Hanne Lefrère1, Giuseppe Floris2, Marjanka K Schmidt3, Patrick Neven4, Ellen Warner5, Elyce Cardonick6, Fedro A Peccatori7, Sibylle Loibl8, Charlotte Maggen9, Hanne De Mulder10, Katarzyna J Jerzak5, Diether Lambrechts11, Liesbeth Lenaerts12, Frédéric Amant13. 1. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Gynecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Gynecology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Imaging and Pathology, Unit of Translational Cell & Tissue Research, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Pathology, Unit of Translational Cell & Tissue Research, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Multidisciplinary Breast Centre, UZ-KU Leuven Cancer Institute (LKI), University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Division of Physiological Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Gynecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Multidisciplinary Breast Centre, UZ-KU Leuven Cancer Institute (LKI), University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 5. Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cooper University Health Care, Camden, NJ, USA. 7. Division of Gynecological Oncology, Department of Gynecology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 8. German Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Hessen, Germany; Centre for Haematology and Oncology Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany. 9. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Gynecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 10. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 11. Center for Cancer Biology, VIB, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 12. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Gynecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 13. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Gynecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Gynecology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Gynecological Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: frederic.amant@uzleuven.be.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In young women, a breast cancer diagnosis after childbirth increases the risk for metastasis and death. Studies in rodents suggest that post-weaning mammary gland involution contributes to the poor prognosis of postpartum breast cancers. However, this association has not been investigated in humans, mainly because of missing information on the patient's lactation status at diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinicopathological data of 1180 young women with primary invasive breast cancer, diagnosed within 2 years postpartum (PP-BC), during pregnancy (Pr-BC), or nulliparous (NP-BC), were collected. For PP-BC patients, breastfeeding history was retrieved to differentiate breast cancers identified during lactation (PP-BCDL) from those diagnosed post-weaning (PP-BCPW). Differences in prognostic parameters, first site of distant metastasis, and risks for metastasis and death were determined between patient groups. RESULTS: Cox proportional hazard models pointed to a twofold increased the risk of metastasis and death in PP-BCPW patients compared with PP-BCDL (hazard ratio [HR] 2.1 [PDRS = 0.021] and 2.9 [POS = 0.004]), Pr-BC (HR 2.1 [PDRS<0.001] and 2.3 [POS<0.001]) and NP-BC (HR 2.1 [PDRS<0.001] and 2.0 [POS<0.001]) patients. Prognosis was poorest for PP-BCPW patients who did not breastfeed or only for ≤ 3 months before diagnosis. This could not fully be attributed to differences in standard prognostic characteristics. In addition, PP-BCPW tumours showed a 3- to 8-fold increased risk to metastasise to the liver, yet this did not correlate with the poor outcome of this patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer diagnosed shortly after weaning specifically adds to the poor prognosis in women diagnosed with PP-BC. Apart from the importance of an increased awareness, these data show that detailed lactation data need to be registered when breast cancer outcome in young women is investigated.
BACKGROUND: In young women, a breast cancer diagnosis after childbirth increases the risk for metastasis and death. Studies in rodents suggest that post-weaning mammary gland involution contributes to the poor prognosis of postpartum breast cancers. However, this association has not been investigated in humans, mainly because of missing information on the patient's lactation status at diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinicopathological data of 1180 young women with primary invasive breast cancer, diagnosed within 2 years postpartum (PP-BC), during pregnancy (Pr-BC), or nulliparous (NP-BC), were collected. For PP-BC patients, breastfeeding history was retrieved to differentiate breast cancers identified during lactation (PP-BCDL) from those diagnosed post-weaning (PP-BCPW). Differences in prognostic parameters, first site of distant metastasis, and risks for metastasis and death were determined between patient groups. RESULTS: Cox proportional hazard models pointed to a twofold increased the risk of metastasis and death in PP-BCPW patients compared with PP-BCDL (hazard ratio [HR] 2.1 [PDRS = 0.021] and 2.9 [POS = 0.004]), Pr-BC (HR 2.1 [PDRS<0.001] and 2.3 [POS<0.001]) and NP-BC (HR 2.1 [PDRS<0.001] and 2.0 [POS<0.001]) patients. Prognosis was poorest for PP-BCPW patients who did not breastfeed or only for ≤ 3 months before diagnosis. This could not fully be attributed to differences in standard prognostic characteristics. In addition, PP-BCPW tumours showed a 3- to 8-fold increased risk to metastasise to the liver, yet this did not correlate with the poor outcome of this patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer diagnosed shortly after weaning specifically adds to the poor prognosis in women diagnosed with PP-BC. Apart from the importance of an increased awareness, these data show that detailed lactation data need to be registered when breast cancer outcome in young women is investigated.
Authors: Elena Shagisultanova; Dexiang Gao; Eryn Callihan; Hannah J Parris; Betsy Risendal; Lisa M Hines; Martha L Slattery; Kathy Baumgartner; Pepper Schedin; Esther M John; Virginia F Borges Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 10.002
Authors: Sungmin Park; Ji Sung Lee; Jae Sun Yoon; Nam Hyoung Kim; Seho Park; Hyun Jo Youn; Jong Won Lee; Jung Eun Lee; Jihyoun Lee; Ho Hur; Joon Jeong; Kweon-Cheon Kim; Soo Youn Bae Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 5.738