Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330:1375-1378 (11 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1375
Ludger Barthelmes, specialist registrar1, Louise A Davidson, clinical nurse specialist1, Christopher Gaffney, consultant clinical oncologist2, Christopher A Gateley, consultant surgeon1
1 Breast Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, Wales NP20 2UB, 2 Velindre Hospital, Cardiff, Wales CF14 2TL
Correspondence to: Ludger Barthelmes barthelmes{at}tinyonline.co.uk
|
|
|
|
Pregnancy before breast cancer
Population studies have looked at the interval between last birth and diagnosis of breast cancer, on the assumption that the cancer is present at a subclinical level for some time and that pregnancy related hormonal changes promote its growth. These studies noted that the shorter the interval between birth and diagnosis, the poorer the outcomes.1
w1-w4 Although this evidence indirectly suggests that pregnancy may promote the growth of breast cancer, it does not apply to our patient as her disease was detected at the start of pregnancy. Her previous pregnancy is unlikely to have had an effect on the current disease as it preceded diagnosis by more than four years.
Pregnancy associated breast cancer
Pregnancy associated breast cancer is defined as breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy or lactation or one year post partum (see table A on bmj.com). Most of the studies on this topic show that such women present with more advanced and aggressive disease.w5-8
w10 w11 Only two studies showed a worse survival when the women were matched stage by stage with non-pregnant women with breast cancer.1
w11
Undoubtedly pregnancy related hormonal changes could play a part in the promotion of breast cancer in all the circumstances in women with pregnancy associated breast cancer. Breast cancers detected during lactation show a different pattern of exposure to hormones than that of breast cancers detected during early pregnancy. In our patient, the presence of the breast cancer at a subclinical level when not pregnant was longer than the three weeks when the breast cancer was exposed to the pregnancy related increase of oestrogen.
Other methodological shortcomings of the studies on pregnancy associated breast cancer were their retrospective design, small sample sizes, and that they often covered long periods during which time breast cancer treatment had changed. In some studies, control groups were not matched for tumour size and stage (see table A on bmj.com).
Knowledge about the influence of pregnancy on breast cancer prognosis is therefore limited. No studies have looked specifically at women presenting with breast cancer during early pregnancy, which could help with the dilemma over management of our patient.
Indications for termination of pregnancy are medical and social. In the case of our patient we had to consider both the mother, assuming a deleterious effect on the disease of continuing pregnancy, and the fetus, considering injury from treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or hormonal management).
The social indication in this case was the possibility of the child surviving the mother if the breast cancer recurred.
Medical indications
The mother
Compared with studies of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy, there is even less evidence on women who opt for termination after a diagnosis early in pregnancy. The few studies that have looked at this have been hampered by small numbers of patients analysed over decades who were not matched by age and tumour size and stage (see table B on bmj.com). These studies showed no difference in survival between women who did or did not terminate their pregnancy, apart from two where the women who underwent termination fared worse possibly because they were a selected group with advanced disease.w14 w17
The fetus
If pregnancy is to continue after a diagnosis of breast cancer, the effects of treatment (particularly radiotherapy and chemotherapy) on the developing fetus have to be considered.
RadiotherapyThe teratogenic potential of radioactivity on developing fetuses poses a particular dilemma in the management of pregnant women with breast cancer. During the first trimester, the fetus is outside the radiation field of the chest wall but still exposed to scattered radiation. At later stages of pregnancy, although the fetus has grown out of the pelvis and is closer to the radiation field, organogenesis is complete and the effects of radiation are thought to have diminished.2 Anecdotal reports mention fetal malformations (growth retardation with chemotherapy in the first trimester,w18 anal atresia, retrovaginal fistula) as well as normal pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women receiving radiotherapy for breast cancer.w19 w20 The teratogenic potential of radiotherapy has to be weighed up against improvements in recurrence-free survivalw21 and overall mortality from breast cancer.w22 w23 Whether evidence of reduced mortality from radiotherapy is strong enough to change the indications of its use during pregnancy is an issue of ongoing debate.3 If our patient had wanted to continue her pregnancy, we would not have recommended breast conserving surgery because of the need for adjuvant radiotherapy. A proportion of patients who have a mastectomy are advised to undergo radiotherapy to reduce the risk of local recurrence. The information required to make this decision is only available after surgery. Our patient would not have fallen into this category.
