Breast Cancer

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Today News Reference Education Log In Register 

 

Breast Cance C ancerr  Author: Alison T Stopeck, MD; Chief Editor: Editor: Jules E Harr Harris, is, MD more...  

Updated: Dec 23, 2013  

Practice Essential Ess entials s Worldwide, breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed life-threatening cancer in women and the leading cause of cancer death among women.

Essential update: FDA warns warns against against nipple aspirate tests te sts for breast bre ast cancer cancer screens scree ns The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently issued a warning that nipple aspirate tests are not an effective screening tool for breast cancer or other breast diseases and should not be used in place of  mammography, other imaging tests, or biopsy. The agency is concerned that the test, which involves analysis of  fluid aspirated from a woman's breast with a pump device, could lead to false-positive or -negative results if fluid analysis alone is used as a screen. [1]  A warning warning against against t he use of nipple aspiration aspiration for for breast breast cancer screening is also foun found d in the Nationa Nationall Comprehensive Cancer Network’s (NCCN’s) 2013 guidelines, which, in addition, state that the test is currently being evaluated for clinical usefulness.

Signs and symptoms Early breast cancers may be asymptomatic, and pa pain in and discomfort discomfort are typically typic ally not pre present. sent. If a lump is discovered, the following may indicate the possible presence of breast cancer: Change in breast size or shape Skin dimpling or skin sk in changes Recent nipple inversion or skin change, or nipple abnormalities Single-duct Sing le-duct discharge, particularly if blood-stained  Axilla  Ax illary ry lump See Clini Clinical cal Presentation for Presentation for more detail.

Diagnosis Breast cancer is often first detected as an abnormality on a mammogram before it is felt by the patient or health care provider. Evaluation of breast cancer includes the following: Clinical examination Imaging Needle biopsy emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

1/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Physical examination examination The following physical findings should raise concern: Lump or contour change Skin tetherin tethering g Nipple inversion inversion Dilated veins Ulceration Paget disease Edema or peau d’orange If a palpable lump is found and possesses any of the following features, breast cancer may be present: Hardness Irregularity Focal nodularity Fixation to skin or muscle Screening  Early detection remains the primary defense in preventing breast cancer. Screening modalities include the following: Breast self-examination self-examination Clinical breast examination Mammography Ultrasonography Magnetic resonance imaging Ultrasonography and MRI are more sensitive than mammography for invasive cancer in nonfatty breasts. Combined mammography, clinical examination, and MRI are more sensitive than any other individual test or combination of  tests. Biopsy  Core biopsy with image guidance is the recommended diagnostic approach for newly diagnosed breast cancers. This is a method for obtaining breast tissue without surgery and can eliminate the need for additional surgeries. Open excisional biopsy is the surgical removal of the entire lump. See Workup for Workup for more detail.

Management Surgery  Surgery Surge ry is the primary primary trea t reatment tment for breast breast cancer. Lumpectomy or total mastectomy may be indicated. Radiation therapy may follow surgery in an effort to eradicate residual disease while reducing recurrence rates.  Adjuvant  Adjuv ant treatment treatment for breast breast cancer involv involves es radiation therap therapy y and a variety variety of chemotherap chemotherapeutic eutic and biolog biologic ic agents. There are 2 general approaches for delivering radiation therapy: External-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) Partial-breast irradiation (PBI) Surgical resection with or without radiation is the standard treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ. Pharmacologic agents Hormone therapy and chemotherapy are the 2 main interventions for treating metastatic breast cancer. Common chemotherapeutic regimens include the following: emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

2/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Docetaxel Cyclophosphamide Doxorubicin Carboplatin Methotrexate Trastuzumab Two selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), tamoxifen and raloxifene, are approved for reduction of  breast brea st cancer risk in high-risk high-risk women. women. In patients receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for breast cancer who are at high risk for fracture, the monoclonal antibody denosumab or either of the bisphosphonates zoledronic acid and pamidronate may be added to the treatment regimen to increase bone mass. These agents are given along with calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Treatment and  and Medication Medication for  for more detail. See Treatment

Image library

 Anatomy of breas t.

Background Worldwide, breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed life-threatening cancer in women and the leading cause of cancer death in women. [2] In the United States, breast cancer accounts for 29% of all cancers in women and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer deaths. [3] (For discussion of male breast cancer c ancer,, see Breast Cancer in Men.) Men.) Many early breast breast carcinomas are asymptomatic; pain or discomf discomfort ort is not usually a s ymptom of bre breast ast cancer. c ancer. Breast cancer is often first detected as an abnormality on a mammogram before it is felt by the patient or  healthcare provider. provider. The general approach to evaluation of breast cancer has become formalized as triple assessment: clinical examination, imaging (usually mammography, ultrasonography, or both), and needle biopsy. (See Workup.) Increased public awareness and improved screening have led to earlier diagnosis, at stages amenable to complete surgical resection and curative therapies. Improvements in therapy and screening have led to improved survival rates for women diagnosed with breast cancer. Surgery and radiation therapy, along with adjuvant hormone or chemotherapy when indicated, are now considered primary treatment for breast cancer. For many patients with low-risk early-stage breast cancer, surgery with local radiation is curative. (See Treatment and Management.) Surgery is considered primary treatment for breast cancer. Many patients with early-stage breast cancer are cured with surgery alone. (See Treatment and Management.)  Adjuvant  Adjuv ant breast breast cancer c ancer therapie therapies s are designed designed to treat micrometastatic disease or breast breast cancer cells that hav have e emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

3/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

escaped the breast and regional lymph nodes but do not yet have an established identifiable metastasis. Depending on the model of risk reduction, adjuvant therapy has been estimated to be responsible for 35-72% of  the decrease decrease in mortality. mortality . Over the past 3 decades, extensive and advocate-driven breast cancer research has led to extraordinary progress in the understanding of the disease. This has resulted in the development of more targeted and less toxic treatments. (See Treatmentand Medication.) Medication.) Mastectomy , For patient education information, see the Breast Cancer Health Center , as well as Breast Cancer , Mastectomy, Pain,, Breast SelfS elf-Exam Exam,, and Mammogram Mammogram.. Breast Lumps and Pain

Anatomy The breasts of an adult woman are milk-producing glands on the front of the chest wall. They rest on the pectoralis major and are supported by and attached to the front of the chest wall on either side of the sternum by ligaments. Each breast contains 15-20 lobes arranged in a circular fashion. The fat that covers the lobes gives the breast its size and shape. Each lobe comprises many lobules, at the end of which are glands that produce milk in response to hormones (see the image below).

 Anatomy of breas t.

Pathophysiology The current understanding of breast cancer etiopathogenesis is that invasive cancers arise through a series of  molecular alterations at the cell level. These alterations result in breast epithelial cells with immortal features and uncontrolled growth. Genomic profiling has demonstrated the presence of discrete breast tumor subtypes with distinct natural histories and clinical behavior. The exact number of disease subtypes and molecular alterations from which these subtypes arise remains to be fully elucidated, but these generally align with the presence or absence of estrogen receptor  (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). This view of breast cancer--not as a set of stochastic molecular events, but as a limited set of separable diseases of distinct molecular and and cellular origins--has origins--has altered thinking about brea breast st cancer etiology, t ype-specif ype-specific ic risk factors, and prevention and has had a substantial impact on treatment strategies and breast cancer research. Evidence from The Cancer Genome Atlas Network (TCGA) confirms the following 4 main breast tumor subtypes, with distinct dist inct genetic genetic and epigenetic epigenetic aberrations aberrations[4] (see the image below): Luminal A Luminal B Basal-like HER2-positive

emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

4/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Intrin ntrinsic sic subtypes of breast cancer.

It is noteworthy that the basal-like breast tumor subgroup shares a number of molecular characteristics common to serous ovarian tumors, including the types and frequencies of genomic mutations. These data support the evidence that some breast cancers share etiologic factors with ovarian cancer. Most compelling are the data showing that patients with basal-type breast cancers show treatment responsiveness similar to that of ovarian cancer patients.[5] The various types of breast cancers are listed below by percentage of cases: Infiltra Infiltrating ting ductal carcinoma is the most commonly diagnosed breast breast tumor t umor and has has a tendency to metastasize via lymphatics; lymphatics ; tthis his lesion lesi on accounts for 75% 75% of brea breast st cancers Over the2.8 past years, women; the incidence of lobular carcinoma in situaged (LCIS) has years doubled, reaching a current level of per25 100,000 the peak incidence is in women 40-50 Infiltrating lobular carcinoma accounts for fewer than 15% of invasive breast cancers Medullary carcinoma accounts for about 5% of cases and generally occurs in younger women Mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is seen in fewer than 5% of invasive breast cancer cases Tubular carcinoma of the breast accounts for 1-2% of all breast cancers Papillary carcinoma is usually seen in women older than 60 years and accounts for approximately 1-2% of  all breast cancers Metaplastic breast cancer accounts for fewer than 1% of breast cancer cases, tends to occur in older  women (average age of onset in the sixth decade), and has a higher incidence in blacks Mammary Mammar y Paget P aget disease accounts for 1-4% 1-4% of all breast cancers and has a peak inc incidence idence in the sixth six th decade of life (mean age, 57 years)

Etiology Epidemiologic studies have identified a number of risk factors that are associated with an increased risk of a woman developing breast cancer. Several risk factors have been found to be clinically useful for assessing a patient’s risk of breast breast cancer. c ancer. Many of these factors factors form the basis of breast breast cancer c ancer risk assessment ass essment tools currently curren tly being used in the practic practice e setting. setti ng.

