Breast Cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative Trial of Estrogen Plus Progestin For the WHI Investigators Rowan T Chlebowski, MD., Ph.D.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Women's Health Initiative
Advertisements

TOP2A IS AN INDEPENDENT PREDICTOR OF SURVIVAL IN UNSELECTED BREAST CANCER Amit Pancholi Molecular Profiling of Breast Cancer: Predictive Markers of Long.
Serena T. Wong, MD Assistant Professor of Medicine
Breast Cancer Tumor Board Chair Harold Burstein, MD, PhD Faculty Jennifer Bellon, MD Mehra Golshan, MD.
¡Celebremos La Salud!: A cancer prevention program for Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women living in a rural area Silvia Tejeda, MPH Doctoral Candidate.
Breast Cancer 101 Barbara Lee Bass, MD, FACS Professor of Surgery
Cardiovascular Disease in Women Module VI: Update on Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERMs)
Early Detection of breast cancer Anthony B. Miller, MD, FRCP Associate Director, Research, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada.
Breast Imaging Made Brief and Simple
Impact of Cancer Diagnosis and Chemotherapy on Mammography Use Xinhua Yu, M.B., Ph.D. A. Marshall McBean, M.D., M.Sc. Beth A. Virnig, Ph.D., M.P.H Division.
Effects of Conjugated Equine Estrogen in Postmenopausal Women with Hysterectomy The Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA 2004;291:
Meta-analysis of trials of radiotherapy in DCIS Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG)
Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Incidence, Survival and Treatment Linda C. Harlan, PhD, MPH National Cancer Institute Division of Cancer Control and.
Description of fracture with endocrine therapy use in older breast cancer survivors in a population-based setting Taryn Becker 123, Geoff Anderson 123,
Tenth Anniversary of Initial Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) Report Richard Santen, MD University of Virginia 12/2/11.
Linda Snetselaar, PhD, RD Professor Interim Chair of the Department of Community and Behavioral Health College of Public Health University of Iowa.
Long-Term Effects of Continuing Adjuvant Tamoxifen to 10 Years versus Stopping at 5 Years After Diagnosis of Oestrogen Receptor- Positive Breast Cancer:
Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy And The Risk of Breast Cancer A Contrary Thought Leon Speroff, M.D.
Wildiers H, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:1101. Breast Cancer in Elderly (>65 Years) Recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology Surgical.
ACRIN Protocol 6666 ACRIN Protocol 6666 Screening Breast Ultrasound in High-Risk Women Made possible by grants from the Avon Foundation and National Cancer.
EPIB-591 Screening Jean-François Boivin 29 September
Oral Bisphosphonate and Breast Cancer: Prospective Results from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) Chlebowski RT et al. SABCS 2009; Abstract 21.
Cognitive Impairment: An Independent Predictor of Excess Mortality SACHS, CARTER, HOLTZ, ET AL. ANN INTERN MED, SEP, 2011;155: ZACHARY LAPAQUETTE.
Slide Source: Lipids Online Slide Library Women’s Health Initiative: Trial of Estrogen plus Progestin 16,608 women randomized 16,608.
Session Fertility and Pregnancy FL-BBM Specific questions Risk of premature ovarian failure Ability to become pregnant Safety of pregnancy.
The Women’s Health Initiative Hormone Trials The Estrogen Only (women with a hysterectomy at baseline) and the Estrogen + Progestin (women with a uterus)
Design of Clinical Trials for Select Patients With a Rising PSA following Primary Therapy Anthony V. D’Amico, MD, PhD Professor of Radiation Oncology Harvard.
Metabolic Syndrome and Recurrence within the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay Risk Categories in Lymph Node Negative Breast Cancer Lakhani A et al. Proc.
Antiplatelet Therapy Use and the Risk of Venous Thromboembolic Events in the Double-Blind Raloxifene Use for the Heart (RUTH) Trial C. Duvernoy 1, A. Yeo.
Estrogen plus Progestin, BMD and Fractures: Women’s Health Initiative Jane A. Cauley University of Pittsburgh JAMA 2003; 290 (13) :
Breast Cancer Risk with Menopausal Hormone Use Jackie Bouillon Advisor: Dr. Robert Hadley Spring 2007.
