nIO or treatment without nIO.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. Some authors declared serving in consulting or advisory roles, receiving educational or financial support, research or travel grant, research funding, speaker fees, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Cunha MT et al. Long-term outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: An extracted individual patient data and trial-level meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2023 (Nov 27). doi: 10.1038/s41416-023-02501-w

Key clinical point: Taxane + anthracycline-based chemotherapy (ATAX) vs taxane-based chemotherapy (TAX) did not increase the risk for major cardiovascular adverse events in older patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or affect survival outcomes in those who had a cardiac event.

Major finding: The risks for acute myocardial infarction, potentially fatal arrhythmia, and cerebral vascular accident did not increase (all P > .1) and the risk for subsequent heart failure was lower in patients receiving ATAX vs TAX (odds ratio 0.63; P < .01). In patients who experienced a cardiac event, ATAX vs TAX did not worsen the survival outcomes.

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and included 2215 older women (age ≥ 66 years) diagnosed with early-stage TNBC who received ATAX (39.78%) or TAX (60.26%) in an adjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Women’s Cancer Developmental Therapeutics Program, University of Colorado Cancer Center. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Roy S et al. Major cardiovascular adverse events in older adults with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant taxane  + anthracycline versus taxane-based chemotherapy regimens: A SEER-Medicare study. Eur J Cancer. 2023;196:113426 (Nov 11). doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113426

Key clinical point: Taxane + anthracycline-based chemotherapy (ATAX) vs taxane-based chemotherapy (TAX) did not increase the risk for major cardiovascular adverse events in older patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or affect survival outcomes in those who had a cardiac event.

Major finding: The risks for acute myocardial infarction, potentially fatal arrhythmia, and cerebral vascular accident did not increase (all P > .1) and the risk for subsequent heart failure was lower in patients receiving ATAX vs TAX (odds ratio 0.63; P < .01). In patients who experienced a cardiac event, ATAX vs TAX did not worsen the survival outcomes.

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and included 2215 older women (age ≥ 66 years) diagnosed with early-stage TNBC who received ATAX (39.78%) or TAX (60.26%) in an adjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Women’s Cancer Developmental Therapeutics Program, University of Colorado Cancer Center. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Roy S et al. Major cardiovascular adverse events in older adults with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant taxane  + anthracycline versus taxane-based chemotherapy regimens: A SEER-Medicare study. Eur J Cancer. 2023;196:113426 (Nov 11). doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113426

Key clinical point: Taxane + anthracycline-based chemotherapy (ATAX) vs taxane-based chemotherapy (TAX) did not increase the risk for major cardiovascular adverse events in older patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or affect survival outcomes in those who had a cardiac event.

Major finding: The risks for acute myocardial infarction, potentially fatal arrhythmia, and cerebral vascular accident did not increase (all P > .1) and the risk for subsequent heart failure was lower in patients receiving ATAX vs TAX (odds ratio 0.63; P < .01). In patients who experienced a cardiac event, ATAX vs TAX did not worsen the survival outcomes.

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and included 2215 older women (age ≥ 66 years) diagnosed with early-stage TNBC who received ATAX (39.78%) or TAX (60.26%) in an adjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Women’s Cancer Developmental Therapeutics Program, University of Colorado Cancer Center. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Roy S et al. Major cardiovascular adverse events in older adults with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant taxane  + anthracycline versus taxane-based chemotherapy regimens: A SEER-Medicare study. Eur J Cancer. 2023;196:113426 (Nov 11). doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113426

Key clinical point: Tumor involvement within the axillary soft tissue extending beyond the positive lymph node (LN+) and extracapsular extension (ECE) should be pathologically evaluated in patients with LN+ breast cancer (BC) as it is a significant predictor of worsened prognostic outcomes for this population.

Major finding: Axillary soft tissue involvement is significantly associated with worsened distant failure (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6; P < .001), locoregional failure (HR 2.3; P < .001), and axillary failure (HR 3.3; P = .003). The delivery of regional lymph node radiation improved the locoregional tumor outcomes in patients with axillary soft tissue involvement, ECE, or both (HR 0.5; P = .03).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective review including 2162 patients with LN+ invasive BC tumors.

Disclosures: One author declared receiving financial support for this study. Two authors declared being employees of, receiving research funding, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Naoum GE, Oladero O, et al. Pathological exploration of the axillary soft tissue microenvironment and its impact on axillary management and breast cancer outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2023 (Nov 15). doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01009

Key clinical point: Tumor involvement within the axillary soft tissue extending beyond the positive lymph node (LN+) and extracapsular extension (ECE) should be pathologically evaluated in patients with LN+ breast cancer (BC) as it is a significant predictor of worsened prognostic outcomes for this population.