Age and gender  ge nder  Increasing age and female sex are established risk factors for breast cancer. Sporadic breast cancer is relatively uncommon among women younger than 40 years but increases significantly thereafter. The effect of age on risk is illustrated in the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) data, where the incidence of invasive breast cancer for women younger than 50 years is 44.0 per 100,000 as compared with 345 per 100,000 for women aged 50 years or older. [6] The total and age-specific incidence for breast cancer is bimodal, with the first peak occurring at about 50 years and the second occurring at about 70 years. [7] This bimodal pattern may reflect the influence of age within the different tumor subtypes; poorly differentiated, high-grade disease tend to occur earlier, whereas hormonesensitive, slower-growing tumors tend to occur with advancing age. emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

5/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Family history of breast cancer   A positive family family hist ory of brea breast st c ancer is the most widely recognized risk factor ffor or breast breast cancer. The lif lifetime etime risk is up to 4 times higher if a mother and sister are affected, and it is about 5 times greater in women who have 2 or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer. The risk is also greater among women with breast cancer in a single first-degree relative, particularly if the relative was diagnosed at an early age (≤50 years). Despite a history indicating increased risk, many of these families have normal results on genetic testing.  A family history of ovarian ovarian cancer cancer in a first-degre first-degree e relative, relative, especially if i f the disease occurr occurred ed at an ear early ly age (< 50 years), has been associated with a doubling of breast cancer risk. This often reflects inheritance of a pathogenic mutation in the BRCA1 BRCA1 or  or BRCA2  gene.   gene. Th The e family history chara c haracteristic cteristics s t hat suggest increased risk of cancer are are summarized as follows: follows: Two or more relatives with breast or ovarian cancer  Breast cancer occurring in an affected relative younger than 50 years Relatives with both breast cancer and ovarian cancer  One or more relatives with 2 cancers (breast and ovarian cancer or 2 independent breast cancers) Male relatives with breast cancer  BRCA1 and BRCA1  and BRCA2  mutations  mutations  Ataxia telangiectasia heterozygotes (quadrup (quadrupled led risk)  Ashkenazi Jewish descent (doubled (doubled risk risk))  A small percentage percentage of patients, usually with a strong s trong family family hist ory of other other cancers, have have cancer syndrome syndromes. s. These include families with a mutation in the PTEN, TP53, MLH1, MLH2, CDH1, or CDH1, or STK11 STK11 gene.  gene. To aid in the identification of mutation carriers of BRCA1/2 , a number of family family hist ory–ba ory–based sed risk assessment assess ment tools have been developed for clinical use, including the following: BRCAPRO Couch Myriad I and II Ontario Ontar io Family History Assessment As sessment Tool (FHAT) (FHAT) Manchester   All of these assessment assess ment tools are highly highly predictiv predictive e of carrier carrier status and aid in reducing reducing testing cost costs s for the [8] majority of mutation negative families. BRCAPR BRCAPRO, O, the t he most commonly used model, identif identifies ies approximately 50% of mutation-negative families, avoiding unnecessary genetic testing, and fails to screen only about 10% of  mutation carr c arriers. iers. Notably, a significant portion of ovarian cancers not previously considered familial can be attributed to BRCA1 BRCA1 or   or  [9] BRCA2  mutations.  mutations. This finding has led to the suggestion that women with nonmucinous invasive ovarian cancers may benefit from genetic testing to determine mutation status independent of a strong history or no history of  breast brea st cancer. Directory.. This is a partial listing of  The National Institutes of Health (NIH) provides a Cancer Genetics Services Directory professionals who provide services related to cancer genetics, including cancer risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic susceptibility testing.

Reproductive factors and steroid hormones Late age at first pregnancy, nulliparity, early onset of menses, and late age of menopause have all been consistently associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. [10, 11, 12, 13, 14] Prolonged exposure to elevated levels of sexbetween hormones has cancer long been as behaviors. a risk factor for [15, 16]developing breast cancer, explaining the association breast andpostulated reproductive Clinical trials of secondary prevention in women with breast cancer have demonstrated the protective effect of  selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors on recurrence and the development of  emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

6/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

contralateral breast cancers.[17] Use of SERMs in women at increased risk for breast cancer has prevented contralateral invasive invasive ER-positi ER-positiv ve cancers. c ancers. [18, 19, 20] These data support estradiol and its receptor as a primary target for risk reduction but do not establish that circulating hormone levels predict increase risk.  A number of of epidemiolog epidemiologic ic and pooled studies support support an elevated elevated risk of breast breast c cancer ancer among among wo women men with high [21, 22] The Endogenous Hormones and Breast Cancer Collaborative Group (EHBCG) reported a estradiol levels. relative risk of 2.58 among women in the top quintile of estradiol levels. [23] Upon thorough review of the collective data, the Breast Cancer Prevention Collaborative Group (BCPCG) prioritized additional factors that might be included in the validation phase of a risk prediction model and gave a high priority score to free plasma estradiol levels. [22] At present, routine measuremen measurementt of plasma hor hormone mone lev levels els is not recommended recommen ded in the assessment ass essment of breast cancer risk. risk . One of the most widely studied factors in breast cancer etiology is the use of exogenous hormones in the form of  The e overall overall evidence suggests suggest s an oral contraceptives (OCs) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT).[24, 25] Th approximately 25% greater risk of breast cancer among current users of OCs. The risk appears to decrease with age and time since OC discontinuance. For OC users, risk returns to that of the average population risk about 10 years after cessation. Data obtained from case-control and prospective cohort settings support an increased risk of breast cancer  incidence and mortality with the use of postmenopausal HRT. [26] Increased risk of breast cancer has been positively associated with length of exposure, with the greatest risk being observed for hormonally responsive lobular, mixed ductal-lobular, and tubular cancers. [26] Risk is greater among women taking combination HRT than among those taking estrogen-only formulations. [27] In the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trial, the incidence of invasive breast cancer was 26% higher in women randomly assigned to combination HRT than in those assigned to placebo. In contrast, the use of estrogen (conjugated equine estrogen) alone in women who had undergone hysterectomy was associated with a 23% (but not significant) decrease in breast cancer risk in comparison with placebo at initial reporting. On extended follow-up (median, 11.8 years), estrogen-only therapy for 5-9 years in women with hysterectomy was associated with a significant 23% reduction in the annual incidence of invasive breast cancer (0.27%; placebo, 0.35%). [28] Fewer women died of breast cancer in the estrogen-only arm. These findings contrast with those reported from large observational case-control and prospective cohort studies, where estrogen alone was associated with increased risk (though the increase was consistently less than that associated with combined HRT use). [29] To aid the medical community in the application of HRT, a number of agencies and groups have published recommendations for HRT use in the treatment of menopause and associated bone loss. At present, HRT is not recommended for prevention of cardiovascular disease or dementia or, more generally, for long-term use to prevent disease. Recommendations differ slightly by agency and by country. US and non-US evidence-based treatment recommendations can be found at the National Guidelines Clearinghouse Web site site.. When prescribing HRT, the clinician should provide a discussion of the most current evidence and an assessment of the potential benefit and harm to the patient. Because of the known risk of endometrial cancer with estrogenonly formulations, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently advises the use of estrogen-plusprogesterone HRT for the management of menopausal symptoms in women with an intact uterus tailored to the individual patient, at the lowest effective dose for the shortest time needed to abate symptoms. There are currently no formal guidelines for the use of HRT in women at high risk for breast cancer (ie, women with a family history of breast cancer, a personal history of breast cancer, or benign breast disease). Only a few studies have evaluated the effect of HRT after a diagnosis of breast cancer. The largest of these, the HABITS (Hormonal replacement therapy After Breast cancer—is IT Safe?) study was stopped early because unacceptable rates of breast cancer recurrence and contralateral disease with 2 years of HRT use (hazard ratio, 3.5). [30] In another randomized clinical trial, no increase in the risk of breast cancer recurrences was observed in women at emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

7/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

a median follow up of 4.1 years. [31] Use of progesterone-containing HRT was limited by intermittent use, with continuous exposure avoided. Combination formulations containing estrogen plus progesterone are contraindicated in women with a prior history of invasive disease, a history of ductal or lobular carcinoma in situ, or a strong family history of breast cancer. This recommendation poses a significant challenge when confronted with a patient suffering severe menopausal symptoms. Many new treatments for menopausal symptoms have been suggested (eg, clonidine, venlafaxine, gabapentin, and combination venlafaxine plus gabapentin). To date, no randomized clinical trials among women at increased risk of  breast cancer or women with a history of breast cancer have assessed the overall efficacy or risks associated with these treatments.[32] Use of these agents is controversial and should target the severity of menopausal symptoms. Other hormone-based approaches (eg, low-dose vaginal estrogen for vaginal and urinary symptoms, including dyspareunia) are generally considered to be safer, particularly in patients receiving SERMs. However, these agents agen ts may also carry a slight increased risk, in that they are capable of rraising aising estradiol lev levels, els, at least transiently, depending on the dose and frequency of administration. Little evidence supports the benefit of  commonly used dietary isoflavones, black cohosh, or vitamin E.

Prior breast health history  A history hist ory of brea breast st cancer is associated ass ociated with a 3- to 4-fo 4-fold ld increased risk risk of a second primary primary cancer in the [33, 34, 35] The presence of any premalignant ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or LCIS confers contralateral breast. an 8- to 10-fold increase in the risk of developing breast cancer in women who harbor untreated preinvasive lesions. [36, 37]

 A history hist ory of brea breast st biopsy that is positive positive for for hyperplasia, hyperplasia, fibroade fibroadenoma noma w with ith complex featur features, es, s sclerosing clerosing adenosis, and solitary papilloma have been associated with a modest (1.5- to 2-fold) increase in breast cancer  risk.[36, 37] In contrast, contrast, any diagno diagnosis sis of atypical hyperplasia hyperplasia tthat hat is ductal or lobular in nature, nature, especially iin na woman under the age of 45 years, carries a 4- to 5-fold increased risk of breast cancer, with the increase rising to 8- to 10-fold among women with multiple foci of atypia or calcifications in the breast. [38] Benign breast breast lesions, including fibrocys fibrocystic tic disease such as fibrocystic change without without prolif proliferativ erative e breast disease [39] or fibroadenoma, have not been associated with increased risk.

