Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2010

01-05-2010 | Clinical trial

Breast cancer risk assessment in a mammography screening program and participation in the IBIS-II chemoprevention trial

Authors: Christian R. Loehberg, Sebastian M. Jud, Lothar Haeberle, Katharina Heusinger, Gerhard Dilbat, Alexander Hein, Claudia Rauh, Peter Dall, Nadine Rix, Sabrina Heinrich, Stefan Buchholz, Benno Lex, Barbara Reichler, Boris Adamietz, Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland, Matthias W. Beckmann, Peter A. Fasching

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

It has been shown in several studies that antihormonal compounds can offer effective prophylactic treatment to prevent breast cancer. In view of the low participation rates in chemoprevention trials, the purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of women taking part in a population-based mammography screening program who wished to obtain information about the risk of breast cancer and then participate in the the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II (IBIS-II) trial, a randomized double-blind controlled chemoprevention trial comparing anastrozole with placebo. A paper-based survey was conducted in a population-based mammography screening program in Germany between 2007 and 2009. All women who met the criteria for the mammography screening program were invited to complete a questionnaire. A total of 2,524 women completed the questionnaire, and 17.7% (n = 446) met the eligibility criteria for the IBIS-II trial after risk assessment. The women who wished to receive further information about chemoprevention were significantly younger (P < 0.01) and had significantly more children (P = 0.03) and significantly more relatives with breast cancer (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the participants with regard to body mass index or hormone replacement therapy. Normal mammographic findings at screening were the main reason (42%) for declining to participate in the IBIS-II trial or attend risk counseling. The ultimate rate of recruitment to the IBIS-II trial was very low (three women). Offering chemoprevention to women within a mammography screening unit as part of a paper-based survey resulted in low participation rates for both, the survey and the final participation in the IBIS-II trial. More individualized approaches and communication of breast cancer risk at the time of the risk assessment might be helpful to increase the participation and the understanding of chemopreventive approaches.
Literature
1.
Cuzick J, Forbes J, Edwards R et al (2002) First results from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS-I): a randomised prevention trial. Lancet 360:817–824CrossRefPubMed
2.
Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL et al (1998) Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1371–1388CrossRefPubMed
3.
Powles T, Eeles R, Ashley S et al (1998) Interim analysis of the incidence of breast cancer in the Royal Marsden Hospital tamoxifen randomised chemoprevention trial. Lancet 352:98–101PubMed
4.
Veronesi U, Maisonneuve P, Sacchini V, Rotmensz N, Boyle P (2002) Tamoxifen for breast cancer among hysterectomised women. Lancet 359:1122–1124CrossRefPubMed
5.
Cuzick J, Powles T, Veronesi U et al (2003) Overview of the main outcomes in breast-cancer prevention trials. Lancet 361:296–300CrossRefPubMed
6.
Cauley JA, Norton L, Lippman ME et al (2001) Continued breast cancer risk reduction in postmenopausal women treated with raloxifene: 4-year results from the MORE trial. Multiple outcomes of raloxifene evaluation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 65:125–134CrossRefPubMed
7.
Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL et al (2006) 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 295:2727–2741CrossRefPubMed
8.
Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S et al (2003) A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 349:1793–1802CrossRefPubMed
9.
Baum M, Budzar AU, Cuzick J et al (2002) Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trial. Lancet 359:2131–2139CrossRefPubMed
10.
Thurlimann B, Keshaviah A, Coates AS et al (2005) A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353:2747–2757CrossRefPubMed
11.
Coombes RC, Hall E, Gibson LJ et al (2004) A randomized trial of exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med 350:1081–1092CrossRefPubMed
12.
Jakesz R, Jonat W, Gnant M et al (2005) Switching of postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer to anastrozole after 2 years’ adjuvant tamoxifen: combined results of ABCSG trial 8 and ARNO 95 trial. Lancet 366:455–462CrossRefPubMed
13.
Mouridsen H, Giobbie-Hurder A, Goldhirsch A et al (2009) Letrozole therapy alone or in sequence with tamoxifen in women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med 361:766–776CrossRefPubMed
14.
Forbes JF, Cuzick J, Buzdar A, Howell A, Tobias JS, Baum M (2008) Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 100-month analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 9:45–53CrossRefPubMed
15.
Coombes RC, Kilburn LS, Snowdon CF et al (2007) Survival and safety of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2–3 years’ tamoxifen treatment (Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 369:559–570CrossRefPubMed
16.
Cuzick J (2003) Aromatase inhibitors in prevention—data from the ATAC (Arimidex, tamoxifen alone or in combination) trial and the design of IBIS-II (the second International Breast Cancer Intervention Study). Recent Results Cancer Res 163:96–103 (discussion 264–266)PubMed
17.
Goss PE, Richardson H, Chlebowski R et al (2007) National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group MAP.3 Trial: evaluation of exemestane to prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Clin Breast Cancer 7:895–900CrossRefPubMed
18.
Editorial (2007) NCI and the STELLAR trial. Lancet 369:2134
19.