Major finding: Axillary soft tissue involvement is significantly associated with worsened distant failure (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6; P < .001), locoregional failure (HR 2.3; P < .001), and axillary failure (HR 3.3; P = .003). The delivery of regional lymph node radiation improved the locoregional tumor outcomes in patients with axillary soft tissue involvement, ECE, or both (HR 0.5; P = .03).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective review including 2162 patients with LN+ invasive BC tumors.

Disclosures: One author declared receiving financial support for this study. Two authors declared being employees of, receiving research funding, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Naoum GE, Oladero O, et al. Pathological exploration of the axillary soft tissue microenvironment and its impact on axillary management and breast cancer outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2023 (Nov 15). doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01009

Key clinical point: Tumor involvement within the axillary soft tissue extending beyond the positive lymph node (LN+) and extracapsular extension (ECE) should be pathologically evaluated in patients with LN+ breast cancer (BC) as it is a significant predictor of worsened prognostic outcomes for this population.

Major finding: Axillary soft tissue involvement is significantly associated with worsened distant failure (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6; P < .001), locoregional failure (HR 2.3; P < .001), and axillary failure (HR 3.3; P = .003). The delivery of regional lymph node radiation improved the locoregional tumor outcomes in patients with axillary soft tissue involvement, ECE, or both (HR 0.5; P = .03).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective review including 2162 patients with LN+ invasive BC tumors.

Disclosures: One author declared receiving financial support for this study. Two authors declared being employees of, receiving research funding, or honoraria from, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Naoum GE, Oladero O, et al. Pathological exploration of the axillary soft tissue microenvironment and its impact on axillary management and breast cancer outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2023 (Nov 15). doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01009

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea (CRA) was common in premenopausal women with stages I-III breast cancer (BC), particularly in those who were older, experienced hot flashes, or received adjuvant tamoxifen.

Major finding: The majority (57.1%) of premenopausal patients with BC reported having persistent CRA, with the likelihood increasing in those who were age ≥ 35 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 35-39 years: 1.84, 40-44 years: 5.90, ≥45 years: 21.29; all P < .001), experienced hot flashes at diagnosis (aOR 1.83; P = .01), or received adjuvant tamoxifen (aOR 1.97; P < .001).

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Cancer Toxicities Study and included 1636 premenopausal women with stages I-III BC who were age < 50 years and received chemotherapy but not ovarian function suppressants.

Disclosures: MA Franzoi, M Lambertini, and A Di Meglio received grants or awards for this study. Some authors declared receiving personal fees, speaking fees, grants, or honoraria from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Kabirian R et al. Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea and quality of life among premenopausal women with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343910 (Nov 16). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43910

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea (CRA) was common in premenopausal women with stages I-III breast cancer (BC), particularly in those who were older, experienced hot flashes, or received adjuvant tamoxifen.

Major finding: The majority (57.1%) of premenopausal patients with BC reported having persistent CRA, with the likelihood increasing in those who were age ≥ 35 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 35-39 years: 1.84, 40-44 years: 5.90, ≥45 years: 21.29; all P < .001), experienced hot flashes at diagnosis (aOR 1.83; P = .01), or received adjuvant tamoxifen (aOR 1.97; P < .001).

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Cancer Toxicities Study and included 1636 premenopausal women with stages I-III BC who were age < 50 years and received chemotherapy but not ovarian function suppressants.

Disclosures: MA Franzoi, M Lambertini, and A Di Meglio received grants or awards for this study. Some authors declared receiving personal fees, speaking fees, grants, or honoraria from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Kabirian R et al. Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea and quality of life among premenopausal women with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343910 (Nov 16). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43910

Key clinical point: Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea (CRA) was common in premenopausal women with stages I-III breast cancer (BC), particularly in those who were older, experienced hot flashes, or received adjuvant tamoxifen.

Major finding: The majority (57.1%) of premenopausal patients with BC reported having persistent CRA, with the likelihood increasing in those who were age ≥ 35 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 35-39 years: 1.84, 40-44 years: 5.90, ≥45 years: 21.29; all P < .001), experienced hot flashes at diagnosis (aOR 1.83; P = .01), or received adjuvant tamoxifen (aOR 1.97; P < .001).

Study details: This study analyzed the data from the Cancer Toxicities Study and included 1636 premenopausal women with stages I-III BC who were age < 50 years and received chemotherapy but not ovarian function suppressants.

