Back to Authors

Amant, Frédéric

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5452-4905

Mayo Clinic

Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven

Citations 12

Management of Cancer During Pregnancy: ASCO Guideline
Loren, Alison W. , Lacchetti, Christina , Amant, Frédéric , Carey, Lisa A. , Christian, Nicole , Clark, Caroline C. , Dizon, Don S. , Hudson, Melissa M. , Maués, Julia , Peterson, Erika, Prowell, Tatiana M. , Raab, Rachel, Saeed, Hina , Watson, Katie, Yadav, Siddhartha , Carey, Lisa A , Christian, Nicole , Clark, Caroline , Dizon, Don S , Henry, Melissa , Hudson, Melissa M , Maues, Julia , Prowell, Tatiana M , Rogers, Jane E , Sekeres, Mikkael A , Taylor, Jolyn S , Van Loon, Katherine , Wallace, W Hamish , Yadav, Siddhartha , Partridge, Ann H , Amant, Frederic , Cardonick, Elyce H. , Rogers, Jane E. , Sekeres, Mikkael A. , Loon, Katherine Van , Partridge, Ann H.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | December 11, 2025 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 200-251

10.1200/jco-25-02115 Get It

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To provide guidance on the recommended management of cancer in pregnant patients. METHODS A multidisciplinary Expert Panel convened and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS The systematic review identified 450 eligible studies. Much of the evidence consisted of observational data, case series, and case reports. RECOMMENDATIONS Management of cancer during pregnancy should be grounded in a values-based informed-consent process outlining maternal and fetal risks and anticipated benefits. Diagnostic evaluation should follow the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle, with timing of diagnostic studies individualized based on urgency of cancer detection, potential dangers of delay, and the balance of risks to both the pregnant patient and her embryo or fetus. Due to significant risk of harm to the developing embryo and/or fetus, systemic therapy should be deferred until the second trimester. Methotrexate, hormonal therapies, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–targeted agents, vascular endothelial growth factor and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and all cellular therapies are contraindicated during pregnancy, regardless of gestational age. For patients who wish to continue their pregnancy, delivery should be planned at or after 37 weeks, with the final chemotherapy dose scheduled 2-4 weeks before birth. Referral to psychosocial support services is essential to address emotional and practical challenges, reduce distress, and support shared decision making. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines .
Fertility Preservation and Assisted Reproduction in Patients With Breast Cancer Interrupting Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy to Attempt Pregnancy
Azim, Hatem A. , Niman, Samuel M. , Partridge, Ann H. , Demeestere, Isabelle , Ruggeri, Monica , Colleoni, Marco , Saura, Cristina , Shimizu, Chikako , Sætersdal, Anna Barbro, Kroep, Judith R. , Mailliez, Audrey , Gombos, Andrea, Kataoka, Akemi, Rousset‐Jablonski, Christine , Borštnar, Simona , Takei, Junko , Walshe, Janice M. , Ruíz-Borrego, Manuel , Bjelic‐Radisic, Vesna , Klar, Natalie , Španić, Tanja, Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Piccart, Martine , Korde, Larissa A. , Goldhirsch, Aron, Gelber, Richard D. , Pagani, Olivia , Borges, Virginia F , Amant, Frederic , Kataoka, Akemi , Rousset-Jablonski, Christine , Takei, Junko , Lee, Jeong Eon , Walshe, Janice M , Ruíz-Borrego, Manuel , Moore, Halle C F , Saunders, Christobel , Susnjar, Snezana , Cardoso, Fatima , Klar, Natalie J , Ruddy, Kathryn J , Piccart, Martine , Goldhirsch, Aron , Gelber, Richard D , Peccatori, Fedro A , Partridge, Ann H , Demeestere, Isabelle , Colleoni, Marco , Saura, Cristina , Warner, Ellen , Borges, Virginia F. , Amant, Frédéric , Gombos, Andrea , Moore, Halle C. F. , Saunders, Christobel , Cardoso, Fátima

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 29, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 2822-2832

10.1200/jco.23.02292 Get It

PURPOSE We investigated time to pregnancy, efficacy and safety of fertility preservation, and assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) in women with early hormone receptor–positive breast cancer (BC) desiring future pregnancy. PATIENTS AND METHODS POSITIVE is an international, single-arm, prospective trial, in which 518 women temporarily interrupted adjuvant endocrine therapy to attempt pregnancy. We evaluated menstruation recovery and factors associated with time to pregnancy and investigated if ART use was associated with achieving pregnancy. The cumulative incidence of BC-free interval (BCFI) events was estimated according to the use of ovarian stimulation at diagnosis. The median follow-up was 41 months. RESULTS Two hundred seventy-three patients (53%) reported amenorrhea at enrollment, of whom 94% resumed menses within 12 months. Among 497 patients evaluable for pregnancy, 368 (74%) reported at least one pregnancy. Young age was the main factor associated with shorter time to pregnancy with cumulative incidences of pregnancy by 1 year of 63.5%, 54.3%, and 37.7% for patients age <35, 35-39, and 40-42 years, respectively. One hundred and seventy-nine patients (36%) had embryo/oocyte cryopreservation at diagnosis, of whom 68 reported embryo transfer after enrollment. Cryopreserved embryo transfer was the only ART associated with higher chance of pregnancy (odds ratio, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.75 to 4.95]). The cumulative incidence of BCFI events at 3 years was similar for women who underwent ovarian stimulation for cryopreservation at diagnosis, 9.7% (95% CI, 6.0 to 15.4), compared with those who did not, 8.7% (95% CI, 6.0 to 12.5). CONCLUSION In POSITIVE, fertility preservation using ovarian stimulation was not associated with short-term detrimental impact on cancer prognosis. Pregnancy rates were highest among those who underwent embryo/oocyte cryopreservation followed by embryo transfer.
Abstract GS02-11: Fertility preservation and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) interrupting endocrine therapy (ET) to attempt pregnancy
Azim, Hatem A. , Niman, Samuel, Ruggeri, Monica , Saura, Cristina , Shimizu, Chikako , Sætersdal, Anna Barbro, Mailliez, Audrey , Gombos, Andrea, Kataoka, Akemi, Borštnar, Simona , Takei, Junko , Lee, Jeong Eon, Borrego, Manuel Ruíz, Bjelic‐Radisic, Vesna , Klar, Natalie , Spanic, Tanya, Ruddy, Kathryn, Piccart, Martine , Korde, Larissa A. , Goldhirsch, Aron, Gelber, Richard D. , Pagani, Olivia , Klar, Natalie J , Saura, Cristina , Partridge, Ann H. , Demeestere, Isabelle , Colleoni, Marco , Kroep, Judith R. , Warner, Ellen , Borges, Virginia F. , Amant, Frédéric , Gombos, Andrea , Rousset‐Jablonski, Christine , Lee, Jeong Eon, Walshe, Janice M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Saunders, Christobel , Susnjar, Snezana , Cardoso, Fátima , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Peccatori, Fedro A

