Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Must- Read Articles
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Must- Read Articles
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Research Article

Quality of Life in a Randomized Breast Cancer Prevention Trial of Low-Dose Tamoxifen and Fenretinide in Premenopausal Women

Davide Serrano, Sara Gandini, Aliana Guerrieri-Gonzaga, Irene Feroce, Harriet Johansson, Debora Macis, Valentina Aristarco, Bernardo Bonanni and Andrea DeCensi
Davide Serrano
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: davide.serrano@ieo.it
Sara Gandini
2Molecular and Pharmacoepidemiology Unit, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sara Gandini
Aliana Guerrieri-Gonzaga
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Irene Feroce
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Harriet Johansson
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Debora Macis
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Debora Macis
Valentina Aristarco
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bernardo Bonanni
1Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea DeCensi
3Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
4Division of Medical Oncology, Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-18-0073 Published December 2018
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Menopausal symptoms are the main reason for withdrawal in tamoxifen prevention trials. Here, we present Menopause Quality of Life (MenQoL) assessment within a randomized 2 × 2 phase II clinical trial of low-dose tamoxifen and the synthetic retinoid fenretinide. A total of 235 premenopausal women at higher risk for breast cancer were randomized to either tamoxifen 5 mg daily, fenretinide 200 mg daily, their combination, or placebo. Climacteric symptoms were investigated using the MenQoL questionnaire which was self-administered at each visit for 2 years of treatment and for 1 year of follow-up. CYP2D6 was genotyped in subjects taking tamoxifen to study the association with menopausal symptoms. The MenQoL effect size analysis showed no statistically significant difference among the four treatment arms for all four domains (vasomotor, physical, psychosocial, and sexual). Vasomotor symptoms only slightly increased under tamoxifen, with a score at year two of 1.45, 1.21, 0.58, and 1.17 in the combined, tamoxifen, fenretinide, and placebo arms, respectively. Compared with the slow metabolizers, a higher percentage of subjects with CYP2D6 extensive metabolizer genotype complained of a ≥3 score in the vasomotor, psychosocial, and sexual domain in the tamoxifen arms (P value = 0.01, 0.007, and 0.007, respectively). QoL in premenopausal or perimenopausal women was not significantly worsened by low-dose tamoxifen or fenretinide. Our findings suggest that a low dose of tamoxifen may increase its acceptability for breast cancer prevention.

Introduction

Chemoprevention has a tremendous potential, especially for breast and colon cancer (1, 2). Assuming for any treatment the oft-quoted Hippocratic dictum “first do no harm,” this is a must in the field of preventive medicine, and evaluation of the resulting quality of life (QoL) is of paramount importance. Strategies to improve QoL and prompt management of side effects are essential for preventive program acceptability and adherence (3).

In 1999, the FDA approved tamoxifen for primary prevention of breast cancer. Later, raloxifene and then aromatase inhibitors (AI) proved their efficacy in postmenopausal women at high risk for breast cancers (4–6).

Despite the strong risk reduction, selective estrogen receptor modulators and AIs are not well accepted by high-risk women for the possible impact on QoL and adverse events (7). In parallel, even physicians may fail to recognize and/or advise high-risk women of such preventive opportunities (8).

Menopausal symptoms (hot flashes and night sweats) were a main reason for full-dose tamoxifen treatment withdrawal in the IBIS I trial (9). Maintaining a high QoL is therefore crucial to implement therapeutic prevention on a large scale. We have investigated for several years a strategy to reduce side effects and retain efficacy by lowering the dose or using an intermittent schedule of tamoxifen and or combining treatments to neutralize side effects (10–12). At the biological level, we demonstrated an equivalent efficacy of 5 or 1 mg day relative to 20 mg day in reducing Ki-67 (13) or modulating circulating biomarkers and mammographic density (10, 11). Moreover, a lower dose compared with the standard dose, used as cancer therapy, can be more appealing to healthy women at increased risk. At the clinical level, tamoxifen at 5 mg was studied in a phase III prevention trial in women taking hormone replacement therapy with a 20% nonsignificant reduction of breast cancer incidence overall and a significant 68% reduction in luminal A breast cancers (12). Furthermore, an indirect comparison of tamoxifen side effects between the standard dose and the low-dose tamoxifen can be made across the two phase III prevention studies conducted by our group (12, 14). A trend toward a lower symptom rate has been shown by low-dose tamoxifen, with an annual rate of grade 2 to 3 hot flashes of 6.5%, 9.7%, and 11.9% and vaginal discharge of 1.2%, 2.1%, and 6% for placebo, tamoxifen 5 mg and 20 mg, respectively.