Lifestyle Lifestyl e risk factors The wide variability of breast cancer incidence around the world (eg, the nearly 5-fold difference between Eastern  Africa and and Western West ern Europe) Europe) has long been been attributed to diffe differen rences ces in dietary intake and reproductiv reproductive e pattern patterns. s. [40, 41, 42, 43] In general, rates differ according to the level of industrial development: there are more than 80 cases per  100,000 in developed countries, compared with fewer than 40 per 100,000 in less developed countries.  As with cancers c ancers of the the colon and prostate, prostate, diets that are rich in grains, grains, fruits, and vegetab vegetables; les; low in saturated fa fats; ts; low in energy (calories); and low in alcohol—the more common pattern in less industrialized countries—are thought to be protective against breast cancer. [44]

Obesity Increased risk of postmenopausal breast cancer has been consistently associated with the following:  Adult weight weight gain of 20-25 20-25 kg abov above e body weight weight at age 18[45, 46] Western dietary pattern (high energy content in the form of animal fats and refined carbohydrates) Seden Sedentary tary lifestyle lifestyl e consumption of alcohol (3-5 alcoholic beverages per week) Regular, moderate Th The e Western W estern lifestyle (ie, chronic excess energy energy intake intak e from from meat, fat, fat, and carbohydrate carbohydrates s and lack of exer exercis cise) e) strongly correlates with development of the following: emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

8/22

 

12 12//28/13

Br east Cancer  

Obesity, particularly particularly abdominal abdominal obesity Chronic hyperinsulinemia Higher production and availability of insulinlike growth factor (IGF)-1 Increased levels of endogenous sex hormones through suppression of sex hormone–binding globulin[47, 48] Studies of dietary fat, total energy, and meat intake levels have largely been inconsistent in population studies of  adult women with regard to risk of breast cancer. In contrast, epidemiologic studies have more consistently found a positive relation relation between between breast breast cancer risk and ear early-life ly-life exposures exposures such as diet, obesity, obesity , and body s size ize [49, 50, 51] (including height). The mechanism of this relation is unknown.

Environmental risk factors  A number of of env environme ironmental ntal exposure exposures s have have been in inv vestigated in relation to breast breast cancer risk in humans, humans, iincluding ncluding [52, 53, 54, 55] the following : Tobacco smoke (both active and passive exposure) Dietary (eg, charred and processed meats)  Alcohol consumption Environmental carcinogens (eg, exposure to pesticides, radiation, and environmental and dietary estrogens) Of these environmental exposures, only high doses of ionizing radiation to the chest area, particularly during puberty, have been unequivocally linked with an increased risk of breast cancer in adulthood. [55, 56] Because of the strong association between ionizing radiation exposure and breast cancer risk, medical diagnostic procedures are performed in such a way as to minimize exposure to the chest area, particularly during adolescence. Women with a history of radiation exposure to the chest area should be examined and counseled regarding their  risk of breast cancer on the basis of the timing and dose of the previous exposure. A patient treated for Hodgkin lymphoma with Mantel radiation that includes the breasts in the radiation field has a 5-fold higher risk of developing breast cancer. This risk increases markedly for women treated during adolescence[57] ; evidence suggests that cumulative risk increases with age as a function of age of exposure and type of therapy. [58] Current evidence does not support a significant and reproducible link between other environmental exposures and breast cancer risk. Thus, a number of factors remain suspect but unproven.

Epidemiology United States statistics In the United States, approximately 232,340 new cases of female invasive breast cancer are predicted to occur in 2013, along with 2240 cases in men. [3] Among US women women in 2011, 2011, in addition to invasiv invasive e breast breast c cancer, ancer, 57,650 57,650 new cases of in situ breast cancer were expected to occur; approximately 83% of these cases were expected to be DCIS, and 11% were expected to be LCIS. [59] The incidence of breast cancer in the United States increased rapidly from 1980 to 1987, largely as a consequence of the widespread use of mammography screening, which led to increased detection of  asymptomatic small breast tumors. After 1987, the increase in overall rates of invasive breast cancers slowed significantly, specifically among white women aged 50 years or older. Incidence over this period of time varied dramatically by histologic type. Common ductal carcinomas increased modestly from 1987 to 1999, whereas invasive lobular and mixed ductal-lobular carcinomas increased dramatically during this time period. [60] For women under the age of 50, breast cancer rates have remained stable since the middle to late 1980s. Rates of DCIS have stabilized since 2000. [59] Whereas a decline in invasive breast cancer rates was evident as early as 1999, rates decreased dramatically in women aged 50 years or older between 2001 and 2004. During this same period, no significant change was observed in the incidence of ER-negative cancers or cancers in women younger than 50 years. The decline in rates from 2001 to 2004 was greatest between 2002 and 2003 and was limited to non-Hispanic whites. [61, 62, 63, emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

9/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

64]

The reason for the decline has been extensively debated. Breast cancer rates decreased significantly after the reports repo rts from the Million W omen Study[65] and the Women’s Health Initiative showing higher numbers of breast cancers in women using combination HRT with estrogen and progestin for menopausal symptoms. The nearimmediate decrease in the use of combination HRT for that purpose has been widely accepted as a primary explanation for the decrease in breast cancer rates. [63] However, Jemal and Li argued that the decline in breast cancer incidence started earlier than the reduction in combination HRT use and that the decline is due in part to a “saturation” in mammographic screening mammography that produced a plateau in incidence when such screening stabilized in the late 1990s. [60, 62] Saturation of the population would be predicted to reduce the pool of undiagnosed or prevalent cases. For women aged 69 years or older, breast cancer rates started to decline as early as 1998, when screening first showed a plateau. This observation is consistent with the prediction that if widespread screening and earlier  detection are effective, they should result in a peak incidence among women during the sixth and seventh decades of life, followed by a decline. This is exactly the pattern now being reported for screened populations. [66] The second observation noted by Jemal et al was that despite evidence for a plateau effect, screening saturation alone could not explain the dramatic declines or the pattern of decline. The decline in incidence was observed only for ER-positive tumors and not for ER-negative ones; these findings support the competing hypothesis that exposure to HRT as estrogen in combination with synthetic progesterone promoted the growth of undetected tumors. Under this scenario, withdrawal of combination HRT at the population level may have resulted in regression or a slowing of tumor growth. The latter, it has been argued, would result in a delay in detection. Overall, incidence figures from 2005-2009, for which the most recent data are currently available, suggest that overall new breast cancer case rates have remained fairly stable since the initial drop. It is notable, however, that the annual percentage change from 2005 to 2009 increased in women aged 65-74 years occurring curring in by 2.7% during this period, rates that parallel 2001 incidence figures for this age group. [6] This rise is oc [67] and suggests that the drop in combination HRT use immediately spite of very low use of HRT by this population after 2002 may not have resulted in a sustained decrease in new breast cancer cases.  At present, it is unclear whether whether decreased decreased use of combination HRT HRT has resulted in a sustained reduction reduction in the incidence of breast cancer at the population level or has shifted the age at which preexisting disease would become detectable. Longer-term follow-up of post-2002 trends in relation to combination HRT use are needed to address addr ess this question.

International statistics statistics The final decades of the 20th century saw worldwide increases in the incidence of breast cancer, with the highest rates reported in Westernized countries. Reasons for this trend are largely attributed to introduction of screening mammography. Changes in reproductive patterns—particularly fewer children and later age at first birth—may also have played a role, as may changes in lifestyle factors, including the following: Western dietary patterns patterns Decreased Decre ased physical physic al activ ac tivity ity Rising obesity rates More widespread use of exogenous hormones for contraception and treatment of menopausal symptoms The beginning of the 21st century saw a dramatic decrease in breast cancer incidence in a number of Westernized countries (eg, the United Kingdom, France, and Australia). These decreases paralleled those noted in the United [2]

States and reflected similar patterns of mammography screening and decreased use of combination HRT. In 2008, there were an estimated 1.38 million new cases of invasive breast cancer worldwide. The 2008 incidence of female breast cancer ranged from 19.3 cases per 100,000 in Eastern Africa to 89.9 cases per 100,000 in Western Europe. [2] em emedicine.medscape.com/article/1947145-overview edicine.medscape.com/article/1947145-overview

 

10/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

With early detection and significant advances in treatment, death rates from breast cancer have been decreasing over the past 25 years in North America and parts of Europe. In many African and Asian countries (eg, Uganda, South Korea, and India), however, breast cancer death rates are rising. [2]

Age-related ge-re lated demographics demographics The incidence rate of breast cancer increases with age, from 1.5 cases per 100,000 in women 20-24 years of age to a peak of 421.3 cases per 100,000 in women 75-79 years of age; 95% of new cases occur in women aged 40 years or older. The median age of women at the time of breast cancer diagnosis is 61 years. [59] Rates of in situ breast cancer c ancer stabilized among women women 50 years and older older in the late 1990s; this t his is consistent consist ent with the proposed effects of screening saturation. However, the incidence of in situ breast cancer continues to increase in younger women. [59]

Race- and ethnicity et hnicity-re -related lated demographics demographics In the United States, the incidence of breast cancer is higher in non-Hispanic whites than in women of other racial and ethnic groups. Among women younger than 40 years, African Americans have a higher incidence. In addition, a larger proportion of African-American women are diagnosed with larger, advanced-stage tumors (>5 cm) and are more likely to die of breast cancer at every age. [59]  Acc ording  Accord ing to the American Cancer Cancer Society (ACS), breast cancer rates amon among g women women fr from om variou various s racial and [59] : ethnic groups are as follows Non-Hispanic white: 125.4/100,000  Afr  African ican American: 116.1/100,000 116.1/10 0,000 Hispanic/Latina: 91.0/100,000 91.0/100,000  American Indian Indian/Alask /Alaska a Native: Native: 89.2/100,000 89.2/100,000  Asian American/Pacific Islander: Islander: 84.9/100,000  Acc ording  Accord ing to the ACS, death rates from from breast breast cancer c ancer among among women women from from v variou arious s racial and ethnic grou groups ps are as follows: Non-Hispanic white: 23.9/100,000  African  Afr ican American: 32.4/100,000 32.4/100,000 Hispanic/Latina: 15.3/100,000 15.3/100,000  American Indian Indian/Alask /Alaska a Native: Native: 17.6/100,000 17.6/100,000  Asian American/Pacific Islander: Islander: 12.2/100,000 Breast cancer death rates among women in most racial and ethnic groups in the US have been declining since the early 1990s, except in American Indian and Alaska Native populations, among whom rates have remained stable.