Cancer Research | May 2, 2024 | Volume: 84 | Issue: 9_Supplement | Pages: GS02-11-GS02-11

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs23-gs02-11 Get It

Abstract Background: The POSITIVE trial recently demonstrated that temporary interruption of ET to attempt pregnancy does not increase the short-term risk of recurrence in pts with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC. Yet, uncertainty exists regarding the safety of ovarian stimulation for embryo/oocyte cryopreservation to preserve fertility in these pts. In addition, very limited data exist regarding safety and efficiency of ART to achieve pregnancy after ET interruption. Methods: POSITIVE is an international, single-arm, prospective trial that enrolled pts ≤ 42 years with stage I-III HR+ BC who had already received 18-30 months of ET prior to enrollment. The use of ART was a predefined 2ry endpoint. We evaluated factors associated with time to pregnancy in a Fine and Gray competing risks model, which included chemotherapy (chemo) ± GnRH analogue (GnRHa), age, prior ET, prior birth, and menstrual status at enrollment. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 12 months from enrollment by age was estimated controlling for competing risks. We performed a logistic regression model to evaluate whether ART use was associated with achieving pregnancy, adjusting for age, receipt of chemo ± GnRHa. The cumulative incidence of BCFI events was estimated according to whether or not ovarian stimulation for cryopreservation was performed at diagnosis and prior to enrollment. BC-free interval (BCFI) was defined as the time from enrollment until the first BC event (invasive local, regional, or distant recurrence or contralateral disease). A 24-month landmark analysis was performed to investigate the safety of ART use after enrollment. Median follow-up was 41 months. Results: 497 out of 516 included pts (96%) were followed for at least 6 months and were evaluable for pregnancy status. 368 out of 497 evaluable pts (74%) reported at least one pregnancy. In a multivariable model, young age was the only factor associated with shorter time to pregnancy. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 12 months was 64%, 54% and 38% for pts aged &lt; 35, 35-39 and 40-42 years, respectively. 179 pts (36.0%) had undergone ovarian stimulation for embryo/oocyte cryopreservation at diagnosis and prior to enrollment, of whom 68 (37.9%) reported cryopreserved embryo transfer after enrollment. 215 pts (43.3%) reported using any ART after enrollment, of whom 80 (37.2%) underwent ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization (FIVET) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Other ART used included clomiphene (n=19), intrauterine insemination (n=37) and egg donation (n=17). Pregnancy rates were 82.4% and 67.5% for women who underwent cryopreserved embryo transfer and FIVET/ICSI, respectively. In a multivariate model, cryopreserved embryo transfer was the only ART independently associated with a higher chance of pregnancy (OR:2.41, 95% CI: 1.75-4.95). The cumulative incidence of BCFI events at 3 years was similar for women who underwent ovarian stimulation for cryopreservation at diagnosis and before enrollment, 9.7% (95% CI: 6.0-15.4%), and those who did not, 8.7% (95% CI: 6.0-12.5%). A 24-month landmark analysis showed no impact of ovarian stimulation for FIVET/ICSI after enrollment on BCFI. Conclusions: This is the largest prospective study to investigate fertility preservation and ART in pts with HR+ BC. Young age was the main factor associated with shorter time to pregnancy. Embryo/oocyte cryopreservation at BC diagnosis followed by embryo transfer after ET interruption was the only approach associated with an increased chance of pregnancy. Ovarian stimulation either at BC diagnosis for embryo/oocyte cryopreservation or after enrollment to POSITIVE for FIVET/ICSI did not appear to impact prognosis in the short term. These data are of paramount importance for oncofertility counselling of young BC pts. Citation Format: Hatem Azim, Samuel Niman, Ann Partridge, Isabelle Demeestere, Monica Ruggeri, Marco Colleoni, Cristina Saura, Chikako Shimizu, Anna Saetersdal, Judith Kroep, Audrey Mailliez, Ellen Warner, Virginia Borges, Frédéric Amant, Andrea Gombos, Akemi Kataoka, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Simona Borstnar, Junko Takei, Jeong Eon Lee, Janice Walshe, Manuel Ruíz - Borrego, Halle Moore, Christobel Saunders, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Snezana Susnjar, Fatima Cardoso, Natalie Klar, Tanya Spanic, Kathryn Ruddy, Martine Piccart, Larissa Korde, Aron Goldhirsch, Richard Gelber, Olivia Pagani, Fedro Alessandro Peccatori. Fertility preservation and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) interrupting endocrine therapy (ET) to attempt pregnancy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS02-11.
Pregnancy After Breast Cancer in Young BRCA Carriers
Kim, Hee Jeong , Bernstein‐Molho, Rinat , Pogoda, Katarzyna , Carrasco, Estela , Bajpai, Jyoti , Phillips, Kelly‐Anne , Rousset‐Jablonski, Christine , Renaud, Tiphaine , Cui, Wanda, Wong, Stephanie M. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Rozenblit, Mariya, Marchis, Laura De , Mriňáková, Bela , Meister, Sarah , Livraghi, Luca , Clatot, Florian , Yerushalmi, Rinat , Angelis, Carmine De , Meattini, Icro , Cichowska-Cwalińska, Natalia, Berlière, Martine , Salama, Mahmoud , Giorgi, Ugo De , Sonnenblick, Amir , Chiodi, Camila , Maria, Camille, Azim, Hatem A. , Molinelli, Chiara , Paesmans, Marianne , Ameye, Lieveke , Hatse, Sigrid , Nevelsteen, Ines , Neven, Patrick , Rompuy, Chantal Van, Duhoux, François, Bini, Federica , Cont, Nicoletta Tomasi, Pais, Helena Luna , Mohar, Alejandro , Palacios, Tamara, Pastò, Brenno , Bonadio, Renata Colombo , Peretz‐Yablonski, Tamar , Anghelone, Chiara Annunziata Pasqualina, Valle, Angelica Della , Campanella, Maria, Bas, Raphaëlle, Talouet, Solenne de, Bonadona, Valérie, Lasset, Christine , Acheritogaray, Marion , Sénéchal, Claire , Mariño, Monica , Feldman, Didi, Pesce, Romina , Allemand, Carol, Riggi, Cecilia, Iriarte, Maria Belen, Salgado, Alfonso Cortés, Gión, María , Prat, Aleix , Hester, Anna, Dunckelmann, Sofia, Bartsch, Rupert , Mannsbarth, Constantin, Božović‐Spasojević, Ivana, Dimitrijević, Marija, Visani, Luca , Bettazzi, Beatrice, Sini, Valentina, Rognone, Alessia, Patricelli, Maria Grazia , Rabaiotti, Emanuela , Acconci, Giulia, Baldacci, Erica, Bianchini, Giulia, Kleiterp, Sieta, Moha, Daoud Ait, Sekar, Anberson, Loi, Francesco , Dessì, Mariele, O’Connor, Sarah , Nesci, Stephanie, Michael, Chris, Larson, Nicole L. , Lopetegui, Nerea M., Rocco, Roberta Di, Bengala, Carmelo , Haddad, Stephanie , Safran, Emma, Negri, Serena , Dell'Oro, Cristina, Marchetta, Liliana, Lustberg, Maryam B. , Blansky, Deanna , Ansari, Norin , Aguilar-y-Méndez, Dione, Swain, Monique , Miller, Madison , Leach, Richard E., Synowiec, Agnieszka , Hancinova, M., Tarbaj, L., Beslija, S. , Cerić, Timur , Hasanbegovic, B. , Bianchi, Manuel A., Álvaro, Laura, Bergman, Louise Eriksson, Damian, Cristina , Eriksson, Louise , Cui, Wanyuan , Prat, Aleix , De Angelis, Carmine , Meattini, Icro , Rousset-Jablonski, Christine , Phillips, Kelly-Anne , Cui, Wanda , Wong, Stephanie M , Livraghi, Luca , Lustberg, Maryam , Pogoda, K. , Lambertini, Matteo , Blondeaux, Eva , Agostinetto, Elisa , Hamy, Anne‐Sophie , Meglio, Antonio Di , Hilbers, Florentine , Punie, Kevin , Ignatiadis, Michail , Moore, Halle C. F. , Toss, Angela , Peccatori, Fedro A , Ferrari, Alberta , Paluch–Shimon, Shani , Fruscio, Robert , Vernieri, Claudio , Dieci, Maria Vittoria , Matikas, Alexios , Rozenblit, Mariya , Villarreal‐Garza, Cynthia , Mastro, Lucia Del , Puglisi, Fabio , Estevez-Diz, Maria Del Pilar , Rodriguez-Wallberg, Kenny A , Sánchez-Bayona, Rodrigo , Lee, Young‐Jin , Boni, Luca , Partridge, Ann H. , Azambuja, Evandro de , Amant, Frédéric , Brems, Hilde , Han, Sileny , Smeets, Ann , Wildiers, Hans , Giugliano, Federica , Criscitiello, Carmen , Borea, Roberto , Arecco, Luca , Chirco, Alessandra, Venturelli, Marta , Cortesi, Laura , Ponzone, Riccardo , Balmañà, Judith , Graffeo, Rossella , Ros, Lucia Da , Miolo, Gianmaria , Garutti, Mattia , Spazzapan, Simon , Viel, Alessandra , Fidalgo, José Alejandro Pérez , Guarneri, Valentina , Heudel, Pierre‐Etienne , Trédan, Olivier , Bonadona, Valérie , Córdoba, Octavi , Cortés, Javier , Saavedra, Cristina , Rodriguez, Adela R. , Adamo, Bárbara , Harbeck, Nadia , Marhold, Maximilian , POPOVIC, LAZAR S. , Krivokuća, Ana , Livi, Lorenzo , Sposetti, Caterina , Bianchini, Giampaolo , Gentilini, Oreste D , Fontana, Andrea , Pistelli, Mirco , Linn, Sabine C. , Sarin, Rajiv , Atzori, Francesco , O’Connor, Sarah, James, Paul A. , Michael, Chris, Couch, Fergus J. , Olson, Janet E. , Yadav, Siddhartha , Carey, Lisa A. , Abdou, Yara George , Zagami, Paola , Baldassarri, Margherita , Mariamidze, Elene , Graff, Stephanie L. , Matos, Leonor Vasconcelos de , Ferreira, Arlindo Rebelo , Dell’Oro, Cristina, Inzoli, Alessandra , Costa, Clarissa , Jeon, June Evelyn , Woodruff, Teresa K. , Fabi, Alessandra , Palazzo, Antonella , Paris, Ida , Kufel-Grabowska, Joanna , Sokolović, Emir , Foulkes, William D. , Bianchi, Manuel Alva, Tolosa, Pablo , Antone, Nicoleta Zenovia , Damian, Cristina

JAMA | December 7, 2023 | Volume: 331 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 49

