Citations

In the United States, one in 196 women is diagnosed with breast cancer under the age of 40 years. Adolescents and young adults (AYAs), of age 15-39 years at diagnosis, experience a number of unique challenges when confronting breast cancer. The incidence of invasive breast cancer has increased among AYA women in the United States since 2004, and most of this change is due to an increase in young women diagnosed with distant disease. AYAs are more likely than older women to present with aggressive subtypes and advanced disease, and they often require systemic staging at diagnosis. Clinical trials should be considered whenever possible, particularly in AYAs with locally advanced or metastatic disease at diagnosis and those with disease progression or recurrence. A significant proportion of AYAs carry germline cancer predisposition mutations, which necessitates prompt genetic testing for all AYAs at diagnosis and may influence choice of local therapy. Suppression of ovarian function, as an adjunct to chemotherapy, may improve breast cancer survival in AYAs. To provide optimal care for AYAs with breast cancer, clinicians should engage multidisciplinary teams that offer fertility preservation, genetic counseling, physical and occupational therapy, nutrition, and psychosocial support, along with medical expertise in tailoring cancer-directed therapy and symptom management toward young women.

AbstractBreast cancer is the most common cancer of adolescents and young adult (AYA) women aged 15 to 39 years, accounting for 5.6% of all invasive breast cancer in women. In comparison with older women, AYAs are more likely to have familial cancer predisposition genes, larger breast tumors, unfavorable biological characteristics, distant metastatic disease at diagnosis, and adverse outcome. Endocrine therapy and some chemotherapy recommendations differ between young and older women. AYAs require coordinated multidisciplinary care, treatment regimens that minimize late effects such as premature menopause and osteoporosis, and proactive management of psychological and sexual health during and after cancer treatment.

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients with cancer have not attained the same improvements in overall survival as either younger children or older adults. One possible reason for this disparity may be that the AYA cancers exhibit unique biologic characteristics, resulting in differences in clinical and treatment resistance behaviors. This report from the biologic component of the jointly sponsored National Cancer Institute and LiveStrong Foundation workshop entitled “Next Steps in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology” summarizes the current status of biologic and translational research progress for 5 AYA cancers; colorectal cancer breast cancer, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, melanoma, and sarcoma. Conclusions from this meeting included the need for basic biologic, genomic, and model development for AYA cancers as well as translational research studies to elucidate any fundamental differences between pediatric, AYA, and adult cancers. The biologic questions for future research are whether there are mutational or signaling pathway differences (for example, between adult and AYA colorectal cancer) that can be clinically exploited to develop novel therapies for treating AYA cancers and to develop companion diagnostics. Cancer 2016;122:1017–1028. © 2016 American Cancer Society

Purpose Limited data exist regarding the outcomes of adjuvant therapy in younger patients with stage II and III colon cancer. We examined disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), recurrence-free interval (RFI), and grade 3+ adverse events (AEs) in younger patients in the 33,574 patient Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints Group data set. Patients and Methods Individual patient data from 24 randomized phase III clinical trials were obtained for survival outcomes, which included 10 clinical trials for AE outcomes. Two age-based cutoff points were used to define younger patients: age younger than 40 years and younger than 50 years. Adjuvant therapy benefit analyses were limited to the nine clinical trials in which the investigational chemotherapeutic arm demonstrated benefit. Results One thousand seven hundred fifty-eight patients (5.2%) were younger than 40 years, 5,817 patients (17.3%) were younger than 50 years, and only 299 patients (0.9%) were younger than 30 years. No meaningful differences in sex or stage were noted in younger versus older patients. Younger and older patients did not differ in RFI (age, < 40 years: hazard ratio [HR], 1.0; P = .62 and age < 50 years: HR, 1.02; P = .35). Younger patients (both cutoff points), had longer OS and DFS than older patients. In trials demonstrating adjuvant therapy benefit, similar DFS benefit was observed by age. Younger patients experienced less leukopenia and stomatitis, but more frequent nausea/vomiting. Conclusion Among patients on clinical trials, younger and older patients with stage II and III colon cancer had similar RFI and adjuvant therapy benefit. Younger patients have longer OS and DFS, which is likely primarily because of fewer competing causes of death. Adjuvant therapy is beneficial for colon cancer in patients younger than 50 years who meet typical clinical trial eligibility criteria.

PurposeColorectal cancer predominantly occurs in the elderly, but approximately 5% of patients are 50 years old or younger. We sought to determine whether young age is prognostic, or whether it influences efficacy/toxicity of chemotherapy, in patients with advanced disease.MethodsWe analyzed individual data on 6,284 patients from nine phase III trials of advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) that used fluorouracil-based single-agent and combination chemotherapy. End points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and grade 3 or worse adverse events. Stratified Cox and adjusted logistic-regression models were used to test for age effects and age-treatment interactions.ResultsA total of 793 patients (13%) were younger than 50 years old; 188 of these patients (3% of total patients) were younger than 40 years old. Grade 3 or worse nausea (10% v 7%; P = .01) was more common, and severe diarrhea (11% v 14%; P = .001) and neutropenia (23% v 26%; P < .001) were less common in young (younger than 50 years) than in older (older than 50 years) patients. Age was prognostic for PFS, with poorer outcomes occurring in those younger than 50 years (median, 6.0 v 7.5 months; hazard ratio, 1.10; P = .02), but it did not affect RR or OS. In the subset of monotherapy versus combination chemotherapy trials, the relative benefits of multiagent chemotherapy were similar for young and older patients. Results were comparable when utilizing an age cut point of 40 years.ConclusionYoung age is modestly associated with poorer PFS but not OS or RR in treated patients with aCRC, and young patients have more nausea but less diarrhea and neutropenia with chemotherapy in general. Young versus older patients derive the same benefits from combination chemotherapy. Absent results of a clinical trial, standard combination chemotherapy approaches are appropriate for young patients with aCRC.

Abstract Purpose: Vinorelbine (Navelbine) is an orally absorbable Vinca with broad antitumor activity. It differs from other Vinca in that it is structurally modified on the catharanthine nucleus and has differential actions on tubulin that render it less neurotoxic than other compounds in this class. We conducted a phase I study of vinorelbine given the activity of Vinca alkaloids in many pediatric tumors. Experimental Design: We evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of oral and i.v. vinorelbine administered weekly × 6 in children (age, 2-17 years) with different tumors. Patients with disease involvement in the bone marrow were eligible but were stratified and dose-escalated separately. Oral vinorelbine (week 1) was administered as liquid-filled gelatin capsules at thrice the i.v. dose. Intravenous vinorelbine doses of 24 to 37.5 mg/m2 were administered on weeks 2 to 6. Results: The dose-limiting toxicity in patients without marrow involvement was reversible neutropenia. Common nonhematologic toxicities included ≤ grade 2 nausea/vomiting and increased hepatic transaminases. A higher mean i.v. ClTB was observed (1.75 ± 1.0 L/h/kg) compared with adult reports, with a mean t1/2B of 16.5 ± 9.7 hours. Mean oral bioavailability was 28.5 ± 22.5%. The apparent oral clearance (12.1 ± 13.0 L/h/kg) and volume of distribution (69.4 ± 30.6 L/kg) were substantially higher than in adults given similar oral doses. Conclusions: The maximum tolerated dose in children without bone marrow involvement was 30 mg/m2, similar to that reported in adults, with myelosuppression being the dose-limiting toxicity. Higher plasma clearance resulted in lower area under the plasma concentration-time curves at a given dose compared with that reported in adults.