Prognosis Death rates from breast cancer in the United States have decreased steadily in women since 1990. Breast cancer  mortality fell by 24% between 1990 and 2000 for women aged 30-79 years. The largest decrease in mortality has been seen in women younger than 50 years (3.3% per year) compared with those aged 50 years and older (2.0% per year). The decrease in breast cancer death rates is thought to represent progress in both earlier detection and improved treatmentt modalities.[3] The 2013 estimates are 39,920 expected breast cancer deaths (39,510 women, 410 men). treatmen [3]

Prognostic and predictive factors Numerous prognostic and predictive factors for breast cancer have been identified by the College of American Pathologists (CAP) to guide the clinical management of women with breast cancer. Breast cancer prognostic emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

11/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

factors include the following:  Axillary lymph l ymph node status Tumor size Lymphatic/vascular invasion Patient age Histologic grade Histologic subtypes (eg, (eg, ttubula ubular, r, mucinous [colloid], [c olloid], or papillary) papillary) Response to t o neoadjuvant neoadjuvant t herapy ER/PR status HER2  gene  gene amplification or overexpression Cancerous involvement of the lymph nodes in the axilla is an indication of the likelihood that the breast cancer has spread to other organs. Survival and recurrence are independent of level of involvement but are directly related to the number of involved nodes. Patients with node-negative disease have an overall 10-year survival rate of 70% and a 5-year recurrence rate of  19%. In patients with lymph nodes that are positive for cancer, the recurrence rates at 5 years are as follows: 1-3 positive nodes – 30-40% 4-9 positive nodes – 44-70% >10 positive nodes – 72-82% Hormone receptor–positive tumors generally have a more indolent course and are responsive to hormone therapy. ER and PR assays are routinely performed on tumor material by pathologists; immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a semiquantitative technique that is observer- and antibody-dependent. This prognostic information can guide physicians in making therapeutic decisions. Pathologic review of the tumor  tissue tiss ue for for histologic grade, along with with the determination of ER/PR status and HER2 HER2 status, status , is necessary for  determining prognosis and treatment. Evaluation of lymph node involvement by means of sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection is generally necessary as well. [68] (See Staging.)

HER2 In the past, HER2 overexpression was associated with a more aggressive tumor phenotype and a worse prognosis (higher recurrence rate and increased mortality), independent of other clinical features (eg, age, stage, and tumor  grade), especially in patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Prognosis has improved with the routine use of HER2-targeted therapies, which consist of the following: Trastuzumab Monoclonalantibody antibody Pertuzumab ––Monoclonal Lapatinib Lap atinib – A small-molecule oral oral ttyrosine yrosine kinase inhibitor  i nhibitor  Trastuzumab-emtansine – An antibody-drug conjugate directed specifically to the HER2 receptor  HER2 status has also been shown to predict response to certain chemotherapeutic agents (eg, doxorubicin). Retrospectively analyzed results from clinical trials have shown that HER2-positive patients benefit from anthracycline-based regimens, perhaps because of the frequent coamplification of topoisomerase II with HER2. Preliminary data also suggest that HER2 positivity may predict response to and benefit from paclitaxel in the adjuvant setting.[69] (See Breast Cancer and HER2 HER2.) .)

Prognosis by cancer type DCIS is divided into comedo (ie, cribriform, micropapillary, and solid) and noncomedo subtypes, a division that provides additional prognostic information on the likelihood of progression or local recurrence. Generally, the prognosis is worse for comedo DCIS than for noncomedo DCIS (see Histology).  Approximately 10-20%  Approximately 10-20% of women women with with LCIS LCIS develop develop inv invasiv asive e breast breast c ancer within within 15 years af after ter their LC LCIS IS diagnosis. Thus, LCIS is considered a biomarker of increased breast cancer risk. emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

12/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Infiltrating Infiltrating ductal ductal carcinoma is the most commonly diagnosed breast breast tumor t umor and and has a tenden tendency cy to metastasize metast asize via lymphatic vessels. Like ductal carcinoma, infiltrating lobular carcinoma typically metastasizes to axillary lymph nodes first. However, it also has a tendency to be more multifocal. Nevertheless, its prognosis is comparable to that of ductal carcinoma. Typical or classic medullary carcinomas are often associated with a good prognosis despite the unfavorable prognostic features associated with this type of breast cancer, including ER negativity, high tumor grade, and high proliferative rates. However, an analysis of 609 medullary breast cancer specimens from various stage I and II National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) protocols indicates that overall survival and prognosis are not as good as previously reported. Atypical medullary carcinomas also carry a poorer prognosis. Overall, patients with mucinous carcinoma have an excellent prognosis, with better than 80% 10-year survival. Similarly, tubular carcinoma has a low incidence of lymph node involvement and a very high overall survival rate. Because of the favorable prognosis, these patients are often treated with only breast-conserving surgery and local radiation therapy. Cystic papillary papillary c arcinoma has has a low mitotic mit otic activ ac tivity, ity, which results in a more indolent indolent course and a goo good d prognosis. However, invasive micropapillary ductal carcinoma has a more aggressive phenotype, even though approximately 70% of cases are ER-positive. A retrospective review of 1400 cases of invasive carcinoma identified 83 cases (6%) with at least 1 component of invasive micropapillary ductal carcinoma. [70]  Additionally, lymph ly mph node node metastasis is frequently frequently seen s een in this subtype (incidence, 70-90%), 70-90%), and the nu number mber o of  f  lymph lym ph nodes inv involv olved ed appears to t o correlate c orrelate with surviv survival. al. For metaplastic breast cancer, the majority of published case series have demonstrated a worse prognosis than with infiltrating ductal carcinoma, even when adjusted for stage, with a 3-year overall survival rate of 48-71% and 3year disease-free survival rate of 15-60%.[71] In most case series, large tumor size and advanced stage have emerged as predictors of poor overall overall surv s urviv ival al and prognosis. [72] Nodal status does not appear to impact survival in metaplastic breast cancer. Paget disease of the breast is associated with an underlying breast cancer in 75% of cases. Breast-conserving surgery can achieve satisfactory results, but at the risk of local recurrence. Poor prognostic factors include a palpable breast tumor, lymph node involvement, histologic type, and an age of less than 60 years. Paget disease with a palpable mass usually has an invasive component and a lower 5-year survival rate (20-60%). Those that do not have an underlying palpable mass have a higher 5-year survival rate (75-100%). [73, 74]  

Contributor Information Information and Disclosures Disclosures  Author  Alison Alis on T Stopeck, MD  MD  Ass Associat ociate e Prof Profess essor or of of Medicine, Medici ne, Arizona Cancer Center, U Univ niversity ersity of Arizona Health Sciences Center; Director of Clinical Breast Cancer Program, Arizona Cancer Center; Medical Director of  Coagulation Laboratory, University Medical Center; Director of Arizona Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center  Alison T Stopeck, MD is a member of the followin following g medical societies:  American Associati Association on for for Cancer  Cancer  Research,,  American College Research College of Physic Physicians ians,,  American Society of Clinical Oncology Oncology,,  American Society of  Hematology,, Hemophilia and Thrombosis Research Society, Hematology Society , and Southwest Oncology Group Disclosure: Genentech Honoraria Speaking and teaching; AstraZeneca Honoraria Speaking and teaching;  AstraZeneca  AstraZe neca Grant/resear Grant/research ch funds funds Other  Coauthor(s) Patricia A Thompson, PhD  PhD  Assist Ass ist ant Profess Professor, or, Department Department of Pathology, Pathology , Un Univ iversity ersity of Arizona, Tucson Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Chief Editor  Jules E Harris, MD  MD  Clinical Clinic al Profess Professor or of Medicine, Medici ne, Section Secti on of Hematology/Oncology Hematology/ Oncology,, Univ Universit ersity y of Arizona College of Medicine, Arizona Cancer Center emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