The Menopause Quality of Life (MenQoL) questionnaire is validated self-administered instrument to evaluate the QoL for climacteric symptoms (15, 16). The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the QoL of women participating in a chemoprevention trial through the self-administered MenQoL. The study, a 2 × 2 factorial breast cancer prevention trial, included 235 premenopausal women with an increased risk for breast cancer who were randomized to either tamoxifen at a lower dose, fenretinide, the combination, or placebo for 2 years, with 1 year of follow up. The primary endpoint biomarkers were the changes in IGF-I and mammographic percent density values from baseline to 24 months (10).

Materials and Methods

Participants and study design

A total of 235 high-risk premenopausal women were randomly allocated to either tamoxifen 5 mg/daily, fenretinide 200 mg/daily, the combination, or placebo in a double-blind and double-dummy fashion. The study was conducted under the approval of the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Review Board, and all the participants signed an inform consent. The study duration was 2 years of treatment and 1 year of follow-up. Risk categories were surgically removed intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN) or pT1mic breast cancer (160 and 21 women, respectively) or increased risk based on the Gail model (54 women). A detailed description of the study has been previously reported (10).

Study objective, outcome, and assay method

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the modification in QoL in the different intervention groups using a validated questionnaire specific for climacteric symptoms, namely the MenQoL questionnaire. The MenQoL intervention questionnaire is based on 29 items divided into four domains (vasomotor, physical, psychosocial, and sexual). Each item is scored from 1 to 8: 1 means no symptom, 2 indicates presence of the symptoms but not bothersome, 3 to 8 mean an increasing grade of discomfort. The vasomotor domain includes three items to investigate hot flashes and sweating. In the physical domain, there are 16 items covering general symptoms, skin, gastrointestinal, sleeping problems, and urinary symptoms. The psychosocial domain includes seven items, evaluating states of anxiousness, memory, and loneliness. The sexual domain has three items: sexual desire, vaginal dryness, and avoiding intimacy (15).

Women were clinically assessed at baseline and every 6 months up to the 36th month. The trial received Institutional Review approvals and was conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice procedures. All subjects gave their written-informed consent. Adverse events were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (version 4.0). Compliance was measured by pill count and circulating drug levels.

Genotype analysis

Genomic DNA was extracted from whole-blood specimens with a QIAamp DNA blood kit (Qiagen). The INFINITI analyzer (AutoGenomics) was employed for CYP2D6 genotyping, according to the manufacturer's protocol as described elsewhere (17).

We classified the resulting genotype as poor metabolizers (PM) when there were nonfunctional variants on both alleles; intermediate metabolizers (IM) if they carried two reduced function alleles or one reduced and one nonfunctional allele; extensive metabolizers (EM) when carrying at least one fully functional allele; and ultrarapid metabolizers (UM) when duplication of normal alleles was present. For the statistical analysis, usually the four genotypes are grouped in two groups (EM + UM genotype as rapid metabolizers and IM + PM genotype as slow metabolizers, as previously described; ref. 17). Because there were no UM subjects in this study, comparison is between extensive and slow metabolizers.

Statistical methods

Percentages of symptoms of each domain at baseline and three time points are represented graphically by trial arms and CYP2D6 genotypes.