Dunn BK, Ryan A (2009) Phase 3 trials of aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer prevention: following in the path of the selective estrogen receptor modulators. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1155:141–161CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Vescia S, von Minckwitz G, Loibl S et al (2008) The GISS Trial: a pilot phase randomized prevention trial of screening plus goserelin plus ibandronate, versus screening alone in premenopausal women at increased risk of breast cancer (abstract). Eur J Cancer 6:72
22.
von Minckwitz GPB, Hofmann K et al (2002) Prevention with goserelin and ibandronate in premenopausal women with familial breast cancer risk: first experiences of the GISS study (abstract). Arch Gynecol Obstet 267(Suppl 1):S52
23.
Evans D, Lalloo F, Shenton A, Boggis C, Howell A (2001) Uptake of screening and prevention in women at very high risk of breast cancer. Lancet 358(9285):889–890CrossRefPubMed
24.
Schulz-Wendtland R, Becker N, Bock K, Anders K, Bautz W (2007) Mammography screening. Radiologe 47:359–369 (quiz 70)CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J (2004) A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med 23:1111–1130CrossRefPubMed
27.
Fasching PA, von Minckwitz G, Fischer T et al (2007) The impact of breast cancer awareness and socioeconomic status on willingness to receive breast cancer prevention drugs. Breast Cancer Res Treat 101:95–104CrossRefPubMed
28.
The Million Women Study Collaborative Group (1999) The Million Women Study: design and characteristics of the study population. The Million Women Study Collaborative Group. Breast Cancer Res 1:73–80CrossRef
29.
The Women’s Health Initiative Study Group (1998) Design of the Women’s Health Initiative clinical trial and observational study. The Women’s Health Initiative Study Group. Control Clin Trials 19:61–109CrossRef
30.
Yeomans-Kinney A, Vernon SW, Frankowski RF, Weber DM, Bitsura JM, Vogel VG (1995) Factors related to enrollment in the breast cancer prevention trial at a comprehensive cancer center during the first year of recruitment. Cancer 76:46–56CrossRefPubMed
31.
Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL et al (2002) Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 288:321–333CrossRefPubMed
32.
Majumdar SR, Almasi EA, Stafford RS (2004) Promotion and prescribing of hormone therapy after report of harm by the Women’s Health Initiative. JAMA 292:1983–1988CrossRefPubMed
33.
Beral V (2003) Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet 362:419–427CrossRefPubMed
34.
Chlebowski RT, Kuller LH, Prentice RL et al (2009) Breast cancer after use of estrogen plus progestin in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 360:573–587CrossRefPubMed
35.
Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP et al (1989) Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:1879–1886CrossRefPubMed
36.
Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD (1994) Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer 73:643–651CrossRefPubMed
37.
Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O (1998) Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 62:145–158CrossRefPubMed
38.
Antoniou AC, Pharoah PP, Smith P, Easton DF (2004) The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 91:1580–1590PubMed
39.
Fasching PA, Bani MR, Nestle-Kramling C, Goecke TC, Niederacher D, Beckmann MW, Lux MP (2007) Evaluation of mathematical models for breast cancer risk assessment in routine clinical use. Eur J Cancer Prev 16:216–224CrossRefPubMed
40.
Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ et al (2007) Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356:227–236CrossRefPubMed
41.
Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K (2008) Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 148(5):337–347PubMed
42.
Chen J, Pee D, Ayyagari R, Graubard B, Schairer C, Byrne C, Benichou J, Gail MH (2006) Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(17):1215–1226PubMedCrossRef
43.
Cummings SR, Tice JA, Bauer S, Browner WS, Cuzick J, Ziv E, Vogel V, Shepherd J, Vachon C, Smith-Bindman R et al (2009) Prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women: approaches to estimating and reducing risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(6):384–398CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Breast cancer risk assessment in a mammography screening program and participation in the IBIS-II chemoprevention trial
Authors
Christian R. Loehberg
Sebastian M. Jud
Lothar Haeberle
Katharina Heusinger
Gerhard Dilbat
Alexander Hein
Claudia Rauh
Peter Dall
Nadine Rix
Sabrina Heinrich
Stefan Buchholz
Benno Lex
Barbara Reichler
Boris Adamietz
Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland
Matthias W. Beckmann
Peter A. Fasching
Publication date
01-05-2010
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2010
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0845-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2010 Go to the issue

Epidemiology

Genetic contribution of GADD45A to susceptibility to sporadic and non-BRCA1/2 familial breast cancers: a systematic evaluation in Chinese populations

Report

Prognostic and predictive impact of central necrosis and fibrosis in early breast cancer: Results from two International Breast Cancer Study Group randomized trials of chemoendocrine adjuvant therapy

Epidemiology

Potentially functional polymorphisms in ESR1 and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis

Letter to the Editor

Some common mutations of RAD50 and NBS1 in western populations do not contribute significantly to Chinese non-BRCA1/2 hereditary breast cancer

Brief Report

Frequent loss of heterozygosity at the interferon regulatory factor-1 gene locus in breast cancer

Preclinical study

Distinct gene mutation profiles among luminal-type and basal-type breast cancer cell lines
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits