<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_450"
                     title="SSRI and Tamoxifen Increase Mortality Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.014"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/BreastCancer/tb/18376?impressionId=1265754190812"
                     
      Overlapping use of tamoxifen and the antidepressant paroxetine (Paxil) significantly increases the risk of breast cancer mortality, data from a large cohort of breast cancer patients showed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The excess breast-cancer mortality risk ranged as high as 91%, depending on the duration of simultaneous use, researchers reported online in &lt;em&gt;BMJ.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Women taking other antidepressants with tamoxifen, including other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), did not have an increased risk of breast cancer death.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;&quot;We estimate that use of paroxetine for 41% of tamoxifen treatment (the median overlap in our sample) would result in one additional breast cancer death within five years of cessation of tamoxifen for every 19.7 patients so treated; the risk with more extensive overlap would be greater,&quot; David Juurlink, MD, PhD, of Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto, and colleagues concluded.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings add to an accumulation of evidence suggesting that inhibition of the cytochrome P450 2D6 isozyme (CYP2D6) may adversely affect outcomes in breast cancer patients taking tamoxifen. CYP2D6 is the principle catalyst for converting tamoxifen into endoxifen, a metabolite with 100-fold greater affinity for the estrogen receptor.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Multiple studies have shown that women who have a poor-metabolizer phenotype have lower levels of endoxifen, as do women treated with drugs that inhibit CYP2D6.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, in patients who receive tamoxifen in addition to a CYP2D6 inhibitor, endoxifen concentrations vary inversely with the degree of CYP2D6 inhibition,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Paroxetine is used to treat depression and vasomotor symptoms in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen. Paroxetine is not the only SSRI antidepressant used by breast cancer patients, but it is the only SSRI that irreversibly inhibits CYP2D6.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Whether the metabolic effects of CYP2D6 inhibition translated into adverse breast cancer outcomes had not been determined.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To examine the issue, Juurlink and colleagues compared prescribing data with clinical records of 24,430 breast cancer patients, ages 66 and older, who initiated tamoxifen therapy from 1993 to 2005. Of those, 7,500 also received an antidepressant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the investigators narrowed the study population to 2,430 women who took a single SSRI during tamoxifen therapy. The most commonly prescribed SSRI was paroxetine (25.9%), followed by sertraline (22.3%), citalopram (19.2%), venlafaxine (15%), fluoxetine (10.4%), and fluvoxamine (7.2%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During a mean follow-up of 2.38 years, 1,074 patients died, including 374 breast cancer deaths.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The analysis showed an increased risk of breast cancer death only among women taking paroxetine.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The breast cancer mortality risk increased with the duration of concomitant use of paroxetine and tamoxifen. As the duration of therapeutic overlap increased from 25%, to 50%, to 75% of time on tamoxifen, the excess risk of breast cancer death increased from 24%, to 54%, to 91%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investigators repeated the analysis, using death from any cause. Overlapping treatment with tamoxifen and paroxetine led to an increased mortality risk of 13%, 28%, and 46% as the duration of overlap increased from 25% to 75%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results suggest clear implications for use of SSRIs in breast cancer patients on tamoxifen, Frank Andersohn, MD, and Stefan Willich, MD, of Charite University in Berlin, wrote in an accompanying editorial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The straightforward answer is to avoid prescribing strong CYP2D6-inhibiting SSRIs (such as paroxetine or fluoxetine) for women with breast cancer who are prescribed tamoxifen, and to consider instead drugs with low potential to inhibit CYP2D6 (such as citalopram or venlafaxine),&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For women who are already taking a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6, doctors should consider switching to a drug that does not inhibit the enzyme, they added. However, any switch should be accomplished gradually, as abrupt discontinuation of an antidepressant confers risk, as well, they noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;Co-author Kathleen Pritchard disclosed relationships with sanofi-aventis, AstraZeneca, Roche, Pfizer, Ortho-Biotech, YM Biosciences, Novartis, Abraxis, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Roche&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_429"
                     title="Low-Dose Radiation in Breast Cancer Gets Support (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/BreastCancer/tb/18339?impressionId=1265754190812"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;About 40% of women in two large breast cancer radiotherapy trials reported being concerned about some aspect of body image over the five years following therapy, researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But there was little difference between those in the standard therapy arms and those getting so-called hypofractionated regimens, according to Penelope Hopwood, MD, of the Institute of Cancer Research in Sutton, England, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The finding is evidence that a lower overall radiation dose given in fewer but larger fractions does not increase adverse effects or worsen body image for most women, Hopwood and colleagues said online in &lt;em&gt;The Lancet Oncology&lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers used data from quality-of-life substudies from the two randomized Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) trials, conducted concurrently in the U.K.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Start A trial compared a standard regimen  --  50 gray (Gy) delivered in five 2.0-Gy fractions weekly over five weeks  --  with two hypofractionated regimens.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the first test regimen, women were treated with 41.6 Gy in 13 fractions of 3.2 each over five weeks, with three fractions in one week and two the next. The other regimen followed the same schedule, but delivered 39 Gy in 13 fractions of 3.0 each.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Start B study was a noninferiority trial comparing the standard regimen with one that delivered 40 Gy in 15 fractions of 2.67 each over three weeks. In contrast to Start A, both regimens had five fractions per week.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As part of the studies, the researchers enrolled 2,208 participants in a quality-of-life analysis that looked at adverse events and changes in body image over a five-year follow-up period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They found: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;The most frequently reported adverse effects in women with breast-conserving surgery were breast hardness and overall change in breast appearance after radiotherapy  --  about 41% and 39%, respectively, at five years. &lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;In all radiotherapy regimens, breast symptoms fell significantly (at &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001) from baseline to 60 months, but there was no significant difference between regimens in either trial.&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Compared with the standard regimen, adverse effects of radiotherapy tended to be lower for the 39 Gy regimen in trial A and the 40 Gy regimen in trial B, but rates were similar between the control regimen and the 41.6-Gy regimen in trial A. &lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;The only significant difference from the 50-Gy regimen, however, was adverse change in skin appearance, which was lower for patients who received 39 Gy or 40 Gy. The hazard ratios were 0.63 and 0.76, respectively.&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;There was no significant difference in change in skin appearance between patients who got 41.6 Gy or 50 Gy in trial A. (The hazard ratio was 0.83, but the 95% confidence interval crossed unity.)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the findings &quot;strengthen evidence in favor of hypofractionated regimens, with a potential for fewer adverse effects on the normal breast tissues,&quot; the researchers concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study&apos;s findings &quot;provide a strong foundation&quot; for more research into how patients experience radiotherapy, according to Julie Schnur, PhD, of Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among areas that might be examined, she wrote in an accompanying editorial, are: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;The acute treatment period, which &quot;presents unique challenges to women&quot;&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;How women view the treated breast specifically, rather than the body overall&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;The use of behavioral medicine approaches to enhance body image&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Schnur said the researchers showed &quot;a consideration of the patient&apos;s point of view that is too often absent.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study had support from Cancer Research UK, the U.K. Medical Research Council, and the U.K. Department of Health.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors declared no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_452"
                     title="Study Backs Late Cardiotoxicity of Childhood Cancer Treatment (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18384?impressionId=1265754190812"
                     
      A childhood cancer survivor&apos;s risk of dying from cardiovascular causes rises with the dose of radiation his heart received during treatment, researchers in France and the U.K. affirmed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Those whose hearts were exposed had a 60% higher risk of cardiovascular death than the general population, even at a dose of 1 Gy (95% CI 20% to 250%), according to Florent de Vathaire, PhD, of L&apos;Institut National de la Sant&amp;#233; et de la Recherche M&amp;#233;dicale in Paris, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The risk jumped to 12.5-fold for a cumulative radiation dose to the heart of 5 to 14.9 Gy, and to 14.9-fold for a dose of more than 15 Gy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01 for trend), the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The notion that exposing the heart to radiation increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and death is not surprising, according to an accompanying editorial.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this study examined cardiovascular mortality effects of both the dose of radiation and the dose of anthracyclines given to childhood cancer victims in the same cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&apos;s something previous studies haven&apos;t done, according to editorialists Steven E. Lipshultz, MD, of the University of Miami and Holtz Children&apos;s Hospital in Miami, and M. Jacob Adams, MD, MPH, of the University of Rochester, N.Y.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These are pretty profound findings,&quot; Lipshultz told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;. &quot;These are the exact concerns we&apos;ve had based on careful subclinical assessments of how the heart in these survivors has been working.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;His group was one of the first to report that survivors of childhood cancer faced not only acute cardiotoxicity from treatment, but also late cardiac effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As more effective treatment for childhood cancers came into play, the dramatic jump in survival rates  --  from less than 50% in the mid-1970s to 80% today  --  yielded a large enough population of survivors to make chronic issues from treatment apparent, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It appears that for some of these survivors we have substituted one fatal disease of childhood  --  cancer  --  for another fatal disease of early adult life,&quot; he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;de Vathaire&apos;s group studied a cohort of 4,122 French and British children diagnosed with childhood solid cancer between 1942 and 1986 and who survived at least five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over an average of 27 years of follow-up, they were at 8.3-fold higher risk of dying from any cause compared with the general populations in France and the U.K. (95% CI 7.6 to 9.0).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The majority of these excess deaths occurred early after diagnosis, five to nine years afterward in this analysis  --  in which all patients survived to five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Based on just 32 deaths from cardiovascular diseases in the cohort, the childhood cancer survivors experienced five times the cardiovascular mortality (95% CI 3.3 to 6.7) expected from the general population (1.7% cumulative at 35 years versus 0.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This elevation in risk was similar to that seen in large studies from the U.S. and Nordic countries, suggesting generalizability of the results, Lipshultz said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Radiation therapy also conferred a 5.0-fold elevation in risk of cardiovascular disease-related death (95% CI 1.2 to 21.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like radiation, a higher cumulative dose of anthracycline chemotherapy also increased risk of dying from cardiac diseases, compared with the general population (RR 4.4 for a dose over 360 mg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, 95% CI 1.3 to 15.3).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, radiotherapy and chemotherapy did not appear to interact for cardiovascular mortality (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Notably, the vinca alkaloids were also significantly linked to cardiovascular disease-related death risk among childhood cancer survivors, even after adjustment for sex, treatment period, age at diagnosis, follow-up, and all other treatment modalities (RR 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 12.9).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Currently, guidelines support regular long-term cardiovascular screening for childhood cancer survivors who received anthracycline-based chemotherapy but provide little to no direction for those treated with nonanthracycline chemotherapy or radiation, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These results suggested all three groups should be getting cardiac follow-up, he told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, because other research has suggested that these individual treatments affect the heart in different ways, such as diastolic rather than systolic dysfunction with radiotherapy, screening modalities may need to account for this as well, he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that cardiovascular disease was probably under-reported as a cause of death in the cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, 15 of the deaths classified as results of cancer as the principal cause had cardiovascular diseases as the immediate cause,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique; the Agence Fran&amp;#231;aise de S&amp;#233;curit&amp;#233; Sanitaire et Produit de Sant&amp;#233;; Electricit&amp;#233; de France; the Wyeth Foundation for childhood and adolescent health; and a grant from the Foundation of France.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The editorialists reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_345"
                     title="FDA Okays Drug Combo for Advanced Breast Cancer"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/ProductAlert/Prescriptions/tb/18224?impressionId=1265754190812"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;The FDA has approved a combination of lapatinib (Tykerb) and letrozole (Femara) to treat hormone-positive and HER2-positive advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The approval follows a company-sponsored study that found that women with HER2-positive disease who were taking the combination had survival rates more than double that of women on letrozole alone (35 weeks versus 13 weeks).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lapatinib is an oral kinase inhibitor that blocks the function of the HER2-positive protein. In 2007, it was approved in combination with capecitabine (Xeloda) to treat advanced HER2-positive breast cancer tumors in refractory disease. (See &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/Chemotherapy/5247&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/Chemotherapy/5247&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;FDA Okays Lapatinib (Tykerb) for Treatment-Resistant Breast Cancer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The FDA said the most commonly reported side effects of the lapatinib/letrozole combination were diarrhea, rash, nausea, and fatigue.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Treatment with lapatinib has also been associated with decreased heart function, liver damage, and inflammation of lung tissue, the agency cautioned. It may also cause harm to the fetus if used in pregnant women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the FDA&apos;s office of oncology drug products, said in a prepared statement that the combination &quot;provides women being treated for advanced breast cancer with an important treatment option.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lapatinib is marketed by GlaxoSmithKline and letrozole by Novartis AG.&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_364"
                     title="ADT for Prostate Cancer Raises Heart Risks"
                     score="0.009"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Urology/ProstateCancer/tb/18250?impressionId=1265754190812"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer can exacerbate cardiac risk factors and may increase the risk of heart attack and cardiac death, according to an advisory supported by four medical organizations.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, the groups did not offer specific guidelines for clinicians on when to employ ADT therapy or avoid it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Clinical trials have shown that ADT increases body weight, decreases lean mass and increases fat mass, reduces insulin sensitivity, and triggers or worsens dyslipidemia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several studies have demonstrated a significant increase in cardiovascular death in prostate cancer patients treated with hormonal therapy or bilateral orchiectomy, although some studies have shown no association between ADT and increased cardiovascular risk, according to a report that will appear in the Feb. 16 issue of &lt;em&gt;Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some evidence also suggests ADT may predispose men to metabolic syndrome.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Based on current data, it was appropriate to conclude that there may be a relationship between ADT therapy in patients with prostate cancer and future cardiovascular risk,&quot; Glenn N. Levine, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston and chair of the advisory writing committee, said in a statement.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The writing committee comprised representatives of the American Heart Association, American Urological Association, and American Cancer Society. Additionally, the American Society for Radiation Oncology endorsed the advisory.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors&apos; review of literature showed that ADT increased cardiovascular risk in 1% to 6% of various studies&apos; patient populations. With that in mind, &quot;the decision about whether to initiate ADT should be based on weighing the benefits of therapy with this potential modest risk,&quot; Levine said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The decision to initiate ADT should remain with the physician who has responsibility for treating a patient with prostate cancer, the authors wrote. That includes patients with known cardiac disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is the consensus of the writing group that there is no clear indication for patients for whom ADT is believed to be beneficial to be referred to internists, endocrinologists, or cardiologists for evaluation before initiation of ADT,&quot; the authors said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The decision as to whether or not to initiate ADT in patients with cardiac disease, in whom the benefits of therapy would be weighed against any possible risks, is most appropriately made by the physician treating the patient for prostate cancer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, the potential adverse metabolic effects warrant periodic evaluation by a patient&apos;s primary care physician, they added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Noting a lack of clinical guidance for follow-up of patients treated with ADT, the advisory authors concluded that at least an annual assessment of blood glucose and lipids seems reasonable. They also called for prospective assessment of cardiovascular risk factors before and after ADT is begun in future clinical trials.&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>