J Raphael1, M E Trudeau1, K Chan1. 1. Medical Oncology Department, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increasing number of young women are delaying childbearing; hence, more are diagnosed with breast cancer (bca) before having a family. No clear recommendations are currently available for counselling such a population on the safety of carrying a pregnancy during bca or becoming pregnant after treatment for bca. METHODS: Using a Web-based search of PubMed we reviewed the recent literature about bca and pregnancy. Our objective was to report outcomes for patients diagnosed with bca during pregnancy, comparing them with outcomes for non-pregnant women, and to evaluate prognosis in women diagnosed with and treated for bca who subsequently became pregnant. RESULTS: "Pregnancy and bca" should be divided into two entities. Pregnancy-associated bca tends to be more aggressive and advanced in stage at diagnosis than bca in control groups; hence, it has a poorer prognosis. With respect to pregnancy after bca, there is, despite the bias in reported studies and meta-analyses, no clear evidence for a different or worse disease outcome in bca patients who become pregnant after treatment compared with those who do not. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy-associated bca should be treated as aggressively as and according to the standards applicable in nonpregnant women; pregnancy after bca does not jeopardize outcome. The guidelines addressing risks connected to pregnancy and bca lack a high level of evidence for better counselling young women about pregnancy considerations and preventing unnecessary abortions. Ideally, evidence from large prospective randomized trials would set better guidelines, and yet the complexity of such studies limits their feasibility.
BACKGROUND: An increasing number of young women are delaying childbearing; hence, more are diagnosed with breast cancer (bca) before having a family. No clear recommendations are currently available for counselling such a population on the safety of carrying a pregnancy during bca or becoming pregnant after treatment for bca. METHODS: Using a Web-based search of PubMed we reviewed the recent literature about bca and pregnancy. Our objective was to report outcomes for patients diagnosed with bca during pregnancy, comparing them with outcomes for non-pregnant women, and to evaluate prognosis in women diagnosed with and treated for bca who subsequently became pregnant. RESULTS: "Pregnancy and bca" should be divided into two entities. Pregnancy-associated bca tends to be more aggressive and advanced in stage at diagnosis than bca in control groups; hence, it has a poorer prognosis. With respect to pregnancy after bca, there is, despite the bias in reported studies and meta-analyses, no clear evidence for a different or worse disease outcome in bca patients who become pregnant after treatment compared with those who do not. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy-associated bca should be treated as aggressively as and according to the standards applicable in nonpregnant women; pregnancy after bca does not jeopardize outcome. The guidelines addressing risks connected to pregnancy and bca lack a high level of evidence for better counselling young women about pregnancy considerations and preventing unnecessary abortions. Ideally, evidence from large prospective randomized trials would set better guidelines, and yet the complexity of such studies limits their feasibility.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; abortion; outcomes; pregnancy
Authors: Frédéric Amant; Gunter von Minckwitz; Sileny N Han; Marijke Bontenbal; Alistair E Ring; Jerzy Giermek; Hans Wildiers; Tanja Fehm; Sabine C Linn; Bettina Schlehe; Patrick Neven; Pieter J Westenend; Volkmar Müller; Kristel Van Calsteren; Brigitte Rack; Valentina Nekljudova; Nadia Harbeck; Michael Untch; Petronella O Witteveen; Kathrin Schwedler; Christoph Thomssen; Ben Van Calster; Sibylle Loibl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael J Halaska; George Pentheroudakis; Pavel Strnad; Hana Stankusova; Jiri Chod; Helena Robova; Lubos Petruzelka; Lukas Rob; Nicholas Pavlidis Journal: Breast J Date: 2009-06-13 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Beth M Beadle; Wendy A Woodward; Lavinia P Middleton; Welela Tereffe; Eric A Strom; Jennifer K Litton; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Richard L Theriault; Thomas A Buchholz; George H Perkins Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael Helewa; Pierre Lévesque; Diane Provencher; Robert H Lea; Vera Rosolowich; Heather M Shapiro Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Date: 2002-02
Authors: Barbara Luke; Morton B Brown; Stacey A Missmer; Logan G Spector; Richard E Leach; Melanie Williams; Lori Koch; Yolanda R Smith; Judy E Stern; G David Ball; Maria J Schymura Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Barbara Luke; Morton B Brown; Logan G Spector; Judy E Stern; Yolanda R Smith; Melanie Williams; Lori Koch; Maria J Schymura Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: A N Schüring; T Fehm; K Behringer; M Goeckenjan; P Wimberger; M Henes; J Henes; M F Fey; M von Wolff Journal: Arch Gynecol Obstet Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 2.344
Authors: László Mangel; Krisztina Bíró; István Battyáni; Péter Göcze; Tamás Tornóczky; Endre Kálmán Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 4.430