scholarly journals A Review of Literature on Updates of Bisphosphonates Administration, Cancer Biomarkers for Bisphosphonate Therapy, and Bisphosphonate-related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Breast Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mina Khayamzadeh ◽  
Farnoosh Razmara ◽  
Amirali Asadi ◽  
Ghazal Shabankare
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Biomarkers ◽  
Osteonecrosis Of The Jaw ◽  
Bisphosphonate Therapy ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Health Maintenance ◽  
Breast Cancer Biomarkers ◽  
Pubmed Database

Context: The emergence of bone health maintenance in breast cancer patients is known as an indispensable aspect in survival and morbidity improvement; therefore, bisphosphonates play a substantial role in the prevention/delaying of cancer treatment induced bone loss and skeletal-related events (SREs) in these patients, although this drug can cause necrosis of the jaw. In this article, we aimed at summarizing updated evidence on bisphosphonates administration, biomarkers representative of the efficacy of bisphosphonate therapy, and bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) affection in patients involved in breast cancer. Methods: Associated published articles were searched for in EMBASE, MEDLINE, CDSR, PubMed, Google Scholar, and CINAHL, using the following keywords or, in the case of PubMed database, medical subject headings (MeSH): ‘Diphosphonate’, ‘osteonecrosis’, ‘breast cancer’, and ‘biomarker’ in the abstract or title, and was limited by "clinical trials, meta-analysis and randomized controlled trial” published in English language from 2015 to 2020-09-15. Results: Bisphosphonates depicted remarkable advantages in improving SREs, skeletal morbidity rate (SMR), survival rate, and treatment-emergent adverse events in breast cancer patients in almost all aspects of breast cancer therapy, from adjuvant therapy for the early stage breast cancer to bone metastatic breast cancer (BMBC). The identification of breast cancer biomarkers that are capable of reflecting the outcomes of bisphosphonates therapy is a highly advantageous aid in the optimal utilization of these drugs. Breast cancer biomarkers such as MAF, DOCK4, CD73, TLR9, and CAPG/GIPC1 composite illustrated a significant correlation with bisphosphonates administration. Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) stands out as the most hazardous adverse event of the bisphosphonates with a rationally high incidence among breast cancer patients, which requires cautious prescription of bisphosphonates as well as regular dental health counseling for being prevented. Conclusions: Bisphosphonates are great weapons in the arsenal of breast cancer treatment and, therefore, comprehensive studying of their features leads to the optimal and safe administration of them. Unfortunately, as this procedure can cause necrosis of the jaw, dental procedures should be performed in these patients before starting bisphosphonate treatment.

scholarly journals The effects of an individualized exercise intervention on body composition in breast cancer patients undergoing treatment

2007 ◽  
Vol 125 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudio Battaglini ◽  
Martim Bottaro ◽  
Carolyn Dennehy ◽  
Logan Rae ◽  
Edgar Shields ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Composition ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Exercise Group ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Changes in metabolism have been reported in the majority of patients undergoing cancer treatment, and these are usually characterized by progressive change in body composition. The effects of aerobic exercise programs to combat the cancer and cancer treatment-related side effects, which include the negative changes in body composition, have been extensively reported in the literature. However, few resistance exercise intervention studies have hypothesized that breast cancer patients might benefit from this type of exercise. The purpose of this study was to determine whether exercise protocols that emphasize resistance training would change body composition and strength in breast cancer patients undergoing treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized controlled trial, at the Campus Recreation Center and Rocky Mountain Cancer Rehabilitation Institute of the University of Northern Colorado, and the North Colorado Medical Center. METHODS: Twenty inactive breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to a 21-week exercise group (n = 10) or a control group (n = 10). The exercise group trained at low to moderate intensity for 60 minutes on two days/week. The primary outcome measurements included body composition (skinfold method) and muscle strength (one repetition maximum). RESULTS: Significant differences in lean body mass, body fat and strength (p = 0.004, p = 0.004, p = 0.025, respectively) were observed between the groups at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that exercise emphasizing resistance training promotes positive changes in body composition and strength in breast cancer patients undergoing treatment.

scholarly journals Probiotics for the Treatment of Docetaxel-Related Weight Gain of Breast Cancer Patients—A Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, and Placebo-Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhang Juan ◽  
Zhang Qing ◽  
Liang Yongping ◽  
Liyuan Qian ◽  
Wei Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Weight ◽  
Weight Gain ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Body Fat ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Body Fat Percentage ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Fat Percentage