ChemotherapyOur patient's core biopsy sample showed a high grade ductal carcinoma, and we expected her to require postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy has shown benefits in premenopausal women with high grade breast cancer, including those without lymph node metastasis.w24 Chemotherapy can cross the placenta and, if given up to week 15 of gestation, interferes with cell differentiation leading to permanent organ malformations or malformations of the central nervous system, eyes, bones, and teeth, which still undergo differentiation thereafter. Theoretically, miscarriage, stillbirth, and low for gestational age birth may occur. Most experience is with cyclophosphamide. Although normal outcomes have been reported in women who, unknowingly pregnant, received cyclophosphamide at conception and during the first trimester,w19 w25 several studies have reported congenital abnormalities.w26-w33 To our knowledge reports are lacking on adverse pregnancy outcomes after exposure to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and 5-fluorouracil during the second and third trimester. No long term follow-up studies have been carried out on neurodevelopment or late occurrence of malignancies in children exposed to these agents.
Delaying chemotherapy owing to pregnancy
The question arises as to whether delaying chemotherapy until the second trimester impairs a woman's prognosis. Assuming the diagnosis is made early in pregnancy, as in our patient, is it disadvantageous to delay chemotherapy?
One study detected no difference in disease-free survival in women receiving fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide within 10 weeks or after 10 weeks of surgery for breast cancer.4 The daily increased risk of developing axillary metastasis (as the most important prognostic indicator) for an untreated breast carcinoma in a pregnant woman is estimated to be 0.057%.5 After surgery, our patient should, if anything, have a lower risk. Therefore the concern of delaying chemotherapy is not reflected in the literature or by estimates about the risk of metastatic spread to the axilla.
Ultimately it is the patient who decides on the management of her breast cancer and pregnancy. Evidence is lacking of a poorer outcome if management is modified to allow continuation of pregnancy. If a pregnancy was planned then the patient not only has to come to terms with the diagnosis of breast cancer but also with the termination of her pregnancy.
Studies on the effect of breast cancer treatment on subsequent pregnancies included patients with full term pregnancies or those who had a miscarriage or terminated their pregnancy. They form a heterogeneous group, as the hormonal changes of these events are different. Miscarriage and termination of pregnancies may be under-reported or included in the comparison group of non-pregnant women. Despite these limitations in design, the studies did not detect a worse outcome in women who subsequently became pregnant after treatment for breast cancer (see table C on bmj.com).
Timing of pregnancy
Opinion on the best timing of pregnancy after breast cancer treatment is divided. Only one study analysed the effect of timing and found no difference in outcome.7 About half of the patients became pregnant within two years of treatment.w37 w38
Reasons to defer pregnancy are based on the argument that most recurrences occur early after breast cancer treatment, particularly in women with lymphnode metastasis.8 Others point out that in the breast cancer overview studies recurrences occur at a constant rate,w40 and therefore women should not defer pregnancy.9 Our patient was not in a high risk group for early recurrence because of the absence of lymph node metastasis.
|
Fertility declines in the fourth decade and may be further impaired by chemotherapy. By delaying pregnancy, a narrow window of opportunity of a possibly important aspect of quality of life and rehabilitation may be missed. We therefore attempted to draw a cautiously optimistic picture for our patient, but also outlined the dilemma of her not seeing her child grow up if the breast cancer recurred.
In the end our patient decided to avoid pregnancy. She continues to take tamoxifen.
We thank the patient for contributing her case, A M Wake for the ultrasonogram and mammogram images, and I W Thompson and A M Rashid for the pathology slide.
Contributors: LB conceived the article. LAD liaised with the patient. All authors contributed ideas to the manuscript. CAG is guarantor for the paper.
Competing interests: LB is opposed to abortion. His over-riding interest is to support women in making an informed decision. CAG and CC have been supported by AstraZeneca, the manufacturer of tamoxifen, to attend courses and conferences.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+