Best first ? The ATAC completed treatment analysis Professor Jack Cuzick Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, London, UK.
1Bachelot T et al. Proc SABCS 2010;Abstract S1-6.
Breast cancer in elderly patients (70 years and older): The University of Tennessee Medical Center at Knoxville 10 year experience Curzon M, Curzon C,
CE-1 IRESSA ® Clinical Efficacy Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive.
Breast Cancer Prevention Art or Science? Kristi McIntyre M.D. Texas Oncology 2005.
BREAST CANCER: Half a million women later… Amy Miglani M.D September 3, 2004.
Breast Cancer. Breast cancer is a disease in which malignant cells form in the tissues of the breast – “National Breast Cancer Foundation” The American.
AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.
Senior Statistician Per-Henrik Zahl, MA MD PhD
Anastrozole (‘Arimidex’): a new standard of care?
‘Arimidex’, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial: Completed Treatment Analysis.
The impact of smoking on cancer recurrence and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer: findings from CALGB Nadine A. Jackson, Charles S.
1 CONFIDENTIAL – DO NOT DISTRIBUTE ARIES mCRC: Effectiveness and Safety of 1st- and 2nd-line Bevacizumab Treatment in Elderly Patients Mark Kozloff, MD.
Reduced Lung Cancer Mortality Risk Among Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Anti- Estrogens Rapiti E et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 35.
BC Cancer Agency CARE & RESEARCH Breast Cancer Mortality After Screening Mammography in British Columbia Women Andrew J. Coldman, Ph.D. Norm Phillips,
1 Risk Benefit and Conclusions George Sledge, MD Indiana University School of Medicine.
Carboplatin Not Inferior to Radiation as Adjuvant Therapy for Stage I Seminoma Slideset on: Oliver RT, Mason MD, Mead GM, et al. Radiotherapy versus single-dose.
Breast Cancer 1. Leukemia & Lymphoma New diagnoses each year in the US: 112, 610 Adults 5,720 Children 43,340 died of leukemia or lymphoma in
Erlotinib plus Gemcitabine Compared with Gemcitabine Alone in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the National Cancer Institute.
Date of download: 5/31/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Estrogen Plus Progestin and Breast Cancer Incidence.
Date of download: 5/31/2016 From: Tipping the Balance of Benefits and Harms to Favor Screening Mammography Starting at Age 40 Years: A Comparative Modeling.
Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer Slideset on: Piccart-Gebhart M, Procter M, Leyland- Jones B, et al. Trastuzumab.
CCO Independent Conference Coverage*: The 2015 Annual Meeting of the CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, December 8-12, 2015 San Antonio, Texas.
Radical Prostatectomy versus Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer Anna Bill-Axelson, M.D., Lars Holmberg, M.D., Ph.D., Mirja Ruutu, M.D., Ph.D., Michael.
Date of download: 6/2/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Health Outcomes During.
Effectiveness of Patient Navigation on Diagnostic Interval, Anxiety, and Satisfaction of Minority Women with Abnormal Mammograms: a Randomized Controlled.
TMIST A Breast Cancer Screening Trial
Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening With Risk-Based and Universal Mammography Screening Compared With Clinical Breast Examination A Propensity Score.
Prognostic significance of tumor subtypes in male breast cancer:
Mammograms and Breast Exams: When to start /stop mammograms
From: Tipping the Balance of Benefits and Harms to Favor Screening Mammography Starting at Age 40 YearsA Comparative Modeling Study of Risk Ann Intern.
Weight Loss and Breast Cancer Incidence in Postmenopausal Women
Breast Health Katherine B. Lee, MD, FACP April 26, 2018.
San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, December 6-10, 2016
Baseline characteristics of HPS participants by prior diabetes
Bernard Rosner Channing Division of Network Medicine
Stamatia Destounis, MD, FACR, FSBI, FAIUM
Nadia Howlader, PhD National Cancer Institute
South Carolina Statewide Cancer Prevention & Control Program
Presentation transcript:

Breast Cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative Trial of Estrogen Plus Progestin For the WHI Investigators Rowan T Chlebowski, MD., Ph.D.

Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Breast Cancer (Background) Preponderance of observational studies suggest long duration estrogen plus progestin increases breast cancers which have: - Low stage and favorable prognosis - Receptor positive preponderance - More lobular histology Holli J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3115Gapstur JAMA 1999; 281: 2021 Delgado Maturitas 2001; 38: 147Lower Breast Cancer Res Treat 1999; 58: 205 Chen, JAMA 287: 734, 2002Coldity Am JEpid 147 (5): 645, 1998

Descriptive Characteristics in WHI Participants AgeAge at menarcheRelatives with breast ca (n) EthnicityTerm pregnancies (n)Benign breast disease EducationAge at first birthPrior estrogen (E) alone use Gail RiskChildren breastfed (n) Prior E + progestin (P) use BMIOral Contraceptive useNSAID use Alcohol Use% Energy from fatPhysical Activity None of these characteristics differed significantly between treatment groups

Descriptive Characteristics By Treatment Group Prior Menopausal Hormone Use E+P (n, %) Placebo Never6280 (73.9)6024 (74.4) Prior1674 (19.7)1588 (19.6) Current548 (6.4)487 (6.0) “Current” users required three month washout

Baseline mammogram and clinical breast exams required for eligibility Annual mammograms and clinical breast exams required when on study Study medications withheld if safety procedures not performed WHI Estrogen+Progestin Trial Breast Safety

Breast Cancers by Category and Treatment Group Breast CaE+PPlacebo HR (95% CI) 1 P-Value 2 Total ( ) Invasive (1.01–1.54) In situ ( ) Hazard ratios (HR) from unweighted Cox proportional hazards regression models 2 P values from weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models

Hazard ratios (HR) from unweighted Cox proportional hazards regressions models Z Statistics and p values from weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models Invasive Breast Cancer By Group

Sensitivity Analysis of Adherent Participants Invasive Breast Cancers by Group Hazard ratios (HR) from unweighted Cox proportional hazards regressions models Z Statistics and p values form weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models Participants were censored 6 months after becoming non-adherent (taking < 80% study meds or taking non-protocol hormones)

Breast Cancers (Annualized Percentage) by Age AgeE+PPlaceboHRP-value y52 (0.31)40 (0.26)1.20 ( ) y94 (0.44)72 (0.31)1.22 ( ) y53 (0.54)38 (0.41)1.34 ( ) P-value tests interactions of E+P and age

Breast Cancer (Annualized Percentage) by BMI BMIE+PPlaceboHRP-value 2545 (0.31)32 (0.23)1.35 ( ) (0.42)49 (0.31)1.40 ( ).12 > 3082 (0.50)68 (0.45)1.08 ( ) P-value tests for interaction of E+P with BMI

Breast Cancers (Annualized Percentage) by Prior Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT) Use Prior MHT E+PPlaceboHR (95% CI) P value None141 (0.40)121 (0.36)1.09 ( ).10 Ever58 (0.46)29 (0.25)1.86 ( ) 1 P value tests for interaction with E+P and prior MHT More breast cancers on E+P in both groups Non-significant trend, no interaction Ever users at somewhat lower risk Cumulative exposure versus selection bias

Breast Cancer Incidence by Prior MHT Use and Randomization Assignment No prior MHTPrior MHT YearE+PPlaceboHRE+PPlaceboHR Z for trend