In the remaining analyses, data of the MenQoL questionnaire were preliminarily summarized, within each patient at each assessment time, by computing the mean score over distinct items of each domain. For descriptive purposes, such means were used to compute average scores of each domain according to time and treatment arm. Furthermore, to assess the clinical significance of 12, 24, and 36 months versus baseline differences, we determined the effect size as M12 month – Mbaseline)/SD baseline, where M is the average (at baseline or 12 months) and SD is the standard deviation (at baseline).

Differences in frequencies were assessed by χ2 tests and Mantel–Haenszel χ2 tests. Differences in median values of continuous variables were assessed by the Wilcoxon rank tests.

Multivariate mixed models were used to assess differences in effect sizes between treatment arms, considering the patient effect as a random factor and including as fixed factors the treatment arms (tamoxifen, fenretinide, tamoxifen+ fenretinide, or placebo) and time (baseline, 12, and 24 months). Exploratory ANCOVA analysis was carried out adjusting for confounding factors such as age, body mass index (BMI), change in menopausal status during time, as well as baseline values.

Results

A total of 235 subjects were randomized to either tamoxifen 5 mg day (N = 58), or fenretinide (N = 59), or fenretinide and tamoxifen (N = 60), or placebo (N = 58) in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1, and more details are published elsewhere (10). Even though all women were premenopausal, several women already had some climacteric symptoms. Within the vasomotor domain, 38% of women in the placebo group, 45% in the tamoxifen and the combination group, and 53% in the fenretinide arm developed at least one symptom, with no statistical significant differences among arms. By the end of the 2-year treatment, 34% of women became postmenopausal, justifying a physiologic symptoms increment.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Baseline subjects and tumor characteristics and menopausal symptoms by treatment arms

MenQoL was administered at each visit and analyzed at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months, while subjects were on treatment, and then after 12 months from treatment completion.

Table 2 shows the MenQoL effect size score per arm for each domain (vasomotor, physical, psychosocial, and sexual). Effect sizes, that estimate changes from baseline, show no different effects in the tamoxifen arms compared with no tamoxifen arms. In particular, for the vasomotor domain, we can see a nonsignificant increment in the mean score from 1.03 at one year up to 1.21 at the second year and a decline to 0.70 in the follow-up year for the tamoxifen arm. Similar results were found for the combination of tamoxifen and fenretinide. Fenretinide and placebo had a parallel trend with a steady increment in time irrespective of treatment.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Effect sizes (change from baseline) of MenQoL domains by treatment arms and visit time

Figure 1 shows the mean score for each domain by treatment arms. For the physical, psychosocial, and sexual domains, curves were superimposable and stable overtime. The curve shapes for vasomotor symptoms were also similar among arms but with an increasing trend overall.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Mean of MenQoL domain scores by treatment arms and visit time.

The analysis was also conducted combining the two arms with tamoxifen versus no tamoxifen, and again no differences were observed for all domains. For instance, the percentage of women with hot flashes at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months in the tamoxifen groups versus no tamoxifen was, respectively, 20% versus 19.3%, 44.9% versus 33.3%, 47.6% versus 39.2%, and 38% versus 50.5%. Likewise, the vasomotor symptom score in the two groups did not show significant difference at any time points.

We further looked at bothersome symptoms, namely, the percentage of women experiencing bothersome symptoms with score ≥3 for each domain by arm (Fig. 2). Again, no statistically significant differences were detected with a superimposable trend on the physical, psychosocial, and sexual curves. The curves for bothersome vasomotor symptoms showed a slight nonsignificant tendency to a higher rate in the combination arm at 24 months.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Percentage of women experiencing bothersome symptoms (score ≥3) for each domain by treatment arms.