13/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Association on for for Cancer Cancer Research Research,, Jules E Harris, MD is a member of the following medical societies:  American Associati  American Association Associati on for for the Advancemen Advancementt of Science, Science,  American Association Associati on of Immu Immunolog nologists ists,,  American Society of Hematology, Hematology , and Central Society for Clinical Research Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.  Additional Contributor Contributors s Leona Downey, MD Assistant MD Assistant Professor of Internal Medicine, Section of Oncology and Hematology, University of Arizona, Arizona Cancer Center   American Ger Geriatrics iatrics Society S ociety,,  American Leona Downey, MD is a member of the following medical societies: societies: American Society of Clinical Clinical Oncology, Oncology, and Southwest Oncology Group Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Manjit Singh Gohel, MD, MRCS, MB, ChB Specialist ChB Specialist Registrar, Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Northwick Nor thwick Park Hospital Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Harold Harvey, MD Professor, MD Professor, Department of Medicine, Pennsylvania State University Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Kanchan Kaur, MBBS, MS (General Surgery), MRCS (Ed) Consulting (Ed) Consulting Breast and Oncoplastic Surge Surgeon, on, Medanta, The Medicity, India Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Julie Lang, MD Assistant MD Assistant Professor of Surgery and the BIO5 Institute, Director of Breast Surgical Oncology, University of Arizona College of Medicine Surgeons ons,, American Julie Lang, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American societies:  American College College of Surge Society of Breast Breast Surg S urgeons, eons, American Oncology,  Association  American Society of Clinical Oncology,  Ass ociation for for Academic Surgery Surgery, and Society of Surgical Surgical Oncology Disclosure: Genomic Health Grant/research funds Speaking and teaching; Agendia Grant/research funds Speaking and teaching; Surgical Tools Grant/research funds Research; Sysmex Grant/research funds Research Robert B Livingston, MD Professor MD Professor of Clinical Medicine and Director, Clinical Research Shared Services,  Arizona Cancer Cancer Center  Center  Robert B Livingston, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American societies:  American Association Associati on for for Cancer  Cancer  Research,, American Federation for Clinical Research, and American Research and American Society of Clinical Oncology Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Hanan Makhoul, MD Staff MD Staff Physician, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arkansas School of  Medicine Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Issam Makhoul, MD Associate MD Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Issam Makhoul, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American societies:  American Society of Clinical Oncology Oncology and  and  American Society of Hematology Hematology Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Robert C Shepard, MD, FACP Associate FACP  Associate Professor of Medicine in Hematology and Oncology at University of  emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

14/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Vice President of Scientific Affairs, Therapeutic Expertise, Oncology, at PRA International for Cancer  Cancer  Robert C Shepard, MD, FACP is a member of the following medical societies: American societies:  American Association Associ ation for Research,,  American College Research College of Physic Physician ian Executives Executives,,  American College College of Physic Physicians ians,, American Federation for Clinical Research, American Research, American Fede Federation ration for for Medical Medical Research, Research,  American Medical Associ Association ation,,  American Medical Informa Informatics tics Ass Association ociation,,  American Society of Hema Hematology tology,,  Ass  Association ociation of Clinical Clinical Research Professionals,, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Professionals Group, European Society for Medical Oncology, Oncology , Massachusetts Medical Society, Society , and Society for Biological Therapy Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Hemant Singhal, MD, MBBS, FRCSE, FRCS(C) Senior FRCS(C) Senior Lecturer, Director of Breast Service, Department of  Surgery, Imperial College School of Medicine; Consultant Surgeon, Northwick Park and St Marks Hospitals, UK Hemant Singhal, MD, MBBS, FRCSE, FRCS(C) is a member of the following medical societies: Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and Canada and Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Carl V Smith, MD The MD The Distinguished Chris J and Marie A Olson Chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Senior Associate Dean for Clinical Affairs, University of  Nebraska Medical Center  Carl V Smith, MD is a member o Carl off the following following medical medical societies: s ocieties: American College of Obstetricians and  American College Gynecologists,,  American IInstitute Gynecologists nstitute of Ultrasound Ultrasound in Medicine, Medicine,  Association  Ass ociation of Prof Professors essors of Gynecology and Obstetrics , Central Obstetrics, Central Association Ass ociation of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Gynecologists , Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecology, Nebraska Medical Association, Association, and Society for Maternal-Fe Maternal-Fetal tal Medicine Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Wiley Souba, MD Chairman, MD Chairman, Professor, Department of General Surgery, Pennsylvania State College of  Medicine; Chief Surgeon, The Milton S Hershey Medical Center  Disclosure: Nothing to disclose. Rachel Swa rt, MD, MD, PhD Assistant PhD Assistant Professor of Medicine, Department of Hematology and Oncology, Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona for Cancer  Cancer  Rachel Swart, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies:  American Association Associati on for Research,,  American Society of Clinical Oncology, Research Oncology,  Arizona Medical Associ Association ation,, and Southwest Southwest Oncology Group Disclosure: Roche Grant/research funds Other  Francisco Talavera, Francisco Tala vera, Pha rmD, PhD Adjunct PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center  College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference Disclosure: Medscape Salary Employment E mployment Simon Thomson, MB, BCh, MD, FRCS FRCS Specialist  Specialist Registrar, Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Northwick Nor thwick Park Hospital, UK Simon Thomson, MB, BCh, MD, FRCS is a member of the following medical societies: British Medical  Assoc iation  Association Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References 1. Chusteck a Z. Z. FDA Warning on Nipple Aspirate Test Test as Breast Cancer Screen. Medscape Medical News emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

15/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

[serial online]. Dec 13 2013;Accessed Dec 23 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/817806 . 2. Jema Jemall A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, J, Ward E, Forman D. Globa Globall cancer statisti statistics. cs. CA Cancer J Clin. Clin. Mar-Apr 2011;61(2):69-90. [Medline]. [Medline]. 3. Siegel R R,, Naishadham Naishadham D, Jemal Jemal A. Cancer Cancer statistics, statisti cs, 2013. 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. Clin. Jan 2013;63(1):11-30. 2013;63(1):11-30. [Medline] [Medline].. 4. The Cancer Genome Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive Comprehensive molecular molecul ar por portraits traits of human human brea breast st ttumours. umours. Nature Nature.. Text].. Oct 4 2012;490(7418):61-70. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text] 5. [Guideline [Guideline]] Recht A, Edge SB, Solin LJ, LJ, Robin Robinson son DS, Estabrook Estabrook A, Fine RE, et al. Postmast Postmastectomy ectomy radiothera rad iotherapy: py: clinical practic practice e guidelines guidelines of the American Society of Clin Clinical ical Oncology. J Clin Oncol . Mar  1 2001;19(5):1539-69. [Medline]. [Medline]. 6. Surv Surveillance eillance Epidemiology Epidemiology and End Results Results (SEER). SEER Stat F Fact act Sheets: Breast. Available Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html#incidence-mortality.. Accessed May 23, 2013. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html#incidence-mortality 7. Jatoi I, I, Anderson WF, Rosenberg PS. Qualit ative age-interactions in breast cancer: canc er: a tale of two [Medline].. diseases? doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e3181844d1c. Am 10.1097/COC.0b013e3181844d1c. Am J Clin Oncol . Oct 2008;31(5):504-6. [Medline] 8. Parmigiani G, Chen S, Iversen ES Jr, Friebel TM, Finkels Finkelstein tein DM, Anton-Culver Anton-Culver H H,, et al. Vali Validity dity of  models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Ann mutations.  Ann Intern Med  Med . Oct 2 2007;147(7):441-50. [Medline]. [Full Text] [Medline]. Text].. 9. Pal T, PermuthPermuth-Wey Wey J, Betts JA, Krischer JP, Fiorica J, Arango H, H., Dec et al.15BRCA1 and and BRCA2 mutations mutations account for a large proportion of ovarian carcinoma cases. Cancer  2005;104(12):2807-16. [Medline]. [Medline]. 10. Kels Kelsey ey JL, Bernstein L. Epidemiology and p prev revention ention of breast cancer. Annu cancer.  Annu Rev Rev Public Hea Health lth.. [Medline].. 1996;17:47-67. [Medline] 11. Colditz GA, Rosner B. Cumulative risk of breast breast cancer canc er to age 70 years according to risk factor st status: atus: data from the Nurses' Health Study. Am Study. Am J Epidemiol . Nov 15 2000;152(10):950-64. [Medline]. [Medline]. 12. Deligeoroglou E, Michailidis Mic hailidis E, E , Creats Creatsas as G. Oral Oral contraceptiv contracepti ves and reproduct reproductiv ive e syst em cancer. Ann cancer.  Ann N  Y Acad Sci . Nov 2003;997:199-208. [Medline]. [Medline]. 13. Cold Colditz itz GA, Rosner BA, Chen Chen WY, Holmes Holmes MD, Hankinson SE. Risk factors for breast breast cancer according [Medline].. to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst . Feb 4 2004;96(3):218-28. [Medline] 14. Pik Pike e MC, Pearce CL, CL, Peters R, Cozen W, Wan W an P, Wu AH. Hormonal factors factors and the risk of inv invasive asive ovarian cancer: a population-based case-control study. Fertil Steril . Jul 2004;82(1):186-95. [Medline] [Medline].. 15. Eliass Eli assen en AH, Missmer Mis smer SA, Tworoger Tworoger SS, Spiegelman Spi egelman D D,, Barbieri RL, RL, Dowsett M, et al. Endogenous steroid hormone concentrations and risk of breast cancer among premenopausal women. J Natl Can Cancer  cer  [Medline].. Inst . Oct 4 2006;98(19):1406-15. [Medline] 16. Han Hankinson kinson SE, Eliassen Eliass en AH. Circulating Circulating sex s teroids and breast breast cancer risk in premenopausal premenopausal wo women. men. [Medline].. [Full Text]. Text] . Horm Cancer . Feb 2010;1(1):2-10. [Medline] 17. Cuzic Cuzick k J, DeCensi A, Arun B, Brown PH, Castiglione Castigl ione M, Dunn B, et al. Prev Preventive entive therapy for breast [Medline].. cancer: a consensus statement. Lancet Oncol . May 2011;12(5):496-503. [Medline] 18. Fis Fisher her B, Costantino Costant ino JP, JP, Wick W ick erham DL, Cecc Cecchini hini RS, Cr Cronin onin WM, Robidoux A, et al. Tamoxifen Tamoxifen ffor or the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst . Nov 16 2005;97(22):1652-62. [Medline] [Medline].. [Full Text]. Text] . 19. Fis Fisher her B, Costantino JP, Wick Wi ckerham erham DL, DL, Redmond CK, Kavanah Kavanah M, C Cronin ronin WM, et al. Tamoxifen for  for  prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

