Ganz, Patricia A.

Abstract Background NSABP B-36 compares 6 cycles of FEC-100 with 4 cycles of standard AC in pts with node-negative breast cancer. As reported separately, no significant differences between the two treatment arms were observed in the primary endpoint of disease-free survival or in the secondary endpoints of overall survival, recurrence-free, or distant recurrence-free intervals. Greater toxicity was reported in pts who received FEC compared to AC. We present here the results of the QOL and MH studies obtained prospectively in conjunction with the treatment study. We hypothesized that pts on FEC would experience greater treatment toxicity in the first 12 months of the study, and would have greater rates of amenorrhea at 18 months compared to pts on AC. Methods Among the 1,357 pts enrolled in the QOL study, 1,332 (675 AC, 657 FEC) submitted the baseline form and had QOL follow-up (fup) information. Pts completed: 1) the FACT-B instrument; 2) a symptom checklist; and 3) the SF-36 Vitality Scale, all at baseline, day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months after random assignment. FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI), symptom severity, and vitality scores were compared between the two treatment arms using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis with adjustment for the baseline scores, type of surgery, and hormone receptor status, examining the first 12 months and the later time points separately. Menstrual status was collected at baseline for all enrolled pts, with subsequent assessments on day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months for pts with menstrual bleeding within 12 months prior to random assignment and not having had a hysterectomy and/or bilateral oophorectomy (1, 096 pts). Post-chemotherapy amenorrhea was defined as the lack of menstrual periods during the 12 months preceding the 18-month fup evaluation. Data from 921 pts (475 AC, 446 FEC) were available for analysis. Logistic regression, adjusted for type of surgery and hormone receptor status, was used to test for association of amenorrhea status and treatment. Results Both TOI and vitality scores were worse for pts on FEC compared to those on AC at 6 months (p<0.01) with no significant difference at 12 months and beyond. No significant differences in symptom severity between the two treatment arms were observed. The rates of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea were significantly different between FEC and AC (66.8% vs. 58.7%, p=0.01) with positive hormone receptor status as an independent risk factor (p=0.03). Conclusions Women receiving FEC had diminished QOL at 6 months after random assignment, but no difference at 12 months or later. Premenopausal women receiving FEC experienced a higher rate of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea than women receiving AC. Support NCI grants U10-CA-12027, -37377, -69974, -69651 and -44066-26, and Pharmacia & Upjohn Company, a subsidiary of Pfizer, Inc. Citation Format: Patricia A Ganz, John W Wilson, Hanna Bandos, André Robidoux, Alexander HG Paterson, Johnathan Polikoff, Luis Baez-Diaz, Adam M Brufsky, Louis Fehrenbacher, Aroop Mangalik, Patrick J Ward, Louise Provencher, John T Hamm, Philip J Stella, Robert L Carolla, Richard G Margolese, Henry R Shibata, Edith A Perez, Norman Wolmark. Impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) and menstrual history (MH) in the NSABP B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-12-01.

BACKGROUNDShared decision‐making is an important component of patient‐centered care and is associated with improved outcomes. To the authors' knowledge, little is known concerning the extent and predictors of the involvement of a patient's family in decisions regarding cancer treatments.METHODSThe Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) Consortium is a large, multiregional, prospective cohort study of the cancer care and outcomes of patients with lung and colorectal cancer. Participants reported the roles of their families in decision‐making regarding treatment. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess patient factors associated with family roles in decisions.RESULTSAmong 5284 patients, 80 (1.5%) reported family‐controlled decisions, with the highest adjusted rates (12.8%) noted among non‐English‐speaking Asians. Among the 5204 remaining patients, 49.4% reported equally sharing decisions with family, 22.1% reported some family input, and 28.5% reported little family input. In adjusted analyses, patients who were married, female, older, and insured more often reported equally shared decisions with family (all P <.001). Adjusted family involvement varied by race/ethnicity and language, with Chinese‐speaking Asian (59.8%) and Spanish‐speaking Hispanic (54.8%) patients equally sharing decisions with family more often than white individuals (47.6%). Veterans Affairs patients were least likely to report sharing decisions with family, even after adjustment for marital status and social support (P <.001).CONCLUSIONSThe majority of patients with newly diagnosed lung or colorectal cancer involve family members in treatment decisions. Non‐English‐speaking Asians and Hispanics rely significantly on family. Further studies are needed to determine the impact of family involvement in treatment decisions on outcomes; until then, physicians should consider eliciting patients' preferences for family involvement. Cancer 2015;121:1079–1087. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) identified variants at 19p13.1 and ZNF365 (10q21.2) as risk factors for breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. We explored associations with ovarian cancer and with breast cancer by tumor histopathology for these variants in mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Methods: Genotyping data for 12,599 BRCA1 and 7,132 BRCA2 mutation carriers from 40 studies were combined. Results: We confirmed associations between rs8170 at 19p13.1 and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers [HR, 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07–1.27; P = 7.42 × 10−4] and between rs16917302 at ZNF365 (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73–0.97; P = 0.017) but not rs311499 at 20q13.3 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.94–1.31; P = 0.22) and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Analyses based on tumor histopathology showed that 19p13 variants were predominantly associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, whereas rs16917302 at ZNF365 was mainly associated with ER-positive breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We also found for the first time that rs67397200 at 19p13.1 was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer for BRCA1 (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.05–1.29; P = 3.8 × 10−4) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10–1.52; P = 1.8 × 10−3). Conclusions: 19p13.1 and ZNF365 are susceptibility loci for ovarian cancer and ER subtypes of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Impact: These findings can lead to an improved understanding of tumor development and may prove useful for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 21(4); 645–57. ©2012 AACR.

Abstract Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have a lifetime breast cancer risk of 40% to 80%, suggesting the presence of risk modifiers. We previously identified significant associations in genetic variants in the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) signaling pathway. Here, we investigate additional IGF signaling genes as risk modifiers for breast cancer development in BRCA carriers. Methods: A cohort of 1,019 BRCA1 and 500 BRCA2 mutation carriers were genotyped for 99 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in 13 genes. Proportional hazards regression was used to model time from birth to diagnosis of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers separately. For linkage disequilibrium (LD) blocks with multiple SNPs, an additive genetic model was used. For an SNP analysis, no additivity assumptions were made. Results: Significant associations were found between risk of breast cancer and LD blocks in IGF2 for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (global P values of 0.009 for BRCA1 and 0.007 for BRCA2), HTRA1 for BRCA1 carriers (global P value of 0.005), and MMP3 for BRCA2 carriers (global P = 0.0000007 for BRCA2). Conclusions: We identified significant associations of genetic variants involved in IGF signaling. With the known interaction of BRCA1 and IGF signaling and the loss of PTEN in a majority of BRCA1 tumors, this suggests that signaling through AKT may modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers. Impact: These results suggest potential avenues for future research targeting the IGF signaling pathway in modifying risk in BRCA1and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(8); 1690–702. ©2011 AACR.

Abstract Inherited BRCA1/2 mutations confer elevated ovarian cancer risk. Knowledge of factors that can improve ovarian cancer risk assessment in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is important because no effective early detection for ovarian cancers exists. A cohort of 1,575 BRCA1 and 856 BRCA2 mutation carriers was used to evaluate haplotypes at ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CTIP, MRE11, NBS1, RAD50, RAD51, and TOPBP1 in ovarian cancer risk. In BRCA1 carriers, no associations were observed with ATM, BARD1, CTIP, RAD50, RAD51, or TOPBP1. At BRIP1, an association was observed for one haplotype with a multiple testing corrected P (Pcorr) = 0.012, although no individual haplotype was significant. At MRE11, statistically significant associations were observed for one haplotype (Pcorr = 0.007). At NBS1, we observed a Pcorr = 0.024 for haplotypes. In BRCA2 carriers, no associations were observed with CTIP, NBS1, RAD50, or TOPBP1. Rare haplotypes at ATM (Pcorr = 0.044) and BARD1 (Pcorr = 0.012) were associated with ovarian cancer risk. At BRIP1, two common haplotypes were significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (Pcorr = 0.011). At MRE11, we observed a significant haplotype association (Pcorr = 0.012), and at RAD51, one common haplotype was significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (Pcorr = 0.026). Variants in genes that interact biologically withBRCA1 and/or BRCA2 may be associated with modified ovarian cancer risk in women who carry BRCA1/2 mutations. [Cancer Res 2009;69(14):5801–10]