Exploratory analyses were conducted to correlate the MenQoL score with adherence to the treatment. Within the study, a total of 37 subjects dropped out, 9 in the tamoxifen arm, 8 in the fenretinide arm, 10 in the combination, and 10 in the placebo group. The drop-out rate was not associated with a worse MenQoL score (data not shown). Furthermore, we investigated whether the CYP2D6 genotype was associated with symptom occurrence in the tamoxifen arms (Fig. 3). Out of 109 subjects taking tamoxifen, 92 were EM and 17 slow metabolizers (10 intermediate and 7 PMs). No ultrarapid metabolizer was found. EM CYP2D6 genotype was associated with higher percentage of bothersome symptoms (score ≥3) in the vasomotor, psychosocial, and sexual domain (P value = 0.01, 0.007, and 0.007, respectively).

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Percentage of women on tamoxifen experiencing bothersome symptoms (score ≥3) for each domain by CYP2D6 genotype groups.

Discussion

Despite the positive results, the uptake of tamoxifen in high-risk women is below 1% (7). Several factors may contribute to the low uptake of tamoxifen, among which the increase of menopausal side effects is of prominent importance (8, 18).

To address QoL from the women's prospective, within a randomized phase II prevention trial, we used a self-administered questionnaire “MenQoL,” which focuses on climacteric symptoms. In this study, tamoxifen was administered at 5 mg per day, and the menopausal symptoms related to tamoxifen did not significantly exceed the fenretinide or placebo. The percentage of subjects reporting vasomotor symptoms and bothersome vasomotor symptoms seems to increase more rapidly in the two tamoxifen-containing arms, but the difference was not significant. By the end of study, we observed an increased symptom score in all four arms, probably due to the physiologic aging of the participants, as 34% of the subjects became postmenopausal while on study. For all other domains, the percentage of subjects reporting any symptoms was overlapping among arms.

It has been reported that not only acceptability but also adherence to the intervention can hamper the implementation of a widespread preventive intervention program. Some studies showed that nearly 50% of subjects who began a prevention regimen as well as an adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen did not finish the 5 years of treatment (19, 20). In our trial, the compliance was much higher, and the claimed discomfort reported on the questionnaire was not associated with dropout. A possible explanation is that within a relatively small clinical trial such as ours, it is easier to maintain a high retention rate by developing personalized counseling with each individual in the study.

Recently in the NSABP P-1 trial, it was reported that the mental component of QoL has more impact on treatment adherence compared with the physical component (3). A prompt symptom management and safety reassurance by the physician helped women to be motivated to adhere to the treatment. The recent analysis from the IBIS I study showed a higher drop-out rates in the tamoxifen arm, but the adherence did not differ between tamoxifen and placebo considering the overall reported symptoms (9). This leads to a further issue, i.e., the nocebo effect, that might be crucial in a preventive treatment. It is a difficult topic to study for the duty to inform properly the participants on the possible side effects and the widespread use of the Internet to get more information, which makes crucial how the physician presents the possible side effects to the participant (21).

CYP2D6 genotype modulates the level of endoxifen, the main tamoxifen metabolite (22), but its clinical relevance is still controversial (23). Also tamoxifen side effects and CYP2D6 genotype showed contradictory results; in the IBIS I and in the TADE studies, CYP2D6 genotype showed no correlation with vasomotor symptoms (24, 25), whereas the BIG 1-98 study showed an association of IM and PM with an increased risk of hot flashes (26), and an opposite trend was reported by Goetz and colleagues in their study (27). These results are not truly comparable because there is no homogeneous categorization and methodology across studies. Our findings support the hypothesis that EM may have a higher incidence of menopausal symptoms on tamoxifen, but these symptoms did not affect adherence to tamoxifen. Because we did not test CYP2D6 genotype in the no-tamoxifen arms, we are unable to assess if the CYP2D6 genotype “per se” has an effect on menopausal symptoms.

The intersubject variability of tamoxifen and its metabolite levels suggests a flexible therapeutic window. Prior studies also showed the tamoxifen antagonist/agonist effect may have a better ratio at low dose (13, 28).

Fenretinide, a synthetic retinoic acid derivative, has not been related to menopausal symptoms, and its profile overlapped the placebo arm for the symptoms related to the MenQoL questionnaire.

