Ovarian Ablation Using Goserelin Improves Survival of Premenopausal Patients with Stage II/III Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer without Chemotherapy-Induced Amenorrhea

Feasibility and efficacy of ultrasonographic and laparoscopic guidance for microwave ablation of clinically normal canine ovaries

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal energy profile for and to assess the feasibility and efficacy of ultrasonographic and laparoscopic guidance for microwave ablation (MWA) of clinically normal canine ovaries.

SAMPLE

44 extirpated ovaries from 22 healthy dogs.

PROCEDURES

In the first of 2 trials, 13 dogs underwent oophorectomy by routine laparotomy. Extirpated ovaries underwent MWA at 45 W for 60 (n = 11) or 90 (12) seconds; 3 ovaries did not undergo MWA and served as histologic controls. Ovaries were histologically evaluated for cell viability. Ovaries without viable cells were categorized as completely ablated. Histologic results were used to identify the optimal MWA protocol for use in the subsequent trial. In the second trial, the ovaries of 9 dogs underwent MWA at 45 W for 90 seconds in situ. Ultrasonographic guidance for MWA was deemed unfeasible after evaluation of 1 ovary. The remaining 17 ovaries underwent MWA with laparoscopic guidance, after which routine laparoscopic oophorectomy was performed. Completeness of ablation was histologically assessed for all ovaries.

RESULTS

2 ovaries were excluded from the trial 1 analysis because of equivocal cell viability. Six of 11 ovaries and 10 of 10 ovaries that underwent MWA for 60 and 90 seconds, respectively, were completely ablated. In trial 2, laparoscopic-guided MWA resulted in complete ablation for 12 of 17 ovaries. Dissection of the ovarian bursa for MWA probe placement facilitated complete ablation.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Laparoscopic-guided MWA at 45 W for 90 seconds was feasible, safe, and effective for complete ablation of clinically normal ovaries in dogs.

Adjuvant ovarian function suppression and tamoxifen in premenopausal breast cancer patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of adding ovarian function suppression (OFS) to tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of premenopausal women with breast cancer is uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that addressed this question.

METHODS

Systematic search of PubMed, the web of science, and the meeting library of ASCO, ESMO, and SABCS was conducted using the following keywords: tamoxifen, ovarian suppression, and breast cancer. Eligible studies were those recruiting patients with breast cancer randomized to receive adjuvant tamoxifen and OFS versus tamoxifen alone. Pooled hazard ratio [HR]) for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the fixed effect model.

RESULTS

We searched a total of 845 records, of which 5 clinical trials, including 7557 patients, were eligible for our analysis. Adding OFS to tamoxifen improved DFS with pooled HR: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80-0.96, P= 0.004) and OS (pooled HR: 0.87 {95% CI: 0.77-0.98, P= 0.02}) compared to tamoxifen alone. The benefit of the addition of OFS to tamoxifen was mostly observed in patients younger than 40 years where the pooled HRs of DFS was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.63-0.91; P= 0.004), and in those who received adjuvant chemotherapy with pooled HRs of DFS 0.80 (95% CI: 0.65-0.99, P= 0.042). There was an increase in the incidence of all grade musculoskeletal symptoms and high-grade hot flushes with the addition of OFS with risk ratios of 1.12 (95% CI: 1.07-1.17, P< 0.001) and 2.14 (95% CI: 1.01-4.51, P= 0.047) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis indicates that the addition of OFS to tamoxifen improves DFS and OS. This strategy could be considered in patients in which tamoxifen alone is not deemed sufficient or in case of poor tolerance to OFS with aromatase inhibitors.

Prognostic Significance of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Induced Amenorrhea in Luminal A and B Subtypes

Objective

In this retrospective study, chemotherapy induced amenorrhea in patients with early stage breast cancer and its effects on survival were investigated.

Materials and Methods

Two hundred fifty-two patients received adjuvant chemotherapy without ovarian suppression treatment (OST) from 600 premenopausal patients were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups; with amenorrhea and without, and compared with clinicopathologic features and survival. SPSS version 17 was used.