10.1001/jama.2023.25463 Get It

ImportanceYoung women with breast cancer who have germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 face unique challenges regarding fertility. Previous studies demonstrating the feasibility and safety of pregnancy in breast cancer survivors included limited data regarding BRCA carriers.ObjectiveTo investigate cumulative incidence of pregnancy and disease-free survival in young women who are BRCA carriers.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsInternational, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study conducted at 78 participating centers worldwide. The study included female participants diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at age 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020 carrying germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2. Last delivery was October 7, 2022; last follow-up was February 20, 2023.ExposurePregnancy after breast cancer.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary end points were cumulative incidence of pregnancy after breast cancer and disease-free survival. Secondary end points were breast cancer–specific survival, overall survival, pregnancy, and fetal and obstetric outcomes.ResultsOf 4732 BRCA carriers included, 659 had at least 1 pregnancy after breast cancer and 4073 did not. Median age at diagnosis in the overall cohort was 35 years (IQR, 31-38 years). Cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 10 years was 22% (95% CI, 21%-24%), with a median time from breast cancer diagnosis to conception of 3.5 years (IQR, 2.2-5.3 years). Among the 659 patients who had a pregnancy, 45 (6.9%) and 63 (9.7%) had an induced abortion or a miscarriage, respectively. Of the 517 patients (79.7%) with a completed pregnancy, 406 (91.0%) delivered at term (≥37 weeks) and 54 (10.4%) had twins. Among the 470 infants born with known information on pregnancy complications, 4 (0.9%) had documented congenital anomalies. Median follow-up was 7.8 years (IQR, 4.5-12.6 years). No significant difference in disease-free survival was observed between patients with or without a pregnancy after breast cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81-1.20). Patients who had a pregnancy had significantly better breast cancer–specific survival and overall survival.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this global study, 1 in 5 young BRCA carriers conceived within 10 years after breast cancer diagnosis. Pregnancy following breast cancer in BRCA carriers was not associated with decreased disease-free survival.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03673306
Abstract GS4-09: Pregnancy Outcome and Safety of Interrupting Therapy for women with endocrine responsIVE breast cancer: Primary Results from the POSITIVE Trial (IBCSG 48-14/BIG 8-13)
Partridge, Ann, Pagani, Olivia , Niman, Samuel M. , Ruggeri, Monica , Azim, Hatem A. , Saura, Cristina , Shimizu, Chikako , Sætersdal, Anna Barbro, Mailliez, Audrey , Gombos, Andrea , Kataoka, Akemi, Borštnar, Simona, Takei, Junko , Borrego, Manuel Ruíz, Bjelic‐Radisic, Vesna , Vilarino, Teresa Ferreiro, Ribi, Karin, Ruddy, Kathryn, Piccart, Martine , Korde, Larissa A. , Goldhirsch, Aron, Gelber, Richard D. , Saura, Cristina , Peccatori, Fedro A , Colleoni, Marco , Kroep, Judith R. , Warner, Ellen , Borges, Virginia F. , Amant, Frédéric , Rousset‐Jablonski, Christine , Lee, Jeong Eon , Walshe, Janice M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Saunders, Christobel , Susnjar, Snezana , Cardoso, Fátima , Smith, Karen L. , Vilarino, Teresa Ferreiro, Ruddy, Kathryn J. , El-Abed, Sarra

Cancer Research | March 2, 2023 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 5_Supplement | Pages: GS4-09-GS4-09

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-gs4-09 Get It

Abstract Background: Pregnancy after breast cancer (BC) is of substantial importance for many young women at diagnosis and during follow-up. BC treatment including standard endocrine therapy (ET) (5-10 years) may reduce ovarian reserve and the chances of subsequent successful pregnancy, given conception is contraindicated during ET. A temporary interruption of ET to attempt and carry a pregnancy in this population has never been prospectively studied. Methods: POSITIVE is a single-arm, prospective, investigator-initiated, international trial evaluating the safety and pregnancy outcomes of interrupting ET for young women with early-stage hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) BC who desire pregnancy. The primary objective is to assess the risk of BC relapse associated with ET interruption for ~2 years to achieve pregnancy. Women ≤42 years with stage I-III HR+ BC who received adjuvant ET (SERM alone, GnRH analogue plus SERM or AI) for 18 to 30 months and wished to interrupt ET to attempt pregnancy were eligible. The primary endpoint is breast cancer free interval (BCFI) defined as the time from enrollment to the first BC event (local, regional, distant recurrence or a new invasive contralateral BC). Planned sample size was 500 patients. Three interim analyses of BCFI were reviewed by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) to assure a 95% chance of stopping the trial early if the annual BCFI event rate exceeded 4%; with primary analysis triggered after 1600 patient years of follow-up (pyfu) and no more than 46 BCFI events defined as the safety threshold. The DSMC recommended continuing the study following each interim analysis. We now report the primary results. Results: From 12/2014 to 12/2019, 518 women were enrolled. At enrollment, the median age of participants was 37 years (27-43 years); 75.0% were nulliparous, 93.4% had stage I/II disease, 66.3% node-negative. Median time from BC diagnosis to enrollment was 29 months (IQR: 25-32). Tamoxifen alone was the most prescribed ET (41.7%), followed by tamoxifen+ovarian function suppression (35.7%). 62.0% of participants had received neo/adjuvant chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 41 months (1638 pyfu), 44 participants had experienced a BCFI event, not exceeding the pre-specified safety threshold of 46 events. The 3-year BCFI failure percent was 8.9% (95% CI: 6.3 to 11.6%), similar to the 9.2% (95% CI: 7.6 to 10.8%) calculated in the comparative external control cohort from the SOFT/TEXT trials (Sun et al, Breast 2020). Of 497 women followed for pregnancy status, 368 (74.0%) had at least one pregnancy, 317 (63.8%) had at least one live birth, with a total of 365 babies born. Based on competing risk analysis, 76.3% of patients resumed ET (half within 26 months), 8.3% had BCFI event/death before ET resumption, and 15.4% had not resumed ET yet. Conclusions: The POSITIVE trial demonstrates that for young women with early HR+ BC desiring pregnancy, temporary interruption of ET to attempt pregnancy does not confer a greater short-term risk of recurrence than that observed in a modern historical control group that did not interrupt ET. Most participants have had a live birth. Further follow-up is planned to confirm long-term safety. These results should be considered in counselling BC patients desiring future pregnancy. Citation Format: Ann Partridge, Olivia Pagani, Samuel M. Niman, Monica Ruggeri, Fedro Alessandro A. Peccatori, Hatem A. Azim, Marco Colleoni, Cristina Saura, Chikako Shimizu, Anna Saetersdal, Judith Kroep, Audrey Mailliez, Ellen Warner, Virginia F. Borges, Frédéric Amant, Andrea Gombos, Akemi Kataoka, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Simona Borstnar, Junko Takei, Jeong Eon Lee, Janice Walshe, Manuel Ruiz Borrego, Halle Moore, Christobel Saunders, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Snezana Susnjar, Fatima Cardoso, Karen L. Smith, Teresa Ferreiro Vilarino, Karin Ribi, Kathryn Ruddy, Sarra El-Abed, Martine Piccart, Larissa A. Korde, Aron Goldhirsch, Richard D. Gelber. Pregnancy Outcome and Safety of Interrupting Therapy for women with endocrine responsIVE breast cancer: Primary Results from the POSITIVE Trial (IBCSG 48-14/BIG 8-13) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-09.
Pregnancy After Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Lambertini, Matteo , Blondeaux, Eva , Bruzzone, Marco , Perachino, Marta , Anderson, Richard A. , Azambuja, Evandro de , Poorvu, Philip D. , Kim, Hee Jeong , Villarreal‐Garza, Cynthia , Pistilli, Barbara , Vaz-Luís, Inês , Saura, Cristina , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Franzoi, Maria Alice , Sertoli, Chiara, Azim, Hatem A. , Demeestere, Isabelle , Mastro, Lucia Del , Pagani, Olivia , de Azambuja, Evandro , Ceppi, Marcello , Azim, Hatem A , Amant, Frederic , Demeestere, Isabelle , Del Mastro, Lucia , Partridge, Ann H , Peccatori, Fedro A , Lambertini, Matteo , Saura, Cristina , Villarreal-Garza, Cynthia , Bruzzone, Marco , Amant, Frédéric , Partridge, Ann H.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | July 1, 2021 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 29 | Pages: 3293-3305

10.1200/jco.21.00535 Get It

PURPOSE Many patients and physicians remain concerned about the potential detrimental effects of pregnancy after breast cancer (BC) in terms of reproductive outcomes and maternal safety. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at providing updated evidence on these topics. METHODS A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies including patients with a pregnancy after BC (PROSPERO number CRD42020158324). Likelihood of pregnancy after BC, their reproductive outcomes, and maternal safety were assessed. Pooled relative risks, odds ratios (ORs), and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were calculated using random effects models. RESULTS Of 6,462 identified records, 39 were included involving 8,093,401 women from the general population and 112,840 patients with BC of whom 7,505 had a pregnancy after diagnosis. BC survivors were significantly less likely to have a subsequent pregnancy compared with the general population (relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.49). Risks of caesarean section (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.25), low birth weight (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.73), preterm birth (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.88), and small for gestational age (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.33) were significantly higher in BC survivors, particularly in those with previous chemotherapy exposure, compared with the general population. No significantly increased risk of congenital abnormalities or other reproductive complications were observed. Compared to patients with BC without subsequent pregnancy, those with a pregnancy had better disease-free survival (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.89) and overall survival (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68). Similar results were observed after correcting for potential confounders and irrespective of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics, pregnancy outcome, and timing of pregnancy. CONCLUSION These results provide reassuring evidence on the safety of conceiving in BC survivors. Patients' pregnancy desire should be considered a crucial component of their survivorship care plan.
Abstract GS3-09: Chances of pregnancy after breast cancer, reproductive and disease outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Poorvu, Philip D. , Kim, Hee Jeong , Pistilli, Barbara , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Sertoli, Chiara, Azim, Hatem A. , Pagani, Olivia , Blondeaux, Eva , Perachino, Marta , Bruzzone, Marco , Anderson, Richard A. , Azambuja, Evandro de , Villarreal‐Garza, Cynthia , Vaz-Luís, Inês , Saura, Cristina , Franzoi, Maria Alice , Ceppi, Marcello , Amant, Frédéric , Demeestere, Isabelle , Mastro, Lucia Del , Partridge, Ann H. , Peccatori, Fedro A , Lambertini, Matteo

Cancer Research | February 15, 2021 | Volume: 81 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: GS3-09-GS3-09