16/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

J Natl Cancer Inst . Sep 16 1998;90(18):1371-88. [Medline]. [Medline]. 20. Vogel VG, Costantino J JP, P, W Wickerham ickerham DL, DL, Cronin Cronin WM, Cecchini RS, Atkins JN JN,, et al. Effects of  tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial. JAMA JAMA.. Jun 21 2006;295(23):2727-41. [Medline]. [Medline]. 21. Key T, Appleby P, Barnes I, Reev Reeves es G. Endogenous sex hormones and breast canc cancer er in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of nine prospective studies. J Natl Can Cancer cer Inst . Apr 17 2002;94(8):606-16. [Medline]. [Medline]. 22. Santen R RJ, J, Boyd NF, Chlebow Chlebowski ski RT, RT, Cummings S, Cuzick J, Dowsett M, et al. Critical ass assessment essment of  new riskRelat factors for breast cancer: considerations for development of an improved risk prediction model. [Medline]. . Endocr Cancer  . Jun 2007;14(2):169-87. [Medline] 23. Endogenous Hormon Hormones es and Breast Cancer Collaborative Collaborative Group. Group. Free estradiol and breast cancer ris risk k in postmenopausal women: comparison of measured and calculated values. Can Cancer cer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev . Dec 2003;12(12):1457-61. [Medline]. [Medline]. 24. Marchbanks PA PA,, McDonald JA, JA, Wils W ilson on HG, HG, Folger SG, Mandel Mandel MG, Daling JR, JR, et al. Ora Orall contraceptiv contracept ives es [Medline].. and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med . Jun 27 2002;346(26):2025-32. 2002;346(26):2025-32. [Medline] 25. Garbe E, Levesque Levesque L, Suissa Suiss a S. Variabilit y of breast cancer risk in i n observ observational ational st studies udies of h hormone ormone replacement rep lacement therapy: a meta-reg meta-regression ression analysis. analysis . Maturitas Maturitas.. Mar 15 2004;47(3):175-83. [Medline]. [Medline]. 26. Reev Reeves es GK, B Beral eral V, Green J, J, Gathani T, Bull D. Hormonal therapy ffor or menopause menopause and bre breast-c ast-cancer ancer risk by histological type: a cohort study and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol . Nov 2006;7(11):910-8. [Medline]. [Medline]. 27. Schai Schairer rer C, C, Lubin J, T Troisi roisi R, Sturgeon St urgeon S, Bri Brinton nton L, Hoover Hoover R. R. Menopausal estrogen est rogen a and nd estrogenprogestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA JAMA.. Jan 26 2000;283(4):485-91. 2000;283(4):485-91. [Medline] [Medline].. 28. Anderson GL, C Chlebowski hlebowski RT, Aragaki Aragaki AK, Kuller K uller LH, Manson JE, Gass M, et al. Conjugated equine oestrogen and breast cancer incidence and mortality in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: extended follow-up of the Women's Health Initiative randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol . Text] . May 2012;13(5):476-86. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. [Medline].. 29. Speroff L. The The Million Women Study and breast breast cancer. canc er. Maturitas Maturitas.. Sep 25 2003;46(1):1-6. [Medline] 30. Holmberg L, Ander Anderson son H. HABITS (hormonal (hormonal replacement replacement therapy t herapy after after breast cancer--is it safe?), a randomised comparison: trial stopped. Lancet . Feb 7 2004;363(9407):453-5. [Medline]. [Medline]. 31. Loprinzi CL, Michalak JC, Quella SK, O'Fallon JR, Hatfield Hatfield AK, Nelimark RA, et al. Megestrol acetate acetat e for  for  the prevention of hot flashes. N Engl J Med . Aug 11 1994;331(6):347-52. [Medline] [Medline].. 32. Bordeleau L, Pritc Pritchard hard K, Goodwin Goodwin P, Loprinzi C. Therapeutic Therapeutic options for the management management of hot hot flashes in breast cancer surv surviv ivors: ors: an ev evidence-based idence-based review review.. Clin Ther . Feb 2007;29(2):230-41. [Medline] [Medline].. 33. Page DL, Je Jensen nsen RA. Evaluation Evaluation and management of high risk and premalignant lesions of the breast. World J Surg . JanJan-Feb Feb 1994;18(1):32-8. [Medline]. [Medline]. 34. Kollias J, Ellis IO IO,, Elston Els ton CW, Blamey RW. Clinical and histological histological predictors of contralateral contralateral bre breast ast [Medline].. cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol . Dec 1999;25(6):584-9. [Medline] 35. Page D DL, L, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Jen Jensen sen RA, Plummer WD J Jr, r, Simpson JF. Atypical lobular  hyperplasia as a unilateral predictor of breast cancer risk: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet . Jan 11 [Medline].. 2003;361(9352):125-9. [Medline] 36. Page D DL. L. Breast lesions, patholo pathology gy and cancer cancer risk. Breast J . Jan-Feb 2004;10 Suppl 1:S3-4. [Medline] [Medline].. 37. Ashbeck E EL, L, Rosenberg Rosenberg RD, RD, Stauber PM, Key CR. Benign breast breast biopsy diagnosis and subsequent subsequent risk of breast cancer. Can Cancer cer Epidemiol Biomar Bi omark k ers Prev . Mar 2007;16(3):467-72. [Medline] [Medline].. 38. Deg Degnim nim AC, Visscher Viss cher DW, Berman HK, HK, Frost MH, Sellers TA, Vierkant RA, et al. Stratification of bre breast ast emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

17/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

[Medline].. cancer risk in women with atypia: a Mayo cohort study. J Clin Oncol . Jul 1 2007;25(19):2671-7. [Medline] 39. Dupont WD, Page D DL, L, Parl FF, Vnencak-Jone Vnencak -Jones s CL, Plummer WD Jr, Rados Rados MS, et al. Long-term risk of  breast cancer in women with fibroadenoma. N Engl J Med . Jul 7 1994;331(1):10-5. [Medline] [Medline].. 40. Hender Henderson son BE, Bernstein B ernstein L. The international variation variation in breast breast cancer c ancer rates: an epidemiological [Medline].. assessment. Breast Cancer Res Treat . May 1991;18 Suppl 1:S11-7. [Medline] 41. Kaaks R. Nutrition, h hormo ormones, nes, and breast breast cancer: is insulin the missing link?. Cancer Causes Control . Nov 1996;7(6):605-25. [Medline]. [Medline]. 42. Stoll BA BA.. Breast cancer c ancer and and the western diet: diet: role of fatty fatty acids ac ids and antioxidant vitamins. vitamins. Eur J Cancer . Nov 1998;34(12):1852-6. [Medline]. [Medline]. 43. Holme Holmes s MD, Liu S, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, Hunter D DJ, J, Willett WC. Dietary carbo carbohydrates, hydrates, fib fiber, er, and breast cancer risk. Am risk.  Am J Epidemiol . Apr 15 2004;159(8):732-9. [Medline]. [Medline]. 44. Holme Holmes s MD, Willett Wil lett WC. Does diet affe affect ct breast cancer rrisk?. isk?. Breast Cancer Res. Res. 2004;6(4):170-8. 2004;6(4):170-8. [Medline]. [Full Text] [Medline]. Text].. 45. Eliass Eliassen en AH, AH, Colditz GA, Rosner B, W Willett illett WC, W C, Hankinson Hankinson SE. Adult weight weight change and rrisk isk of  [Medline].. postmenopausal postmenop ausal breast cancer. JAMA JAMA.. Jul 12 2006;296(2):193-201. [Medline] 46. Han D D,, Nie J, Bonner MR, McCann SE, Muti Mut i P, Trevisan Trevisan M, et al. Lifetime adult weight gain, central adiposity, and the risk of pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer in the Western New York exposures and breast breast cancer study. st udy. Int J Cancer . Dec 15 2006;119(12):2931-7. [Medline]. [Medline]. 47. Kaaks R. Nutrition, insul insulin, in, IGF-1 metabolism metabolis m and cancer risk: a summary of epidemiologic epidemiological al ev evidence. idence. Novartis Found Symp. Symp. 2004;262:247-60; discussion 260-68. [Medline]. [Medline]. 48. Lukanov Lukanova a A, Lundin E, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Muti P, Mure A, Rinaldi S, et a al. l. Body mass index, i ndex, circulating levels of sex-steroid hormones, IGF-I and IGF-binding protein-3: a cross-sectional study in healthy women. Eur J Endocrinol  Endocrinol . Feb 2004;150(2):161-71. [Medline]. [Medline]. 49. Baer H HJ, J, Colditz Colditz GA, Rosner B, Michels KB, Rich-Edw Ric h-Edward ards s JW, Hunter Hunter DJ, DJ, et al. Body fatness fatness during during childhood and adolescence and incidence of breast cancer in premenopausal women: a prospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res. Res. 2005;7(3):R314-25. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. Text] . 50. Ruder EH, Dorgan JF, Kranz S, Kris-Etherton Kris -Etherton PM, Hartman TJ. TJ. Examining Examini ng bre breast ast c cancer ancer growth growth and lifestyle risk factors: factors: early life, childhood, childhood, and adolescence. Clin Breast Cancer . Aug 2008;8(4):334-42. [Medline]. Text].. [Medline]. [Full Text] 51. Fuemmele Fuemmelerr BF, Pendzich MK, MK , Ter Tercyak cyak KP. W eight, dietary behav behavior, ior, and p physic hysical al activity activity in childhood Text] . and adolescence: adolescence: implications implic ations for adult adult cancer c ancer risk. Obes Facts. Facts . 2009;2(3):179-86. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. 52. Laden F, Hunter DJ. DJ. Environmental Environmental risk factors fact ors and ffemale emale breast breast c cancer. ancer. Annu  Annu Rev Rev Public Hea Health lth.. [Medline].. 1998;19:101-23. [Medline] 53. Coyle YM. The eff effect ect of env environment ironment on breast breast cancer canc er risk risk.. Breast Cancer Res Treat . Apr 2004;84(3):27388. [Medline]. [Medline]. 54. Gammon MD, Eng SM, Teitelbaum SL, Britton Britt on JA, JA, Kabat GC, Hatch M, et al. Env Environmental ironmental tobacco tobacc o [Medline].. smoke and breast cancer c ancer incidence. Environ Res. Res. Oct 2004;96(2):176-85. [Medline] 55. Smit Smith-Bindman h-Bindman R. Environmental Environmental causes of breast cancer and rradiation adiation from medical im imaging: aging: findings from the Institute of Medicine report. Arch report.  Arch Intern Med  Med . Jul 9 2012;172(13):1023-7. [Medline] [Medline].. 56. Carmichael A, Sami AS AS,, Dixon JM. Breast cancer canc er rrisk isk among the surviv survivors ors of atomic bomb and patients exposed to t herapeu herapeutic tic ionising radiation. radiation. Eur J Surg Oncol . Jun 2003;29(5):475-9. [Medline]. [Medline]. 57. Clemo Clemons ns M, Loijens Loijens L, Goss P. Breast cancer risk following following irra irradiation diation ffor or H Hodgkin' odgkin's s dis disease. ease. Cancer  Treat Rev . Aug 2000;26(4):291-302. [Medline]. [Medline]. emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