Background: Docetaxel is an important chemotherapy-agent for breast cancer treatment. One of its side-effects is weight gain, which increases the all-cause mortality rate. Considering gut microbiota is one important factor for weight regulation, we hypothesized that probiotics could be potentially used to reduce the docetaxel-related weight gain in breast cancer patients.Methods: From 10/8/2018 to 10/17/2019, 100 breast cancer (Stage I-III) patients underwent four cycles of docetaxel-based chemotherapy were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive probiotics (Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, and Enterococcus faecalis) or placebo (supplementary material of the probiotics capsule) treatment for 84 days with three capsules per time, twice/day. The primary outcome: the changes in body weight and body-fat percentage of the patients were measured by a designated physician using a fat analyzer, and the secondary outcomes: the fasting insulin, plasma glucose, and lipids were directly obtained from the Hospital Information System (HIS); The metabolites were measured using liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS); The fecal microbiome was analyzed using bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene sequence. All indicators were measured 1 day before the first cycle of docetaxel-based chemotherapy and 21 days after the last cycle of docetaxel-based chemotherapy.Results: Compared with the placebo group, the probiotic group showed significantly smaller changes in body weight (Mean [SD] 0.77 [2.58] vs. 2.70 [3.08], P = 0.03), body-fat percentage (Mean [SD] 0.04 [1.14] vs. 3.86 [11.09], P = 0.02), and low density lipoprotein (LDL) (Mean [SD]−0.05[0.68] vs. 0.39 [0.58], P = 0.002). Moreover, five of the 340 detected plasma metabolites showed significant differences between the two groups. The change of biliverdin dihydrochloride (B = −0.724, P = 0.02) was inverse correlated with weight gain. One strain of the phylum and three strains of the genus were detected to be significantly different between the two groups. Also, the changes of Bacteroides (B = −0.917, P < 0.001) and Anaerostipes (B = −0.894, P < 0.001) were inverse correlated with the change of LDL.Conclusions: Probiotics supplement during docetaxel-based chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment may help to reduce the increase in body weight, body-fat percentage, plasma LDL, and minimize the metabolic changes and gut dysbacteriosis.Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=24294, ChiCTR-INQ-17014181.

COVID-19 outcomes in patients with a history of breast cancer: A diverse multicenter Los Angeles cohort study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12544-e12544
Author(s):  
Nikhita Kathuria-Prakash ◽  
Lauren Antrim ◽  
Alexander W Sun ◽  
Irene Kang ◽  
Maria De Lourdes Garcia-Jimenez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Los Angeles ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Hospitalization Rate ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Treatment History ◽  
History Of ◽  
Extent Of Disease

e12544 Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 has affected over 100 million individuals during the current pandemic. Cancer is a reported risk factor for worse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical syndrome COVID-19. However, risk associated with specific cancer subtypes, extent of disease, and treatment history remains unclear. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and is treated with multiple modalities that may affect COVID-19 severity and outcomes, including surgery, radiation (RT), hormone therapy (HT), and chemotherapy (CT). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and history of breast cancer at two academic centers in Los Angeles, CA between January – September, 2020. Demographic information, cancer diagnosis, treatment history, comorbid conditions, and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 were reviewed. The primary outcome was rate of hospitalization for COVID-19. Associations were evaluated for significance by chi-square test or Student’s T test, with a = 0.05. Results: Our cohort included 61 patients with history of breast cancer. 19 (31.1%) required hospitalization and 3 (4.9%) died from COVID-19. Median age was 61 years. 44% of patients were White/Caucasian, 37.7% Hispanic/Latinx, 8% Black/African American, 5% Asian, and 5% were of another race. 87% of patients had local or regional disease and 13% had distant metastases. 53% of patients had ever received CT historically, 66% HT, and 53% RT. 25% of patients received cancer treatment (surgery, CT, or RT) within 90 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. 38% were on HT at time of COVID-19 diagnosis. Patients with prior RT were more likely to be hospitalized from COVID-19 than those with no prior RT (44% vs 14%, p = 0.02), as were patients with 2 or more comorbidities (p = 0.01). In addition, there was a trend toward lower hospitalization rates for patients on HT [24% vs. 42% (p = 0.17)] and a trend toward higher hospitalization rate for non-white ethnicity [35% vs. 25% (p = ns)]. Extent of disease, history of CT, or receipt of any cancer treatment (e.g. surgery, RT, CT) within 90 days of COVID-19 diagnosis were not associated with hospitalization rate. Conclusions: In our diverse cohort of breast cancer patients with COVID-19 a history of RT and presence of multiple comorbidities were both associated with increased risk of hospitalization, while a history of HT was not. Further investigation is needed to validate these findings in larger cohorts. These findings may inform recommendations for breast cancer patients during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Factors influencing options in primary breast cancer treatment.

1987 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
W H Wolberg ◽  
M A Tanner ◽  
E P Romsaas ◽  
D L Trump ◽  
J F Malec
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Primary Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Information ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Tumor Excision ◽  
Factors Influencing

Primary breast cancer treatment is determined by tumor factors and by patient preference. Breast cancer treatments that preserve the cosmetic appearance of the breast are appealing and effective for appropriately selected patients; long-term survival following tumor excision and breast irradiation appears to be comparable to that for mastectomy. Since April 1981, when a protocol was developed and treatment options were offered, factors influencing treatment selection have been analyzed in 206 consecutive primary breast cancer patients. Mastectomy was dictated by tumor-related factors in 96 patients (47%); 110 patients (53%) had the option of mastectomy or conservation--tumor excision plus radiotherapy to the breast. Among these 110 eligible patients, 54 chose conservation (49%) and 56 chose mastectomy (51%). Intraoperative findings for ten patients electing conservation necessitated mastectomy, so conservation was accomplished for 44 (21%) of those treated for breast cancer. Beginning in July 1982, breast cancer patients took a battery of psychosexual assessments before any operation (Profile of Mood States [POMS], Health Locus of Control Scale [HLCS] Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test [MAT], Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale [PAIS], Derogatis Sexual Function Inventory [DSFI], Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory [MCMI], and a Breast Cancer Information Test [BCIT]). Comparisons of psychologic and demographic variables were made between patients who chose mastectomy and those who chose conservation. No demographic variable was statistically significantly related to choice, although older women tended to select mastectomy more than younger women. Compared with those who elected conservation, women who elected mastectomy were more tense and anxious (P less than .01), more introverted (P less than .01), felt more depressed and dejected (P less than .05), and reported more sexual problems (P less than .05). Those who elected conservation valued their physical appearance more highly (P less than .01) and were generally more self-interested (P less than .05). Mastectomy was dictated by medical considerations for approximately half of patients with breast cancer. Among candidates for breast conservation, the importance of retaining the breast appeared to be determined to a significant degree by measurable psychological factors.

scholarly journals A Personalized Approach to Cancer Treatment: How Biomarkers Can Help

2008 ◽  
Vol 54 (11) ◽  
pp. 1770-1779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Duffy ◽  
John Crown
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Plasminogen Activator ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Personalized Treatment ◽  
Severe Toxicity ◽  
Trial And Error ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients

Abstract Background: The present approach to cancer treatment is often referred to as “trial and error” or “one size fits all.” This practice is inefficient and frequently results in inappropriate therapy and treatment-related toxicity. In contrast, personalized treatment has the potential to increase efficacy and decrease toxicity. Content: We reviewed the literature relevant to prognostic, predictive, and toxicity-related markers in cancer, with particular attention to systematic reviews, prospective randomized trials, and guidelines issued by expert panels. To achieve personalized treatment for cancer, we need markers for determining prognosis, predicting response to therapy, and predicting severe toxicity related to treatment. Among the best-validated prognostic markers currently available are serum concentrations of α-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) for patients with nonseminoma germ cell tumors and tissue concentrations of both urokinase plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) for breast cancer patients. Clinically useful therapy predictive markers are estrogen and progesterone receptors to select patients with breast cancer for treatment with endocrine therapy and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) to select breast cancer patients for treatment with trastuzumab (Herceptin). Markers available for identifying drug-induced adverse reactions include thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) to predict toxicity from thiopurines in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia and uridine diphosphate glucuronyltransferase to predict toxicity from irinotecan in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Conclusions: Validated prognostic, predictive, and toxicity markers should help cancer treatment move from the current trial-and-error approach to more personalized treatment.