Breast Cancer Characteristics by Group E+PPlaceboP-Value Histology Ductal67.8 %67.3 % Lobular11.1 %10.3 %0.885 Ductal + Lobular7.5 %5.3 % Grade Well25.0 %20.3 % Moderately43.3 %47.7 %0.609 Poor31.7 %32.0 % Similar histology and grade on E+P and placebo 1 P value tests association with treatment groups

Receptor StatusE+PPlaceboP-Value 1, 2 Estrogen receptor Positive158 (86.8)112 (88.2)0.720 Negative24 (13.2)15 (11.8) Missing17 (8.5)23 (15.4)0.049 Progesterone receptor Positive135 (75.0)86 (69.9)0.328 Negative45 (25.0)37 (30.0) Missing19 (9.5)27 (18.0)0.021 Both receptor positive and negative breast cancers greater on E+P 1 The first P value tests association with treatment groups 2 P-value for “missing” rows test the association of % missing with treatment group

Breast Cancer Characteristics by Group E+PPlaceboP-Value Tumor size, cm (1.1)1.5 (0.9) Nodes Positive %15.8%0.033 SEER Stage Regional / Mets 25.4%16.0% mean (SD) for tumor with known tumor size 2 P-values from weighted Cox proportional hazards models More advanced stage on E+P

Year 1 Mammogram Findings by Group Mammogram Findings E+P (n, %)Placebo Negative / Benign finding 6940 (90.7)6912 (94.6) Abnormal (total)716 (9.4)398 (5.4) 1 Short interval f/u 625 (8.2)332 (4.5) Suspicious abnormality 85 (1.1)59 (0.8) Highly suggestive 6 (0.1)7 ( 0.1) 1 p <.0001 comparing E+P versus placebo Increased abnormal mammograms after 1 year on E+P

Summary Mammogram Findings by Group and Time BaselineYear 1Cumulative E+PPlaceboE+P Placebo E+P Placebo Mammogram Performed 1 100% 90.3%90.5%97.3%97.8% Mammogram Abnormal (total) 2 5.2%5.0%9.4% 1 5.4%31.5% % 1 % of women due for visit with mammogram in study period who had mammogram 2 % of women with any category of abnormal mammogram 3 p < E+P versus placebo

Abnormal Mammograms: Associated with Short Duration E+P Use 4 % absolute increase in abnormal mammograms after one year on E+P 10% absolute increase in abnormal mammograms after about 5 years on E+P

Recent Results from the UK Million Women Study National Health Service Breast Cancer Screening Program Inform Interpretation of WHI Results

Million Women Study NHSBSP in the UK invites women for mammography screening q 3 years by letters A questionnaire regarding HT use was added to the screening invitation letter HT use data was linked to NHS central registries for breast cancer and death outcomes 1,084,110 women flagged 9,364 incident invasive breast cancers seen Lancet 2003; 362:

Relative Risk of Fatal Breast Cancer by HT Use at Baseline in the Million Women Study Based on 517 deaths after 4.1 years HT useRR (95% CI) Never1.00 ( ) Current1.22 ( )* * P = 0.05 for current versus neverLancet 2003; 362; HT associated with increased breast cancer mortality in “short term” users

Relative Risk of Breast Cancer in the Million Women Study By E+P Duration DurationCases/PopulationRR (95% CI) < 1 yr97/ ( ) 1-4 yr582/ ( ) 5-9 yr850/ ( ) > 10 yr362/ ( ) E+P associated with increased breast cancers in < 1 year

Relative Risk of Breast Cancer in the Million Women Study By Hormone Type Hormone TypeRR (95% CI) Estrogen only1.30 ( ) Equine Estrogens1.29 ( ) Ethinyloestradiol1.24 ( ) Estrogen + Progestin2.00 ( ) Medroxyprogesterone1.60 ( ) Norethisterone1.53 ( )

Conclusions Combined E+P use increases breast Ca, diagnosed at more advanced stage and increases abnormal mammograms These results suggest: Use of E+P may stimulate breast cancer growth and hinder breast cancer diagnosis