Our experience with low-dose tamoxifen is quite encouraging based on its biological, clinical, and safety profile (10, 12, 29). Concerning menopausal symptoms, low-dose tamoxifen exhibits a good safety profile and tolerability in pre/perimenopausal women, which is thus reassuring regarding the use of this agent for breast cancer risk reduction. An ongoing phase III clinical trial of low-dose tamoxifen in women with a resected breast IEN (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Lobular Carcinoma In Situ [DCIS/LCIS]) will definitely address its clinical efficacy and safety (30). Our findings in a large observational study of DCIS (31) show that low-dose tamoxifen is more acceptable, and adherence is greater in patients with a histologic report of a premalignant disease, where the nocebo effect is lower.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Authors' Contributions

Conception and design: B. Bonanni, A. DeCensi

Development of methodology: D. Macis, B. Bonanni, A. DeCensi

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): D. Serrano, A. Guerrieri-Gonzaga, H. Johansson, D. Macis, V. Aristarco

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): D. Serrano, S. Gandini, A. Guerrieri-Gonzaga, A. DeCensi

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: D. Serrano, S. Gandini, A. Guerrieri-Gonzaga, H. Johansson, D. Macis, B. Bonanni, A. DeCensi

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): A. Guerrieri-Gonzaga, I. Feroce, H. Johansson, D. Macis

Study supervision: B. Bonanni, A. DeCensi

Other (study funding): A. DeCensi

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by NCI grant no. CA-77188, a regional grant no. 1068/2005 on second tumors from the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC), and Italian Ministry of Health.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

  • Received March 2, 2018.
  • Revision received June 18, 2018.
  • Accepted October 11, 2018.
  • Published first October 23, 2018.
  • ©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Cuzick J,
    2. Sestak I,
    3. Bonanni B,
    4. Costantino JP,
    5. Cummings S,
    6. Decensi A,
    7. et al.
    Selective oestrogen receptor modulators in prevention of breast cancer: an updated meta-analysis of individual participant data. Lancet 2013;381:1827–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Rothwell PM,
    2. Wilson M,
    3. Elwin CE,
    4. Norrving B,
    5. Algra A,
    6. Warlow CP,
    7. et al.
    Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials. Lancet 2010;376:1741–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Land SR,
    2. Walcott FL,
    3. Liu Q,
    4. Wickerham DL,
    5. Costantino JP,
    6. Ganz PA
    . Symptoms and QOL as predictors of chemoprevention adherence in NRG Oncology/NSABP Trial P-1. J Natl Cancer Inst 2016;108.
  4. 4.↵
    1. Vogel VG,
    2. Costantino JP,
    3. Wickerham DL,
    4. Cronin WM,
    5. Cecchini RS,
    6. Atkins JN,
    7. et al.
    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 2006;295:2727–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Goss PE,
    2. Ingle JN,
    3. es-Martinez JE,
    4. Cheung AM,
    5. Chlebowski RT,
    6. Wactawski-Wende J,
    7. et al.
    Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2381–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Cuzick J,
    2. Sestak I,
    3. Forbes JF,
    4. Dowsett M,
    5. Knox J,
    6. Cawthorn S,
    7. et al.
    Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2014;383:1041–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Waters EA,
    2. McNeel TS,
    3. Stevens WM,
    4. Freedman AN
    . Use of tamoxifen and raloxifene for breast cancer chemoprevention in 2010. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;134:875–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Smith SG,
    2. Sestak I,
    3. Forster A,
    4. Partridge A,
    5. Side L,
    6. Wolf MS,
    7. et al.
    Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 2016;27:575–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Smith SG,
    2. Sestak I,
    3. Howell A,
    4. Forbes J,
    5. Cuzick J
    . Participant-reported symptoms and their effect on long-term adherence in the international breast cancer intervention study I (IBIS I). J Clin Oncol 2017;35:2666–73.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    1. Decensi A,
    2. Robertson C,
    3. Guerrieri-Gonzaga A,
    4. Serrano D,
    5. Cazzaniga M,
    6. Mora S,
    7. et al.
    Randomized double-blind 2 x 2 trial of low-dose tamoxifen and fenretinide for breast cancer prevention in high-risk premenopausal women. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:3749–56.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Bonanni B,
    2. Serrano D,
    3. Gandini S,
    4. Guerrieri-Gonzaga A,
    5. Johansson H,
    6. Macis D,
    7. et al.
    Randomized biomarker trial of anastrozole or low-dose tamoxifen or their combination in subjects with breast intraepithelial neoplasia. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:7053–60.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Decensi A,
    2. Bonanni B,
    3. Maisonneuve P,
    4. Serrano D,
    5. Omodei U,
    6. Varricchio C,
    7. et al.
    A phase-III prevention trial of low-dose tamoxifen in postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy users: the HOT study. Ann Oncol 2013;24:2753–60.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Decensi A,
    2. Robertson C,
    3. Viale G,
    4. Pigatto F,
    5. Johansson H,
    6. Kisanga ER,
    7. et al.
    A randomized trial of low-dose tamoxifen on breast cancer proliferation and blood estrogenic biomarkers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:779–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Veronesi U,
    2. Maisonneuve P,
    3. Rotmensz N,
    4. Bonanni B,
    5. Boyle P,
    6. Viale G,
    7. et al.
    Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: late results of the Italian Randomized Tamoxifen Prevention Trial among women with hysterectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:727–37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Hilditch JR,
    2. Lewis J,
    3. Peter A,
    4. van Maris B,
    5. Ross A,
    6. Franssen E,
    7. et al.
    A menopause-specific quality of life questionnaire: development and psychometric properties. Maturitas 1996;24:161–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Van Dole KB,
    2. DeVellis RF,
    3. Brown RD,
    4. Funk ML,
    5. Gaynes BN,
    6. Williams RE
    . Evaluation of the menopause-specific quality of life questionnaire: a factor-analytic approach. Menopause 2012;19:211–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Johansson H,
    2. Gandini S,
    3. Serrano D,
    4. Gjerde J,
    5. Lattanzi M,
    6. Macis D,
    7. et al.
    A pooled analysis of CYP2D6 genotype in breast cancer prevention trials of low-dose tamoxifen. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016;159:97–108.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Noonan S,
    2. Pasa A,
    3. Fontana V,
    4. Caviglia S,
    5. Bonanni B,
    6. Costa A,
    7. et al.
    A survey among breast cancer specialists on the low uptake of therapeutic prevention with tamoxifen or raloxifene. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2018;11:38–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Nichols HB,
    2. DeRoo LA,
    3. Scharf DR,
    4. Sandler DP
    . Risk-benefit profiles of women using tamoxifen for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:354.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Chlebowski RT,
    2. Kim J,