Results

Chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea (CIA) was observed in 145 (57.5%) of 252 patients who received no OST during follow-up. The 5-year OS rate of patients with CIA was significantly higher than patients without CIA (p= 0.042, 95.9% vs. 89.7% vs. 158.88 vs. 135.33 months, respectively). In the subgroup analysis, the OS in patients with hormone receptor (+) was significantly higher than in those receptor (-) in patients with CIA (p=0.011, 97.5% vs. 90.9% vs. 162.13 vs. 126.16 months, respectively). The OS was significantly longer in the luminal A molecular subtype than in those with luminal B molecular subtype, in patients with CIA, but the difference was not significant in patients without CIA (p=0.027 vs. p=0.074, respectively).

Conclusion

As a conclusion; survival advantage of the chemotherapy induced amenorrhea more pronounced with hormone receptor positivity, lymph node involvement, and advanced disease over patients who do not develop amenorrhea. This advantage of amenorrhea development further prolongs survival compared with luminal B in the luminal A molecular subtype.

Evaluating the Survival Benefit Following Ovarian Function Suppression in Premenopausal Patients with Hormone Receptor Positive Early Breast Cancer

There are divergent opinions regarding the use of ovarian function suppression or ablation (hereafter, OFS) in hormone receptor positive early breast cancer patients. In order to clarify the survival benefit of OFS, a meta-analysis was performed. The result is that use of OFS was more effective than no OFS on DFS (the pooled relative risk (pRR) = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75–0.96) and on OS (pRR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70–0.89). In subgroup analysis, we found that increased DFS was positively associated with patients who had received chemotherapy (pRR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.74–0.96), who were lymph node negative (pRR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.61–0.91) and were less than 40 years old (pRR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.59–0.83). There was a significant difference in OS between the groups receiving chemotherapy (pRR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58–0.89) or for patients less than 40 years old (pRR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.18–0.87). The use of OFS also produces statistical differences in the occurrence of the side-effects; severe hot flashes (pRR = 2.32; 95% CI: 1.36–3.97), and hypertension (pRR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.12–2.12). In general, OFS should be considered as one treatment for hormone receptor positive premenopausal early breast cancer patients who have received chemotherapy and are less than 40 years old. We also should pay attention to the side-effects and weigh the advantages and disadvantages before deciding on using OFS.

Is radiation-induced ovarian ablation in breast cancer an obsolete procedure? Results of a meta-analysis

Background

A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the impact of radiation-induced ovarian ablation (RT-OA) on amenorrhea cessation rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival in pre/perimenopausal women with breast cancer.

Materials and methods

The Medline, CANCERLIT, and Cochrane Library databases and search engines were searched to identify randomized controlled studies comparing RT-OA with control for early or metastatic breast cancer. Further, radiotherapy doses, techniques, and associated side effects were evaluated.

Results

Six controlled trials with a total patient population of 3,317 were identified. Pooled results from these trials showed significant amenorrhea rates (P<0.00001) and increase in progression-free survival in patients treated with RT-OA (P<0.00001). However, there was no difference in overall survival (P=0.37). The majority of patients were treated with larger field sizes with parallel-opposed anteroposterior and posteroanterior pelvic fields. RT-OA was generally well tolerated. Radiotherapy doses of 1,500 cGy in five fractions, 1,500 cGy in four fractions, 1,600 cGy in four fractions, and 2,000 cGy in ten fractions were associated with excellent amenorrhea rates. The resultant funnel plot showed no publication bias (Egger test P=0.16).

Conclusion

RT-OA is cost-effective and can safely be used in pre/perimenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, or if luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs are contraindicated, or in patients in whom fertility preservation is not an issue. Radiation dose of 1,500 cGy in five fractions, 1,500 cGy in four fractions, 1,600 cGy in four fractions, and 2,000 cGy in ten fractions showed more efficacies. However, further studies incorporating three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy are warranted.