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs20-gs3-09 Get It

Abstract Background: Pregnancy-related issues are a priority for young breast cancer (BC) patients. Increasing evidence has shown that pregnancy after prior BC diagnosis is feasible. Nevertheless, few BC survivors conceive following anticancer treatment completion and many physicians remain concerned about the potentially detrimental effects of pregnancy after BC in terms of fetal/obstetrical outcomes and maternal prognosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at providing updated and solid evidence on these important issues. Methods: A systematic literature review up to January 31, 2020 with no language restriction was conducted to identify studies including patients with a pregnancy after prior BC diagnosis. Chances of pregnancy after BC, fetal and obstetrical outcomes, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Pooled relative risks (RRs), hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratio (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects models. The study is registered with the PROSPERO registration number CRD42020158324. Results: Overall, 39 studies were included. Out of the 8,265,713 young women included in these studies, 8,093,401 were from the general population, 57,739 had cancers other than BC, 114,573 had BC. Among the 114,573 BC patients, 7,505 had a pregnancy after BC diagnosis and 107,068 did not. Compared to women from the general population, BC patients had 60% reduced chances of having a pregnancy following anticancer treatment completion (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.32-0.49). Among other cancer patients, only women with prior cervical cancer had lower pregnancy rates (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.31-0.35) than BC patients. Compared to the general population, BC survivors had significantly increased risks of low birth weight (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.31-1.73), small for gestational age (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.33), preterm delivery (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11-1.88) and caesarean section (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04-1.25). No significant increased risk of congenital abnormalities (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.89-2.98) or other pregnancy or delivery complications (spontaneous or induced abortion, gestosis, antepartum or postpartum hemorrhage) was observed. Prior chemotherapy exposure or short pregnancy interval (defined as &lt;2 or &lt;5 years after BC diagnosis) were not associated with additional increased risk of complications. Pregnancy after BC was not associated with a negative impact on patients’ outcomes. Compared to BC patients without subsequent pregnancy, those with pregnancy after BC had better OS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.67) and DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.94). Similar results were observed in the studies correcting for the potential “healthy mother effect” (OS: HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42-0.65; DFS: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.96). No detrimental prognostic effect of pregnancy after BC was observed in patients with hormone-receptor positive disease (DFS: HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.73-1.66), while better outcomes were observed for those with hormone-receptor negative disease (DFS: HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.95). The safety of pregnancy after BC was observed irrespective of BRCA status, nodal status, previous chemotherapy exposure, pregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes. Conclusions: This large meta-analysis provides solid evidence on the safety of pregnancy after prior BC diagnosis. The increased risk of fetal and obstetrical complications (but not of congenital abnormalities) calls for ensuring a closer monitoring of these pregnancies. The significantly reduced chances of conceiving as compared to the general population and other cancer patients should raise further awareness on the need to improve the oncofertility counseling of young BC patients wishing to complete their family planning following anticancer treatment completion. Citation Format: Eva Blondeaux, Marta Perachino, Marco Bruzzone, Richard A. Anderson, Evandro De Azambuja, Philip D. Poorvu, Hee Jeong Kim, Cynthia Villarreal-Garza, Barbara Pistilli, Ines Vaz-Luis, Cristina Saura, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Maria Alice Franzoi, Chiara Sertoli, Marcello Ceppi, Hatem A. Azim, Jr., Frederic Amant, Isabelle Demeestere, Lucia Del Mastro, Ann H. Partridge, Olivia Pagani, Fedro A. Peccatori, Matteo Lambertini. Chances of pregnancy after breast cancer, reproductive and disease outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-09.
Cross-Cancer Genome-Wide Association Study of Endometrial Cancer and Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Identifies Genetic Risk Regions Associated with Risk of Both Cancers
Glubb, Dylan M. , Thompson, Deborah J. , Aben, Katja K.H. , Alsulimani, Ahmad , Amant, Frédéric , Annibali, Daniela , Barricarte, Aurelio , Beckmann, Matthias W. , Bermisheva, Marina , Bernardini, Marcus Q. , Bischof, Katharina , Bodelón, Clara , Brand, Alison H. , Brinton, Louise A. , Bruinsma, Fiona , Burghaus, Stefanie , Cai, Hui , Carney, Michael E. , Chen, Chu , Chen, Xiao Qing, Chen, Zhihua , Cunningham, Julie M. , Vivo, Immaculata De , Dörk, Thilo , Edwards, Todd, Ekici, Arif B. , Ewing, Ailith , Fasching, Peter A. , Ferguson, Sarah, Flanagan, James M. , Fostira, Florentia, Gao, Bo , Gaudet, Mia M. , Gawełko, Jan , Goodman, Marc T. , Harter, Philipp , Hein, Alexander , Hildebrandt, Michelle A.T., Hillemanns, Peter , Høgdall, Claus , Holliday, Elizabeth , Huntsman, David G. , Huzarski, Tomasz , Jones, Michael E. , Kelley, Joseph L., Killeen, Jeffrey , Klapdor, Rüdiger , Köbel, Martin , Konopka, Bożena , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Kopperud, Reidun Kristin, Koti, Madhuri , Lambrechts, Diether , Lele, Shashikant , Lester, Jenny, Li, Andrew J., Liang, Dong , Liebrich, Clemens, Lipworth, Loren , Lissowska, Jolanta , Lu, Karen H., May, Taymaa, McGuire, Valerie , McNeish, Iain A. , Menon, Usha , Moysich, Kirsten B. , Odunsi, Kunle , Olsson, Håkan , Oršulić, Sandra , Osório, Ana , Park‐Simon, Tjoung‐Won , Pearce, Celeste Leigh, Podgórska, Agnieszka , Ramus, Susan J. , Riggan, Marjorie J. , Rothstein, Joseph H. , Runnebaum, Ingo B. , Scott, Rodney J. , Sellers, Thomas A. , Sieh, Weiva , Śpiewankiewicz, Beata, Sutphen, Rebecca , Teo, Soo‐Hwang , Thompson, Pamela J., Titus, Linda , Tone, Alicia , Edwards, Digna Velez, Vergote, Ignace , Wang, Zhaoming , Wang‐Gohrke, Shan , Group, for the OPAL Study, Group, for the AOCS, Whittemore, Alice S. , Wu, Xifeng , Wu, Anna H. , O’Mara, Tracy A. , Lu, Karen H. , Lambrechts, Diether , Barricarte, Aurelio , Bischof, Katharina , Bodelon, Clara , Brenton, James D , Brinton, Louise A , Buchanan, Daniel D , Cunningham, Julie M , De Vivo, Immaculata , Fazio, Anna de , Doherty, Jennifer A , Dörk, Thilo , Dunning, Alison M , Edwards, Todd , Ewing, Ailith , Fasching, Peter A , Flanagan, James M , Friedenreich, Christine M , Gaudet, Mia M , Gawełko, Jan , Gentry‐Maharaj, Aleksandra , Giles, Graham G , Glasspool, Rosalind , Harris, Holly R , Hein, Alexander , Heitz, Florian , Hillemanns, Peter , Jakubowska, Anna , Jones, Michael E , Karlan, Beth Y , Karnezis, Anthony , Kjaer, Susanne K , Klapdor, Rüdiger , Köbel, Martin , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Kupryjanczyk, Jolanta , Lambrechts, Diether , Lissowska, Jolanta , Lu, Lingeng , McAlpine, Jessica N , McNeish, Iain A , Menon, Usha , Nevanlinna, H , Orsulic, Sandra , Palli, Domenico , Park-Simon, Tjoung-Won , Permuth, Jennifer B , Ramus, Susan J , Runnebaum, Ingo B , Sieh, Weiva , Swerdlow, Anthony J , Szafron, Lukasz M , Teo, Soo H , Thompson, Pamela J , Thomsen, Liv Cecilie Vestrheim , Titus, Linda , Tumino, Rosario , Vanderstichele, Adriaan , Vergote, Ignace , Vierkant, Robert A , Webb, Penelope M , Winham, Stacey J , Spurdle, Amanda B , Lambrechts, Diether , Moysich, Kirsten , Wang, Zhaoming , O'Mara, Tracy A , Ekici, Arif B , Amant, Frederic , Høgdall, Claus K , Huzarski, Tomasz , Brand, Alison H , Goodman, Marc T , Attia, John , Berchuck, Andrew , Bjørge, Line , Brenton, James D. , Buchanan, Daniel D. , Bützow, Ralf C. , Chanock, Stephen Jacob , Chen, Xiao Qing, Cook, Linda S. , DeFazio, Anna , Doherty, Jennifer A. , Bois, Andreas du , Dunning, Alison M. , Dürst, Matthias , Fountzilas, George , Giles, Graham G. , Glasspool, Rosalind , Gronwald, Jacek , Harris, Holly R. , Heitz, Florian , Hildebrandt, Michelle A.T. , Høgdall, Estrid , Jakubowska, Anna , Jensen, Allan , Karlan, Beth Y. , Karnezis, Anthony N. , Хуснутдинова, Э. К. , Kjær, Susanne K. , Kraft, Peter , Kupryjańczyk, Jolanta , Larson, Melissa C. , Marchand, Loı̈c Le , Macciotta, Alessandra , Mattiello, Amalia , McAlpine, Jessica N. , Modugno, Francesmary , Nevanlinna, Heli , Palli, Domenico , Pejovic, Tanja B. , Permuth, Jennifer B. , Rebbeck, Timothy R. , Risch, Harvey A. , Senz, Janine , Setiawan, Veronica Wendy , Siddiqui, Nadeem , Swerdlow, Anthony J. , Szafron, Lukasz M. , Thomsen, Liv Cecilie Vestrheim , ­Tumino, ­Rosario , Turman, Constance , Vanderstichele, Adriaan , Edwards, Digna R. Velez , Vierkant, Robert A. , Webb, Penelope M. , Group, for the OPAL Study, Group, for the AOCS, White, Emily , Winham, Stacey J. , Yannoukakos, Drakoulis , Spurdle, Amanda B.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | November 3, 2020 | Volume: 30 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 217-228