Disclosures: MA Franzoi, M Lambertini, and A Di Meglio received grants or awards for this study. Some authors declared receiving personal fees, speaking fees, grants, or honoraria from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Kabirian R et al. Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea and quality of life among premenopausal women with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343910 (Nov 16). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43910

Key clinical point: Neoadjuvant carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab showed encouraging pathological complete response (pCR) rates and 3-year event-free survival (EFS) outcomes and had a manageable safety profile in patients with stages I-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: The overall pCR rate was 58% (95% CI 48%-67%), with the estimated 3-year EFS rates being 86% (95% CI 77%-95%) in all patients and 98% (95% CI 95%-100%) in patients who achieved pCR. Diarrhea (4.3%), anemia (3.5%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (2.6%) were the most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, and one study-related death was reported.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 2 NeoPACT trial including 115 female patients with stages I-III TNBC who received carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab in a neoadjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the University of Kansas Cancer Center and others. The lead author and other authors declared receiving research funding, royalties, personal, consulting or speaking fees from, being advisory board members of, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharma P et al. Clinical and biomarker findings of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and carboplatin plus docetaxel in triple-negative breast cancer: NeoPACT phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023 (Nov 22). doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.5033

Key clinical point: Neoadjuvant carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab showed encouraging pathological complete response (pCR) rates and 3-year event-free survival (EFS) outcomes and had a manageable safety profile in patients with stages I-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: The overall pCR rate was 58% (95% CI 48%-67%), with the estimated 3-year EFS rates being 86% (95% CI 77%-95%) in all patients and 98% (95% CI 95%-100%) in patients who achieved pCR. Diarrhea (4.3%), anemia (3.5%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (2.6%) were the most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, and one study-related death was reported.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 2 NeoPACT trial including 115 female patients with stages I-III TNBC who received carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab in a neoadjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the University of Kansas Cancer Center and others. The lead author and other authors declared receiving research funding, royalties, personal, consulting or speaking fees from, being advisory board members of, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharma P et al. Clinical and biomarker findings of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and carboplatin plus docetaxel in triple-negative breast cancer: NeoPACT phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023 (Nov 22). doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.5033

Key clinical point: Neoadjuvant carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab showed encouraging pathological complete response (pCR) rates and 3-year event-free survival (EFS) outcomes and had a manageable safety profile in patients with stages I-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Major finding: The overall pCR rate was 58% (95% CI 48%-67%), with the estimated 3-year EFS rates being 86% (95% CI 77%-95%) in all patients and 98% (95% CI 95%-100%) in patients who achieved pCR. Diarrhea (4.3%), anemia (3.5%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (2.6%) were the most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, and one study-related death was reported.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 2 NeoPACT trial including 115 female patients with stages I-III TNBC who received carboplatin and docetaxel + pembrolizumab in a neoadjuvant setting.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the University of Kansas Cancer Center and others. The lead author and other authors declared receiving research funding, royalties, personal, consulting or speaking fees from, being advisory board members of, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharma P et al. Clinical and biomarker findings of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and carboplatin plus docetaxel in triple-negative breast cancer: NeoPACT phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023 (Nov 22). doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.5033

Key clinical point: Women with apparently unifocal, non–triple-negative breast cancer (BC) who underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and did not have any occult malignancy may safely forgo radiation therapy.

Major finding: Preoperative MRI detected malignant occult lesions in 11% of patients with BC. At 5 years, the ipsilateral invasive recurrence rate was very low (1.0%; upper 95% CI 5.4%) in patients with no occult malignancy who did not receive adjuvant radiotherapy.

Study details: Findings are from the prospective 2-arm PROSPECT study that included 443 patients with non–triple-negative, clinical stage T1N0, apparently unifocal BC who underwent MRI, of whom 201 patients underwent breast-conserving surgery without radiotherapy and 242 women were deemed ineligible for radiotherapy omission.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Breast Cancer Trials, Australia, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mann GB et al. Postoperative radiotherapy omission in selected patients with early breast cancer following preoperative breast MRI (PROSPECT): Primary results of a prospective two-arm study. Lancet. 2023 (Dec 5). doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02476-5

Key clinical point: Women with apparently unifocal, non–triple-negative breast cancer (BC) who underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and did not have any occult malignancy may safely forgo radiation therapy.

Major finding: Preoperative MRI detected malignant occult lesions in 11% of patients with BC. At 5 years, the ipsilateral invasive recurrence rate was very low (1.0%; upper 95% CI 5.4%) in patients with no occult malignancy who did not receive adjuvant radiotherapy.

Study details: Findings are from the prospective 2-arm PROSPECT study that included 443 patients with non–triple-negative, clinical stage T1N0, apparently unifocal BC who underwent MRI, of whom 201 patients underwent breast-conserving surgery without radiotherapy and 242 women were deemed ineligible for radiotherapy omission.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Breast Cancer Trials, Australia, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mann GB et al. Postoperative radiotherapy omission in selected patients with early breast cancer following preoperative breast MRI (PROSPECT): Primary results of a prospective two-arm study. Lancet. 2023 (Dec 5). doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02476-5

Key clinical point: Women with apparently unifocal, non–triple-negative breast cancer (BC) who underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and did not have any occult malignancy may safely forgo radiation therapy.

Major finding: Preoperative MRI detected malignant occult lesions in 11% of patients with BC. At 5 years, the ipsilateral invasive recurrence rate was very low (1.0%; upper 95% CI 5.4%) in patients with no occult malignancy who did not receive adjuvant radiotherapy.

Study details: Findings are from the prospective 2-arm PROSPECT study that included 443 patients with non–triple-negative, clinical stage T1N0, apparently unifocal BC who underwent MRI, of whom 201 patients underwent breast-conserving surgery without radiotherapy and 242 women were deemed ineligible for radiotherapy omission.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Breast Cancer Trials, Australia, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mann GB et al. Postoperative radiotherapy omission in selected patients with early breast cancer following preoperative breast MRI (PROSPECT): Primary results of a prospective two-arm study. Lancet. 2023 (Dec 5). doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02476-5

Key clinical point: The post-diagnostic use of statins lowered the risk for mortality in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer (BC) only in case of a subsequent lowering of serum cholesterol levels.

Major finding: Compared with patients who did not receive statins, the risk for BC-specific mortality was significantly reduced in those who received statins after BC diagnosis and reported a subsequent reduction in the median total cholesterol level (adjusted hazard ratio 0.49; P = .001). No mortality-risk reduction was observed in patients whose cholesterol levels did not decrease after the post-diagnostic initiation of statins (P = .30).

Study details: This retrospective population-based cohort study included 13,378 patients with newly diagnosed invasive BC, of whom 980 patients initiated statins after BC diagnosis.

Disclosures: This study was supported by research funds and a grant from the Pirkanmaa Hospital District and Duodecim, Finland, respectively. Two authors declared receiving grants or personal fees from various sources, including the Pirkanmaa Hospital District. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Murto MO et al. Statin use, cholesterol level, and mortality among females with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343861 (Nov 17). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43861

Key clinical point: The post-diagnostic use of statins lowered the risk for mortality in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer (BC) only in case of a subsequent lowering of serum cholesterol levels.

Major finding: Compared with patients who did not receive statins, the risk for BC-specific mortality was significantly reduced in those who received statins after BC diagnosis and reported a subsequent reduction in the median total cholesterol level (adjusted hazard ratio 0.49; P = .001). No mortality-risk reduction was observed in patients whose cholesterol levels did not decrease after the post-diagnostic initiation of statins (P = .30).

Study details: This retrospective population-based cohort study included 13,378 patients with newly diagnosed invasive BC, of whom 980 patients initiated statins after BC diagnosis.

Disclosures: This study was supported by research funds and a grant from the Pirkanmaa Hospital District and Duodecim, Finland, respectively. Two authors declared receiving grants or personal fees from various sources, including the Pirkanmaa Hospital District. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Murto MO et al. Statin use, cholesterol level, and mortality among females with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343861 (Nov 17). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43861

Key clinical point: The post-diagnostic use of statins lowered the risk for mortality in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer (BC) only in case of a subsequent lowering of serum cholesterol levels.

Major finding: Compared with patients who did not receive statins, the risk for BC-specific mortality was significantly reduced in those who received statins after BC diagnosis and reported a subsequent reduction in the median total cholesterol level (adjusted hazard ratio 0.49; P = .001). No mortality-risk reduction was observed in patients whose cholesterol levels did not decrease after the post-diagnostic initiation of statins (P = .30).

Study details: This retrospective population-based cohort study included 13,378 patients with newly diagnosed invasive BC, of whom 980 patients initiated statins after BC diagnosis.

Disclosures: This study was supported by research funds and a grant from the Pirkanmaa Hospital District and Duodecim, Finland, respectively. Two authors declared receiving grants or personal fees from various sources, including the Pirkanmaa Hospital District. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Murto MO et al. Statin use, cholesterol level, and mortality among females with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2343861 (Nov 17). doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43861