Serum metabolism during breast cancer treatment.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23043-e23043
Author(s):  
Guro Fanneløb Giskeødegård ◽  
Torfinn Støve Madssen ◽  
Riyas Vettukattil ◽  
Vidar Gordon Flote ◽  
Anders Husøy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Weight Gain ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Lipoprotein Subfractions ◽  
Metabolite Profiles

e23043 Serum metabolism during breast cancer treatment Background: Breast cancer treatment may include surgery, systemic therapy and radiation, often involving side-effects. Many patients experience weight gain during treatment, which is associated with decreased survival rates1. The purpose of this study was to describe serum metabolic alterations in breast cancer patients undergoing treatment, and relate these alterations to weight gain during treatment. Methods: This pilot study includes 60 breast cancer patients, aged 35-75 years, with histologically verified stage I/II disease. All patients underwent tumor surgery, and were treated according to national guidelines. Samples were collected before and 6 months after surgery, and analyzed by MR spectroscopy (MRS) and mass spectrometry (MS). 170 metabolites and 105 lipoprotein subfractions were quantified by combined MRS and MS analyses. Results: Multilevel PLS-DA showed significant alterations in serum metabolite profiles post-treatment, both in patients receiving (n = 35) and not receiving (n = 25) chemotherapy (classification accuracy: 86.7% and 77.0%, resp., p < 0.001). Lipoprotein profiles were also significantly altered in both groups (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy recipients had decreased levels of citrate, ornithine, and methionine after treatment, while non-recipients had increased levels of glutamate, alanine, proline and two biogenic amines, and decreased levels of acylcarnitines. 17/52 patients (32.7%) gained weight (≥ 1.5 kg) during treatment. Weight gain was predicted from pre-treatment samples with accuracy 67.0% (p = 0.020). Weight gain patients had lower levels of three acylcarnitines and 20 phosphocholines, and higher levels of lysine and isoleucine, suggesting aberrant lipid and amino acid metabolism. Weight gain was also reflected in the post-treatment samples (accuracy 66.8%, p = 0.015), with weight gain patients having higher levels of five acylcarnitines, and lower levels of glycine, isoleucine and valine. Conclusions: This study indicates that treatment induces changes in serum metabolite levels. Patients gaining weight had significantly different metabolite profiles than those not gaining weight both before and after treatment. 1. Chan et al, Ann Oncol 25: 1901-14, 2014.

An intervention RCT-study aimed at improving mental health and increasing understanding of fertility preservation with Oncofertility! Psycho-Education And Couple Enrichment (O!PEACE) therapy.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12119-12119
Author(s):  
Nao Suzuki ◽  
Tomoe Koizumi ◽  
Yodo Sugishita ◽  
Hiroshi Matsumoto ◽  
Tatsuro Furui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Fertility Preservation ◽  
Coping Strategy ◽  
Stress Coping ◽  
Ptsd Symptoms ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Marital Communication

12119 Background: Although ASCO revised Guidelines (2013) recommends referring to psychological professionals if cancer patients show concerns or anxiety about fertility, there is no evidence regarding the efficacy of psychotherapy. The aim of this study is to examine whether the Psycho-Education And Couple Enrichment (O!PEACE) therapy can reduce psychiatric symptoms and improve stress coping and marital relationship in breast cancer patients. Methods: Trial design: multicenter randomized controlled trial, pre-post design. Subjects were women aged 20–39 years with breast cancer before cancer treatment and their husbands. Couples were randomly assigned to receive O!PEACE therapy (n = 37) or not (usual care: n = 37). Assessments of PTSD symptoms, depression and anxiety were made as the primary end points at baseline and at the end of therapy before cancer treatment. Stress coping strategies, resilience, marital relationships, and marital communication were examined as secondary end points. Results: Four participants in O!PEACE therapy and one participant in the usual care withdrew from the trial. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted using analysis of covariance after multiple imputation by R and SPSS. Series of ANCOVAs were integrated according to Rubin’s rule. A significant decrease was observed in the primary outcome of PTSD symptoms, from baseline to post-intervention, in women who participated in O!PEACE therapy (p = .011, ηp2 = .089). According to post-hoc analyses, for patients with a higher baseline IES-R-J score, O!PEACE therapy resulted in a significantly higher reduction in follow-up assessment IES-R-J score when compared with usual care (U = 172.80, p = .027, r = .258): 59.3% of the women in O!PEACE therapy showed a 5-point or greater reduction, whereas in usual care, 30.0% showed a 5-point or greater reduction. For husbands, the O!PEACE therapy also showed a significant improvement of giving up and blaming others as the stress coping strategy and escape-avoidance coping strategy in their marital communication. For breast cancer patients, the O!PEACE therapy significantly improved support from husbands and the patients’ knowledge level of oncofertility compared with those receiving usual care. Conclusions: Only two counseling sessions of O!PEACE therapy can reduce patients’ distress, improve their husbands’ coping style, and may build a better cooperative relationship for couples in terms of fertility preservation and cancer treatment. Clinical trial information: UMIN000017754 .

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document