Thursday, August 23, 2018

Good News for Women With Breast Cancer: Many Don’t Need Chemo

Image
Bari Brooks of White House, Tenn., received four chemotherapy treatments, six weeks of radiation and five years of hormone-blocking therapy for breast cancer. A new study suggests she might not have needed the chemotherapy. CreditWilliam DeShazer for The New York Times
Many women with early-stage breast cancer who would receive chemotherapy under current standards do not actually need it, according to a major international study that is expected to quickly change medical treatment.
“We can spare thousands and thousands of women from getting toxic treatment that really wouldn’t benefit them,” said Dr. Ingrid A. Mayer, from Vanderbilt University Medical Center, an author of the study. “This is very powerful. It really changes the standard of care.”
The study found that gene tests on tumor samples were able to identify women who could safely skip chemotherapy and take only a drug that blocks the hormone estrogen or stops the body from making it. The hormone-blocking drug tamoxifen and related medicines, called endocrine therapy, have become an essential part of treatment for most women because they lower the risks of recurrence, new breast tumors and death from the disease.
“I think this is a very significant advance,” said Dr. Larry Norton, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. He is not an author of the study, but his hospital participated. “I’ll be able to look people in the eye and say, ‘We analyzed your tumor, you have a really good prognosis and you actually don’t need chemotherapy.’ That’s a nice thing to be able to say to somebody.”
The findings apply to about 60,000 women a year in the United States, according to Dr. Joseph A. Sparano of Montefiore Medical Center in New York, the leader of the study.
“The results indicate that now we can spare chemotherapy in about 70 percent of patients who would be potential candidates for it based on clinical features,” Dr. Sparano said.
But Dr. Sparano and Dr. Mayer added a note of caution: The data indicated that some women 50 and younger might benefit from chemo even if gene-test results suggested otherwise. It is not clear why. But those women require especially careful consultation, they said. (Most cases of breast cancer occur in older women: The median age at diagnosis in the United States is 62.)
The study, called TAILORx, is being published by The New England Journal of Medicine and was to be presented on Sunday at a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Chicago. The study began in 2006 and was paid for by the United States and Canadian governments and philanthropic groups. Genomic Health, the company that makes the gene test, helped pay after 2016.
This year, about 260,000 new cases of breast cancer are expected in women in the United States, and 41,000 deaths. Globally, the most recent figures are from 2012, when there were 1.7 million new cases and more than half-a-million deaths.
Chemotherapy can save lives, but has serious risks that make it important to avoid treatment if it is not needed. In addition to the hair loss and nausea that patients dread, chemo can cause heart and nerve damage, leave patients vulnerable to infection and increase the risk of leukemia later in life. TAILORx is part of a wider effort to fine-tune treatments and spare patients from harsh side effects whenever possible.
Endocrine therapy also has side effects, which can include hot flashes and other symptoms of menopause, weight gain and pain in joints and muscles. Tamoxifen can increase the risk of cancer of the uterus.
Patients affected by the new findings include women who, like most in the study, have early-stage breast tumors measuring one to five centimeters that have not spread to lymph nodes; are sensitive to estrogen; test negative for a protein called HER2; and have a score of 11 to 25 on a widely used test that gauges the activity of a panel of genes involved in cancer recurrence.
The gene test, called Oncotype DX Breast Cancer Assay, is the focus of the study. Other gene assays exist, but this one is the most widely used in the United States. It is performed on tumor samples after surgery, to help determine whether chemo would help. The test is generally done for early-stage disease, not more advanced tumors that clearly need chemo because they have spread to lymph nodes or beyond.
The test, available since 2004, gives scores from 0 to 100. It costs about $3,000, and insurance usually covers it. Previous research has shown that scores 10 and under do not call for chemotherapy, and scores over 25 do.
But most women who are eligible for the test have scores from 11 to 25, which are considered intermediate.
Image
Ms. Brooks, who is an avid barrel racer, on her horse Howle. “This was a situation where I could also contribute,” she said of her participation in the study. “I was honored and grateful to be part of it.”CreditWilliam DeShazer for The New York Times
“This has been one of the large unanswered questions in breast cancer management in recent times, what to do with patients with intermediate scores,” Dr. Norton said. “What to do has been totally unknown.” He added, “A lot of patients in that range are getting chemo.”
Dr. Sparano said many patients have been receiving chemo because in 2000 the National Cancer Institute recommended it for most women, even those whose disease had not spread to lymph nodes, based on studies showing it could prevent the cancer from recurring elsewhere in the body and becoming incurable.
“Recurrences were being prevented, and lives prolonged,” Dr. Sparano said. “But we were probably overtreating a lot of these women. For every 100 women we were treating, we were probably preventing about 4 distant recurrences.”
Dr. Mayer said, “We couldn’t figure out who we really needed to treat.”
The availability of the gene test in 2004 helped researchers sort out women with very high or very low risk.
“But we really didn’t know what to do with women in the middle,” Dr. Mayer said. “Some seemed to benefit and some didn’t. We were back to square zero, safe rather than sorry, giving chemo to a lot who didn’t need it.”
Data began to emerge suggesting that women in the middle were not being helped by chemo, and many doctors began recommending it less often. But a definitive study was needed, which is how TAILORx came about.
The study began in 2006 and eventually included 10,253 women ages 18 to 75. Of the 9,719 patients with complete follow-up information, 70 percent had scores of 11 to 25 on the gene test. They had surgery and radiation, and then were assigned at random to receive either endocrine therapy alone, or endocrine therapy plus chemo. The median follow-up was more than seven years.
Over time, the two groups fared equally well. Chemo had no advantage. After nine years, 93.9 percent were still alive in the endocrine-only group, versus 93.8 percent in those who also got chemo. In the endocrine group, 83.3 percent were free of invasive disease, compared with 84.3 percent who got both treatments. There were no significant differences.
But the researchers wrote that the chemotherapy benefit varied with the combination of recurrence score and age, “with some benefit of chemotherapy found in women 50 years of age or younger with a recurrence score of 16 to 25.”
Bari Brooks, 58, a patient of Dr. Mayer’s from White House, Tenn., learned from a mammogram that she had breast cancer in 2009 when she was 49. Dr. Mayer told her she was a candidate for chemo, and also for the study — in which she might or might not get chemo.
Could she handle the risk of missing out on a treatment that might save her life? Or the risk of side effects that might be needless?
“It wasn’t even a decision I had to think about,” said Ms. Brooks, who works in human relations for Vanderbilt University. “It was yes, I want to do it.” She added: “You realize how insignificant everything is. Money, it doesn’t matter how much you have. Work, what projects you have, it doesn’t matter. What have I contributed in my life and what do I want to contribute? This was a situation where I could also contribute. I was honored and grateful to be part of it.”
She decided that if she was assigned to chemo, “I would approach it that I was being cleansed rather than poisoned.”
She did land in the group that got both chemo and endocrine therapy. Did the chemo help? Maybe, maybe not. She has no regrets. And no evidence of cancer.
Dr. Mayer said that Ms. Brooks’ philosophical attitude was not unusual, and that women who signed up for studies understood they were taking a leap of faith and might wind up getting the ‘wrong’ or less desirable treatment.
“They’re grateful that they helped to advance knowledge for other women,” Dr. Mayer said. “I never underestimate how nice and how altruistic people can be. Women look out for each other.”
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Many More Can Skip Chemo for Breast CancerOrder Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Thursday, June 21, 2018