18/22

emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145 over vi ew

18/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

58. Hill DA, Gilbert E, Dores GM, Gospodaro Gospodarowicz wicz M, va van n Leeuwen Leeuwen FE, Holowaty E, et al. Breast cancer c ancer risk following radiotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma: modification by other risk factors. Blood . Nov 15 2005;106(10):3358-65. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. Text]. 59. Americ American an Cancer Society Soci ety.. Breast Cancer Facts Fact s & Figures 2 2011-2012 011-2012.. Av Available ailable at http://www.cancer.org/Resear ch/CancerFacts ctsFigure Figures/BreastCancerFa s/BreastCancerFacts ctsFigure Figures/breast-cancers/breast-cancer-fa facts cts-an -anddhttp://www.cancer.org/Research/CancerFa figures-2011-2012.. Ac cessed June 10, 201 figures-2011-2012 2013. 3. 60. Li CI CI,, Daling J JR. R. Changes Changes in breast breast cancer canc er incidence rates in the United States by his histologic tologic subtype s ubtype and race/ethnicity, 1995 to 2004. 2004. Can Cancer cer Epidemiol Biomar Bi omark k ers Prev . Dec 2007;16(12):2773-80. [Medline]. [Medline]. 61. menopausal Glass AG, Lacey Lac ey JV Jr, Carreon Carreon JD, Hoov Hoovmammography, er RN. RN. Breast c ancer incidence, 1980-20 1980-2006: 06: combined roles hormone therapy, screening and estrogen receptor status. J Natl Can Cancer  cer of  [Medline].. Inst . Aug 1 2007;99(15):1152-61. [Medline] 62. Jemal A, Ward E, Thu Thun n MJ. Recent Recent trends in breast cancer canc er incidence rates by age and tumor  Text]. characteristics among U.S. U.S. women. women. Breast Cancer Res. Res . 2007;9(3):R28. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. 63. Rav Ravdin din PM, Cronin KA, Howlader N, Berg CD, Chlebowsk Chlebowskii RT, RT, Feuer EJ, et al. The decrease in breastcancer incidence in 2003 in the United States. N Engl J Med . Apr 19 2007;356(16):1670-4. [Medline] [Medline].. 64. Katali Katalinic nic A, Rawal R. R. Decline in breast breast cancer canc er incidence inci dence af after ter decrease in utili utilisati sation on o off hormone replacement therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat . Feb 2008;107(3):427-30. [Medline]. [Medline]. 65. Beral V. Breast cancer and hormone-replacement hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet . Aug 9 [Medline].. 2003;362(9382):419-27. [Medline] 66. Anderson WF, Reiner AS, Matsuno RK, Pfeiff Pfeiffer er RM. RM. Shifting breast cancer trends in the United States States.. J  Clin Oncol . Sep 1 2007;25(25):3923-9. [Medline]. [Medline]. 67. Evidence-based Evidence-based assessment asses sment of the impact of the WHI on women's women's health. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2012.655564. Burger HG, MacLennan AH, Huang KE, Castelo-Branco C. Climacteric . Jun 2012;15(3):281-7. 68. National Compr Comprehensiv ehensive eC Cancer ancer Network. Network. NCCN Clinical Clinic al Practic e Guidelines in Oncology Oncology.. Breast Cancer, essionals/physician_g ian_gls/pdf/bre ls/pdf/breast.pdf  ast.pdf . Accessed March v.1.2012. Available Available at http://www.nccn.org/prof http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physic 26, 2013. 69. Basel Baselga ga J, J, Seidman AD, Rosen PP, Norton L. HER2 HER2 overexpressi overexpression on and and pa pacli clitaxel taxel s sensit ensitiv ivity ity iin n br breast east [Medline].. cancer: therapeutic implications. Oncology (Williston Park). Park). Mar 1997;11(3 Suppl 2):43-8. [Medline] 70. Nassar H H,, Wallis W allis T, Andea A, Dey Dey J, Adsay V, V , Visscher Vis scher D. Clinicopathologic Clinicopathologic ana analysi lysis s of invasiv invasive e micropapillary differentiation in breast carcinoma. Mo Mod d Pathol  Pat hol . Sep 2001;14(9):836-41. [Medline] [Medline].. 71. Rayson D, Adjei AA, S Suman uman VJ, VJ, Wold W old LE, Ingle Ingle JN. JN. Metaplastic breast breast c ancer: progno prognosis sis and response response to systemic therapy. Ann therapy.  Ann Oncol . Apr 1999;10(4):413-9. [Medline]. [Medline]. 72. Chao TC, TC, Wang CS, Chen SC, Chen MF. Metaplastic Metaplas tic carcinomas c arcinomas of the brea breast st.. J Surg S urg On Oncol  col . Aug [Medline].. 1999;71(4):220-5. [Medline] 73. Chaudar Chaudary y MA, Millis Mi llis RR, Lane EB, Miller M iller NA. Paget's disease dis ease of the nipple: a ten year rev review iew including clinical, pathological, pathological, and immunohistochemical immunohistochemical fin findings. dings. Breast Cancer Res Treat . 1986;8(2):139-46. 1986;8(2):139-46. [Medline]. [Medline]. 74. Kollm Kollmorgen orgen DR, Varanasi JS, Edge SB, Carson WE 3rd. Paget's disease of the breast: a 33-year  experience. J Am Coll Surg . Aug 1998;187(2):171-7. 75. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plev P levritis ritis SK, Fryback Fry back DG, Clarke L, Z Zelen elen M, et al. Effect Effect of screening and adjuv adjuvant ant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med . Oct 27 2005;353(17):1784-92. [Medline] [Medline].. 76. Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening S creening ffor or breast cancer. JAMA JAMA.. Mar 9

emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145 over vi ew

19/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

Text]. 2005;293(10):1245-56. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text]. 77. Nyst Nyström röm L, Andersson Anderss on I,I, Bjurstam Bjurst am N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist Rutqvist LE LE.. Long-term eff effect ects s of  mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet . Mar 16 2002;359(9310):909-19. [Medline]. [Medline]. 78. Tab Tabar ar L, Yen MF, Vitak Vi tak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duf Duffy fy SW. Mammography Mam mography service service s screening creening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet . [Medline]..  Apr 26 2003;36 2003;361(93 1(9367) 67):1405:1405-10. 10. [Medline] 79. Noble M, Bruening W, Uhl S, Schoelles K. Computer-aided detection mammography ffor or breast cancer  screening: review iew and meta-analysis. meta-analysis.  Arch Gynecol Gynecol Ob Obstet  stet . Jun 2009;279(6):881-90. 2009;279(6):881-90. [Medline]. . sys tematic rev [Medline] 80. Barclay L. Digital mammography: direct ou outperfor tperforms ms computed radiography. radiography. Medscape Medical News [serial online]. May 14, 2013;Accessed May 19, 2013. 2013. Available Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/804094 . 81. Chia Chiarelli relli AM, E Edwa dwards rds SA, Prummel MV, Muradali Muradali D, Majpruz V, Done SJ SJ,, et al. Digital compared compared with screen-film mammography: performance measures in concurrent cohorts within an organized breast screening program. Radiology . May 14 2013;[Medline] 2013; [Medline].. 82. Humphrey LL, He Helfand lfand M, Chan Chan BK, Woolf W oolf SH. Breast cancer canc er screening: a summary of the ev evidence idence for  the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Force. Ann Intern Med  Med . Sep 3 2002;137(5 Part 1):347-60. [Medline]. [Medline]. 83. Ward E, Jemal A, Thun M. Regar Regarding ding "Increase in breast cancer incidence inc idence in middle-aged women women during the 1990s". 1990s".  Ann Epidemiol . Jul 2005;15(6):424-5; author reply 426-7. [Medline]. [Medline]. 84. US Prev Preventive entive Serv Services ices Ta Task sk Force. Screening S creening for Breast Cancer. Av A vailable at http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsbrca.htm . Accessed May 23, 2013. 85. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, Burke W, Costanza ME, Ev E vans WP 3rd, et al. American Cancer  Cancer  Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. Clin. May-Jun 2003;53(3):14169. [Medline]. [Medline]. 86. Taillefer R. Clinical Clinic al applications applicat ions of 99mTc-sestamibi 99mTc-sestami bi scinti sc intimammography. mammography. Semin Nucl Med . Apr  2005;35(2):100-15. [Medline] [Medline].. 87. Chen AC, Paulino AC, Schwartz MR, Rodriguez AA, Bass BL, Chang JC, JC, et al. Prognost Prognostic ic markers for  invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a population-based analysis. Clin Breast Cancer . Apr  [Medline].. 2013;13(2):133-9. [Medline] 88. National Comprehe Comprehensive nsive Cancer Network Network Practice Pract ice Guideli Guidelines. nes. Invasive Invasive Breast Cancer. 2009. (Registered . Users Only). Available at http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/breast.pdf  89. [Guideli [Guideline] ne] Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz Sc hwartz JN, JN, Hagerty Hagerty KL, Allred Al lred D DC, C, Cote RJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol . Jan 1 2007;25(1):118-45. [Medline].. [Medline] 90. Tan Tang g G, Cuzick J, Costantino Costant ino JP, Dow Dowset settt M, Forbes JF, Crager Crager M, et al. Risk of recurrence recurrence and chemotherapy benefit for patients with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: recurrence score alone and integrated with pathologic and clinical factors. J Clin Oncol . Nov 20 2011;29(33):4365-72. [Medline]. Text].. [Medline]. [Full Text] 91. online]. JohnsonJune K. For node-positive node-positive breast axillary axilAvailable lary radiation best.. Medscape Medical News [serial News  [serial 6, 2013;Accessed Junecancer, 11, 2013. at is best http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/805406 . 92. Hav Haviland iland JS, Owen JR, Dewar JA, JA, et al, on behalf of the START Trialis Trialists ts'' Group. T The he UK Standardisat Standardisation ion of Breast Radiotherapy (START) trials of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast

emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145 over vi ew

20/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

cancer: 10-year follow-up results of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol . Sep 18 2013; [Medline]. [Medline]. 93. Mulcahy N. Ten-year data confirm shorter radiotherapy best for breast cancer. canc er. Medscape Medical News [serial online]. September 19, 2013;Accessed September 20, 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/811285 . 94. Americ American an Society Soci ety of Breast Surgeons. Consensus Statement for Accelerated Ac celerated Partial Breast Irradiation. Irradiation. . Accessed May 24,  Available  Av ailable at https://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/PDF_Statements/APBI.pdf  2013. 95. Mulcahy N. 'One-Stop' Ra Radiotherapy diotherapy Saves Saves Time With Breast Cancer. Av A vailable at . Accessed November 21,M.2013. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/814157 96. Mulcahy N. 'One-Stop' Ra Radiotherapy diotherapy Saves Saves Time With Breast Cancer. Medscape Medsc ape Medical News. Available Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/814157 . Accessed November 21, 2013. 97. Vaidya JS, Wenz F, Bulsara Buls ara M, Tobias Tobias JS, Joseph Joseph DJ, DJ, Keshtgar M, et al. Risk-adapted targeted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast radiotherapy for breast cancer: 5-year results for local control and ov overall erall surv s urviv ival al from the t he TARGITTARGIT-A A randomised trial. t rial. Lancet . Nov 8 2013;[Medline] 2013; [Medline].. 98. Veronesi U, Orecchia R, Maisonneuv Maisonneuve e P, Viale G, Rotmensz N, S Sangalli angalli C, et al. Intraoperativ Intraoperative e radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy for early breast cancer (ELIOT): a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet Oncol . Nov 8 2013;[Medline] 2013; [Medline].. 99. Allred All red DC, Anderson SJ, Paik S, Wick W ickerham erham DL, Nagtegaal Nagtegaal ID, ID, Swain SM, et al. Adjuvant Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces subsequent breast cancer in women with estrogen receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ: a Text].. study based on NSABP NSABP protocol protocol B-24. J Clin Oncol . Apr 20 2012;30(12):1268-73. [Medline]. [Medline]. [Full Text] 100. Phillips KA, KA , Milne RL, Rookus Rookus MA, Daly MB, Antoniou AC AC,, Peock S, S , et al. Tamoxifen Tamoxifen an and d Risk of  Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers. J Clin Oncol . Sep 1 2013;31(25):3091-3099. [Medline]. [Medline]. 101. Nelson R. Tamoxifen Tamoxifen Cuts Risk for Breast Cancer in BRCA C Carriers. arriers. Medscape Medsc ape [serial online]. Av A vailable at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/809174 . Access Ac cessed ed Septembe Septemberr 1, 2013. 102. ClinicalTrials.gov Clinic alTrials.gov.. Anastrozole Anastroz ole or Tamoxifen in Treating Treating Postmenopausal Women With Wi th Du Duct ctal al Carcinoma Carcinoma in Situ Who Are Undergoing Lumpectomy and Radiation Therapy. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC3341142 1142// . Accessed May 22, 2013. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC334 103. Gianni L, Pienkowski Pienk owski T, Im YH, Roman L, L, Tseng LM, Liu MC, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuv neoadjuvant ant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol . Jan 2012;13(1):25-32. [Medline] [Medline].. 104. Bear HD, HD, Anderson S, Smith Smi th RE, Geyer CE Jr, Jr, Mamounas EP, Fisher Fi sher B, et al. Sequential preoperative preoperative or  postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer:National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol . May 1 [Medline].. 2006;24(13):2019-27. [Medline] 105. Visv Vis vanathan K, Hur Hurley ley P, Bantug B antug E, Brown P, Col NF, Cuzick J, et al. Use of Pharmacologic Interventions Interventions for for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction: Reduction: American Society S ociety of Clinical Clinical Oncology Clinical Practic e Guideline Guideline.. J  Clin Oncol . Jul 8 2013;[Medline] 2013;[Medline].. 106. Goss PE, PE , Ingle Ingle JN, JN, Alés-Martínez JE, Cheung AM, Chlebowski RT, Wactawsk i-Wende J, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med . Jun 23 2011;364(25):2381-91. [Medline] [Medline].. 107. Busko Busk o M. Regular Echo Ec ho Exams Ex ams Warranted to Detect Radiation-Induced Heart Disease. Medsc ape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/808213 . Accessed July 30, 2013.

emedici ne.medscape.com/ar ti cl e/1947145- over vi ew

21/22

 

12/28/13

Br east Cancer  

108. Lancellotti Lancellot ti P, Nkomo Nk omo VT, VT, Badano LP, Bergler J J,, Bogaert J, Da Dav vin L, et al. Expert consensus c onsensus for multimodality imaging evaluation of cardiovascular complications of radiotherapy in adults: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography. Eur  Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging . Aug 2013;14(8):721-40. [Medline]. [Medline]. 109. US Food & Drug Drug Administration. Administ ration. FDA Commissioner Commiss ioner announces announces Avasti Avastin n decision: Drug not shown to be safe and effective in breast cancer patients. Available at http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm280536.htm . Access Ac cessed ed June June 10, 2013. 110. Nelson R. R. Capecitabine Capecitabine Linked to Potentially Fatal Skin Reactions. Medscape Medical News [serial News  [serial online]. Dec 3 2012;Accessed Dec 10 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/815314 . 111. Ellence [package insert]. New York, York, NY: Pfizer; Feb 200 2007. 7. 112. Xeloda [package insert] . South San Francisc o, Calif: Genentec Genentech; h; November November 2009. 2009. 113. Herceptin Herceptin [package insert]. South San Francisco, Calif Calif:: Genentech; October 2010. 2010. 114. Tykerb [package insert]. Research Triangle Triangle Park, NC: NC: GlaxoSmithKl GlaxoSmi thKline; ine; Jan January uary 201 2010. 0. 115. Femara [package insert]. East E ast Hanover, Hanover, NJ: NJ: Novartis; Novartis; April A pril 2010. 116. Ruiter R, Bijl MJ, van van Schaik RH, Berns EM, Hofman A, Coebergh JW, et al. CYP CYP2C19*2 2C19*2 polymorphis polymorphism m is associated with increased survival in breast cancer patients using tamoxifen. Pharmacogenomics . Oct 2010;11(10):1367-75. [Medline]. [Medline]. 117. Fareston [package [pack age insert] . Memphis, Tenn: GTX GTX; December 2004. 118. Chusteck a Z. Z. New Guidelines on Chemoprev Chemoprevention ention for Breast Cancer. Medscape Meds cape [s [serial erial online]. A Av vailable at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/811553 . Accessed October 7, 2013. 119. Moyer VA. Medications Medic ations for Risk Risk Reduction of Primary Breast Cancer in Women: U.S. U.S . Prev Preventiv entive e Serv Services ices Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Statement. Ann Intern Med  Med . Sep 24 2013;[Medline] 2013; [Medline].. 120. Mulcahy N. ASCO adds oomph to breast cancer chemoprevention chemoprevention guide. Medscape Medical News [serial News  [serial online]. July 8, 2013;Accessed July 15, 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/807489 . 121. Visv Vis vanathan K, Hur Hurley ley P, Bantug B antug E, Brown P, Col NF, Cuzick J, et al. Use of Pharmacologic Interventions Interventions for for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction: Reduction: American Society S ociety of Clinical Clinical Oncology Clinical Practic e Guideline Guideline.. J  Clin Oncol . Jul 15 2013;[Medline] 2013; [Medline]..  

Medscape Reference © 2011 WebMD, LLC