10.1158/1055-9965.epi-20-0739 Get It

Abstract Background: Accumulating evidence suggests a relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Independent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer have identified 16 and 27 risk regions, respectively, four of which overlap between the two cancers. We aimed to identify joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci by performing a meta-analysis of GWAS summary statistics from these two cancers. Methods: Using LDScore regression, we explored the genetic correlation between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. To identify loci associated with the risk of both cancers, we implemented a pipeline of statistical genetic analyses (i.e., inverse-variance meta-analysis, colocalization, and M-values) and performed analyses stratified by subtype. Candidate target genes were then prioritized using functional genomic data. Results: Genetic correlation analysis revealed significant genetic correlation between the two cancers (rG = 0.43, P = 2.66 × 10−5). We found seven loci associated with risk for both cancers (PBonferroni &lt; 2.4 × 10−9). In addition, four novel subgenome-wide regions at 7p22.2, 7q22.1, 9p12, and 11q13.3 were identified (P &lt; 5 × 10−7). Promoter-associated HiChIP chromatin loops from immortalized endometrium and ovarian cell lines and expression quantitative trait loci data highlighted candidate target genes for further investigation. Conclusions: Using cross-cancer GWAS meta-analysis, we have identified several joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci and candidate target genes for future functional analysis. Impact: Our research highlights the shared genetic relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Further studies in larger sample sets are required to confirm our findings.
Mendelian randomization analyses suggest a role for cholesterol in the development of endometrial cancer
Annibali, Daniela , Ashton, Katie A. , Auer, Paul L. , Beckmann, Matthias W. , Black, Amanda , Brinton, Louise A. , Buchanan, Daniel D. , Chen, Chu , Chen, Maxine , Cheng, Timothy, Crous‐Bou, Marta , Vivo, Immaculata De , Dörk, Thilo , Dowdy, Sean C. , Easton, Douglas F. , Ekici, Arif B. , Fasching, Peter A. , García‐Closas, Montserrat , Gaudet, Mia M. , Goode, Ellen L. , Gorman, Maggie, Haiman, Christopher A. , Hankinson, Susan E. , Hein, Alexander , Hillemanns, Peter , Hodgson, Shirley, Høivik, Erling A. , Holliday, Elizabeth , Hunter, David J., Lambrechts, Diether , Liang, Xiaolin , Lindblom, Annika , Lissowska, Jolanta , Magliocco, Anthony M., Martin, Lynn , McEvoy, Mark , Mints, Miriam, Nassir, Rami , Otton, Geoffrey, Palles, Claire , Pooler, Loreall , Proietto, Tony, Rübner, Matthias, Runnebaum, Ingo B. , Sacerdote, Carlotta , Sarto, Gloria E., Scott, Rodney J. , Shah, Mitul , Sheng, Xin , Tomlinson, Ian , Trovik, Jone , Wang, Zhaoming , Wentzensen, Nicolas , Xia, Lucy , Webb, Penelope M. , Thompson, Deborah J. , Glubb, Dylan M., O’Mara, Tracy A. , Lambrechts, Diether , Buchanan, Daniel D , Chen, Chu , De Vivo, Immaculata , Dörk, Thilo , Fasching, Peter A , Friedenreich, Christine M , Gaudet, Mia M , Goode, Ellen L , Lu, Lingeng , Sacerdote, Carlotta , Shu, Xiao-Ou , Wang, Zhaoming , Wentzensen, Nicolas , Xiang, Yong‐Bing , Yu, Herbert , Spurdle, Amanda B , O'Mara, Tracy A , Lambrechts, Diether , Webb, Penelope M , Hein, Alexander , Hillemanns, Peter , Lissowska, Jolanta , Lambrechts, Diether , García-Closas, Montserrat , Ekici, Arif B , Nassir, Rami , Palles, Claire , Lindblom, Annika , Kho, Pik Fang , Amant, Frédéric , Attia, John , Chanock, Stephen Jacob , Cook, Linda S. , Czene, Kamila , Dennis, Joe , Dunning, Alison M. , Dürst, Matthias , Fridley, Brooke L. , Giles, Graham G. , Hall, Per N , Hankinson, Susan E. , Jones, Angela, Kraft, Peter , Krakstad, Camilla , Marchand, Loı̈c Le , Long, Jirong , Milne, Roger L. , Mints, Miriam , Rebbeck, Timothy R. , Renner, Stefan P. , Risch, Harvey A. , Schumacher, Fredrick R. , Setiawan, Veronica Wendy , Shu, Xiao‐Ou , Southey, Melissa C. , Tham, Emma , Turman, Constance , Tyrer, Jonathan P. , Berg, David Van Den , Yang, Hannah , Yu, Kai , Zheng, Wei , Spurdle, Amanda B.