    3. Haque R
    . Adherence to endocrine therapy in breast cancer adjuvant and prevention settings. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2014;7:378–87.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Colloca L,
    2. Miller FG
    . The nocebo effect and its relevance for clinical practice. Psychosom Med 2011;73:598–603.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Borges S,
    2. Desta Z,
    3. Li L,
    4. Skaar TC,
    5. Ward BA,
    6. Nguyen A,
    7. et al.
    Quantitative effect of CYP2D6 genotype and inhibitors on tamoxifen metabolism: implication for optimization of breast cancer treatment. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2006;80:61–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Goetz MP,
    2. Ratain M,
    3. Ingle JN
    . Providing Balance in ASCO clinical practice guidelines: CYP2D6 genotyping and tamoxifen efficacy. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:3944–5.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Sestak I,
    2. Kealy R,
    3. Nikoloff M,
    4. Fontecha M,
    5. Forbes JF,
    6. Howell A,
    7. et al.
    Relationships between CYP2D6 phenotype, breast cancer and hot flushes in women at high risk of breast cancer receiving prophylactic tamoxifen: results from the IBIS-I trial. Br J Cancer 2012;107:230–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Fox P,
    2. Balleine RL,
    3. Lee C,
    4. Gao B,
    5. Balakrishnar B,
    6. Menzies AM,
    7. et al.
    Dose escalation of tamoxifen in patients with low endoxifen level: evidence for therapeutic drug monitoring-the TADE study. Clin Cancer Res 2016;22:3164–71.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Regan MM,
    2. Leyland-Jones B,
    3. Bouzyk M,
    4. Pagani O,
    5. Tang W,
    6. Kammler R,
    7. et al.
    CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen response in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer: the breast international group 1–98 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:441–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Goetz MP,
    2. Rae JM,
    3. Suman VJ,
    4. Safgren SL,
    5. Ames MM,
    6. Visscher DW,
    7. et al.
    Pharmacogenetics of tamoxifen biotransformation is associated with clinical outcomes of efficacy and hot flashes. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:9312–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Kisanga ER,
    2. Gjerde J,
    3. Guerrieri-Gonzaga A,
    4. Pigatto F,
    5. Pesci-Feltri A,
    6. Robertson C,
    7. et al.
    Tamoxifen and metabolite concentrations in serum and breast cancer tissue during three dose regimens in a randomized preoperative trial. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:2336–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Decensi A,
    2. Gandini S,
    3. Serrano D,
    4. Cazzaniga M,
    5. Pizzamiglio M,
    6. Maffini F,
    7. et al.
    Randomized dose-ranging trial of tamoxifen at low doses in hormone replacement therapy users. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4201–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Zanardi S,
    2. Branchi D,
    3. Ponti A,
    4. Cruciani G,
    5. D'Amico C,
    6. Cortesi L,
    7. et al.
    Randomized, placebo controlled, phase III trial of low-dose tamoxifen in women with intraepithelial neoplasia (abstract)]. In: Proceedings of the tenth Annual Meeting of the AACR International Conference on Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research, 2011 Oct 22–25; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; 2011. Abstract nr A56.
  31. 31.↵
    1. Guerrieri-Gonzaga A,
    2. Sestak I,
    3. Lazzeroni M,
    4. Serrano D,
    5. Rotmensz N,
    6. Cazzaniga M,
    7. et al.
    Benefit of low-dose tamoxifen in a large observational cohort of high risk ER positive breast DCIS. Int J Cancer 2016;139:2127–34.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Prevention Research: 11 (12)
December 2018
Volume 11, Issue 12
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Editorial Board (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Prevention Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Quality of Life in a Randomized Breast Cancer Prevention Trial of Low-Dose Tamoxifen and Fenretinide in Premenopausal Women
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Prevention Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Prevention Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Quality of Life in a Randomized Breast Cancer Prevention Trial of Low-Dose Tamoxifen and Fenretinide in Premenopausal Women
Davide Serrano, Sara Gandini, Aliana Guerrieri-Gonzaga, Irene Feroce, Harriet Johansson, Debora Macis, Valentina Aristarco, Bernardo Bonanni and Andrea DeCensi
Cancer Prev Res December 1 2018 (11) (12) 811-818; DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-18-0073

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Quality of Life in a Randomized Breast Cancer Prevention Trial of Low-Dose Tamoxifen and Fenretinide in Premenopausal Women
Davide Serrano, Sara Gandini, Aliana Guerrieri-Gonzaga, Irene Feroce, Harriet Johansson, Debora Macis, Valentina Aristarco, Bernardo Bonanni and Andrea DeCensi
Cancer Prev Res December 1 2018 (11) (12) 811-818; DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-18-0073
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Authors' Contributions
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • testosterone therapy, statins and prostate cancer
  • Oral Health and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers
  • HCC Early Detection
Show more Research Articles
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Prevention Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Prevention Research
eISSN: 1940-6215
ISSN: 1940-6207

Advertisement