How breast cancer affected my body and sex life




How breast cancer affected my body and sex life Darlaine HoneyThursday 21 Jun 2018 7:00 am Share this article via facebookShare this article via twitterShare this article via google 

Having breast cancer shattered my self-esteem  I was diagnosed with breast cancer in October 2016 after a routine screening appointment. When they told me, I felt strangely calm. I just wanted the cancer gone and to get on with my life. 

Breast cancer diagnosis stops the vast majority of women from wanting sex My partner of four and a half years, Bernie*, came with me on the day of my diagnosis. He said to the nurse, ‘don’t worry, I’ll look after her’. In the beginning, I was so caught up in the whirlwind of appointments and surgeries that it was hard to take anything in. 

Then I noticed after the first of my five operations that Bernie stopped giving me any sexual attention. At first, I thought it was because he was scared to hurt me, but it just continued. In fact, I don’t think we ever had sex again. 

By January 2017, I was finding it increasingly hard to manage emotionally. I was working full time, commuting for four hours a day and going to endless hospital appointments – it was overwhelming. 

I gradually felt the need to be on my own for a bit, so I temporarily moved out of our home into a bedsit. But we still spent some evenings and all the weekends together and we spoke constantly – we were still very much a couple. 

So it was awful to find out he was on a dating site the very same day I had my final operation, a double mastectomy. After the surgery, he was outwardly very supportive – he helped me with my dressings and generally took care of me, so the discovery was a real shock and has caused me intense pain.

 It was a huge double whammy – having breast cancer and losing my breasts was bad enough, but to be rejected by my ex was incredibly traumatic. I’m fine with my new breasts, but I’m worried about how a sexual partner will react to them  

This turn of events has shattered my confidence – in my body and in myself as a female. It’s a year on and I feel really anxious about the possibility of starting another relationship. 

Not only am I worried about being knocked back again because I don’t look the same, but I’m really nervous about negotiating sex with someone new as my body has changed so much. 

For example, hormone therapy – which I’ll be on for at least another seven years – comes with a whole host of side effects, including painful joints, vaginal dryness, and mood swings.

If and when I have sex again, I run the risk of getting stuck in an awkward position, or falling asleep in the middle of a date. And although I do have an amazing friend who has been trying to help me get back to sex, I still don’t feel confident or comfortable and have to be covered up.

 I can’t imagine what it will be like with someone new. If I start dating again, when would I tell them about my breast cancer? 

Would they also reject me?

 I imagine my ‘foobs’ (my name for my reconstructed breasts) may look a little strange with no nipples, but actually I’m fine with them as I’m grateful to have the cancer removed. I’m starting to feel stronger and more able to move forward with life – I’m just not there with sex yet. 

I know I have a long way to go, but I will get there.

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/06/21/how-breast-cancer-affected-my-body-and-sex-life-7628901/?ito=cbshare
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

One in Three Women Undergoing Breast Reconstruction Have Complications

One in five requires more surgery, and in 5 percent of cases, reconstruction fails.
Image
CreditStuart Bradford
Women who opt for breast reconstruction after a mastectomy have a strikingly high rate of complications, according to a new report. One in three develop a postoperative complication over the next two years, and one in five requires more surgery. In 5 percent of cases, reconstruction fails.
Those who used their own body tissue to rebuild a breast had significantly higher rates of complications than those who used artificial implants, the study found.
The women who used tissue transplanted from the belly area also had weaker abdominal muscles that made simple activities like getting out of bed difficult. But they were more satisfied with their breasts at the end of the process and enjoyed a greater degree of sexual well-being than women with implants.
“They key takeaway from this research is that these are complicated decisions,” said Dr. Edwin Wilkins, a professor and researcher at Michigan Medicine and an author on both of the studies, published on Wednesday in JAMA Surgery. “These operations are not without risk.”
Dr. Andrea L. Pusic, chief of plastic surgery and reconstructive surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, also an author on both of the studies, said the findings are not meant to be prescriptive. “These papers aren’t saying women should have one operation or another,” she said. “They’re about filling in the blanks that aren’t always explained to women, so they know the pros and the cons and can make good decisions.”
Dr. Pusic said the complication rate after reconstruction is probably “higher than what we’ve been telling people” but emphasized that “choosing reconstruction largely restores satisfaction with your breasts and psychosocial functioning. But it’s not uncommon to have bumps in the road.”
The studies were based on data from the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium, which Dr. Wilkins and Dr. Pusic lead. It followed some 2,300 women who had breast reconstruction surgery between Feb. 1, 2012 and July 31, 2015 at 11 medical centers in the United States and Canada. More than half of the women had artificial implants inserted. About a third had reconstructions using their own tissue, a procedure known as autologous reconstruction.
The patients were followed for two or more years after the surgery. During this time, researchers tracked all medical complications and evaluated quality of life using a questionnaire called the BREAST-Q, which looked at satisfaction with the breasts as well as psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being.
The researchers defined complications broadly, including even minor problems like a wound that took extra time to heal and required an antibiotic ointment. Still, the authors and other plastic surgeons said the results were eye-opening.
“I was surprised the difference was so stark between the autologous reconstruction and the implant, and that the autologous tissue flap complication rate was so high,” said Dr. David H. Song, chairman of the department of plastic surgery at Georgetown University School of Medicine, who was not involved in the research but was a co-author of a commentary on the studies.
But Dr. Song said the research, which followed women for only a few years, did not take into account that many women with implants might need to undergo additional surgery down the line because implants may need to be replaced after 10 years or so.
Some advocates for breast cancer survivors and women who have undergone breast reconstruction were not surprised by the figures. “I have heard lots of horror stories,” said Geri Barish, principal officer of 1 in 9, a breast cancer group on Long Island.
Alise Nacson, a 41-year-old researcher in Washington, said she underwent an eight-hour procedure last year that used tissue, including fat, skin and blood vessels, from her belly to create new breasts after a double mastectomy. But the surgery on her left side failed when the transplanted tissue, called a “‘flap,” was rejected, leaving her with only one reconstructed breast. Now she is facing another operation.
“I lost a flap, which is one of the worst outcomes,” Ms. Nacson said. On the other hand, she said, “I love the breast that I have, and I adore having a flesh breast.”
Donna Lo Nigro, a 43-year-old mother of two from Wading River, N.Y., had a double mastectomy followed immediately by reconstruction with implants in 2015. Within months, she developed a painful infection and abscess in one breast, and eventually had to have both implants replaced. Then a replacement operation failed, and she had to have the second set of implants removed.
In April of 2016, she decided to try using her own tissue for breast reconstruction and had a nearly 12-hour-long procedure, which was successful. “It’s fabulous, and I’ve had no complications,” Ms. Lo Nigro said.
The research identified several factors that increase the risk of developing a complication, including being older, being overweight, smoking, undergoing a bilateral reconstruction procedure, undergoing radiation therapy during or after reconstruction or having had chemotherapy.
Although patients are often encouraged to have reconstruction immediately after mastectomy, patients who delayed reconstruction were found to be significantly less likely to develop complications than those undergoing immediate reconstruction.
While the new information is helpful, some doctors were skeptical that it would make decisions much easier for cancer patients.
“Patients trying to make a decision about surgery have just been told they have cancer,” said Dr. Deanna J. Attai, a breast surgeon and assistant clinical professor at David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles. “That alone is enough to shake even the strongest of clear thinkers.”