International Journal of Cancer | July 13, 2020 | Volume: 148 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 307-319

10.1002/ijc.33206 Get It

Abstract Blood lipids have been associated with the development of a range of cancers, including breast, lung and colorectal cancer. For endometrial cancer, observational studies have reported inconsistent associations between blood lipids and cancer risk. To reduce biases from unmeasured confounding, we performed a bidirectional, two‐sample Mendelian randomization analysis to investigate the relationship between levels of three blood lipids (low‐density lipoprotein [LDL] and high‐density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, and triglycerides) and endometrial cancer risk. Genetic variants associated with each of these blood lipid levels ( P < 5 × 10 −8 ) were identified as instrumental variables, and assessed using genome‐wide association study data from the Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium (12 906 cases and 108 979 controls) and the Global Lipids Genetic Consortium (n = 188 578). Mendelian randomization analyses found genetically raised LDL cholesterol levels to be associated with lower risks of endometrial cancer of all histologies combined, and of endometrioid and non‐endometrioid subtypes. Conversely, higher genetically predicted HDL cholesterol levels were associated with increased risk of non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. After accounting for the potential confounding role of obesity (as measured by genetic variants associated with body mass index), the association between genetically predicted increased LDL cholesterol levels and lower endometrial cancer risk remained significant, especially for non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. There was no evidence to support a role for triglycerides in endometrial cancer development. Our study supports a role for LDL and HDL cholesterol in the development of non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. Further studies are required to understand the mechanisms underlying these findings.
Genetic overlap between endometriosis and endometrial cancer: evidence from cross‐disease genetic correlation and GWAS meta‐analyses
Painter, Jodie N. , O’Mara, Tracy A. , Morris, Andrew P. , Cheng, Timothy, Gorman, Maggie, Martin, Lynn , Hodson, Shirley, Henders, Anjali K. , McEvoy, Mark , Holliday, Elizabeth , Scott, Rodney J. , Webb, Penelope M. , Fasching, Peter A. , Beckmann, Matthias W. , Ekici, Arif B. , Hein, Alexander , Rübner, Matthias, Dörk, Thilo , Hillemanns, Peter , Runnebaum, Ingo B. , Lambrechts, Diether , Annibali, Daniela , Depreeuw, Jeroen, Goode, Ellen L. , Cunningham, Julie M. , Dowdy, Sean C. , Trovik, Jone , Høivik, Erling A. , Werner, Henrica M.J., Krakstad, Camilla , Ashton, Katie A. , Otton, Geoffrey, Proietto, Tony, Tham, Emma , Mints, Miriam, Healey, Catherine S., Shah, Mitul , Bolla, Manjeet K. , Michailidou, Kyriaki , Wang, Qin , Hopper, John L. , Peto, Julian , Swerdlow, Anthony J. , Burwinkel, Barbara , Brenner, Hermann , Meindl, Alfons, Brauch, Hiltrud , Lindblom, Annika , Chang‐Claude, Jenny , Couch, Fergus J. , Kristensen, Vessela N. , Zondervan, Krina T. , Nyholt, Dale R. , MacGregor, Stuart , Tomlinson, Ian , Easton, Douglas F. , Thompson, Deborah J. , Lambrechts, Diether , Fasching, Peter A , Dörk, Thilo , Lambrechts, Diether , Goode, Ellen L , Webb, Penelope M , Hein, Alexander , Hillemanns, Peter , Swerdlow, Anthony J , O'Mara, Tracy A , Lambrechts, Diether , Brenner, Hermann , Ekici, Arif B , Michailidou, Kyriaki , MacGregor, Stuart , Jones, Angela , Martin, Nicholas G. , Gordon, Scott D. , Attia, John , Hall, Per N , Czene, Kamila , Dürst, Matthias , Amant, Frédéric , Vanderstichele, Adriaan , Winham, Stacey J. , Mints, Miriam , Ahmed, Shahana , Pharoah, Paul D.P. , Dunning, Alison M. , Dennis, Joe , Tyrer, Jonathan P. , Meindl, Alfons, Couch, Fergus J. , Giles, Graham G. , Cox, Angela , Montgomery, Grant W. , Spurdle, Amanda B. , Brauch, Hiltrud , Lindblom, Annika

Cancer Medicine | April 2, 2018 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1978-1987

10.1002/cam4.1445 Get It

AbstractEpidemiological, biological, and molecular data suggest links between endometriosis and endometrial cancer, with recent epidemiological studies providing evidence for an association between a previous diagnosis of endometriosis and risk of endometrial cancer. We used genetic data as an alternative approach to investigate shared biological etiology of these two diseases. Genetic correlation analysis of summary level statistics from genomewide association studies (GWAS) using LD Score regression revealed moderate but significant genetic correlation (rg = 0.23, P = 9.3 × 10−3), and SNP effect concordance analysis provided evidence for significant SNP pleiotropy (P = 6.0 × 10−3) and concordance in effect direction (P = 2.0 × 10−3) between the two diseases. Cross‐disease GWAS meta‐analysis highlighted 13 distinct loci associated at P ≤ 10−5 with both endometriosis and endometrial cancer, with one locus (SNP rs2475335) located within PTPRD associated at a genomewide significant level (P = 4.9 × 10−8, OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.07–1.15). PTPRD acts in the STAT3 pathway, which has been implicated in both endometriosis and endometrial cancer. This study demonstrates the value of cross‐disease genetic analysis to support epidemiological observations and to identify biological pathways of relevance to multiple diseases.