Recent Publications by CFE Educators

BACKGROUND

Many high-dose groups demonstrate increased leukaemia risks, with risk greatest following childhood exposure; risks at low/moderate doses are less clear.

METHODS

We conducted a pooled analysis of the major radiation-associated leukaemias (acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) with/without the inclusion of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML), acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL)) in ten childhood-exposed groups, including Japanese atomic bomb survivors, four therapeutically irradiated and five diagnostically exposed cohorts, a mixture of incidence and mortality data. Relative/absolute risk Poisson regression models were fitted.

RESULTS

Of 365 cases/deaths of leukaemias excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, there were 272 AML/CML/ALL among 310,905 persons (7,641,362 person-years), with mean active bone marrow (ABM) dose of 0.11 Gy (range 0-5.95). We estimated significant (P  0.005) linear excess relative risks/Gy (ERR/Gy) for: AML (n = 140) = 1.48 (95% CI 0.59-2.85), CML (n = 61) = 1.77 (95% CI 0.38-4.50), and ALL (n = 71) = 6.65 (95% CI 2.79-14.83). There is upward curvature in the dose response for ALL and AML over the full dose range, although at lower doses (0.5 Gy) curvature for ALL is downwards.

DISCUSSION

We found increased ERR/Gy for all major types of radiation-associated leukaemia after childhood exposure to ABM doses that were predominantly (for 99%) 1 Gy, and consistent with our prior analysis focusing on 100 mGy.

There is direct evidence of risks at moderate and high levels of radiation dose for highly radiogenic cancers such as leukaemia and thyroid cancer. For many cancer sites, however, it is necessary to assess risks via extrapolation from groups exposed at moderate and high levels of dose, about which there are substantial uncertainties. Crucial to the resolution of this area of uncertainty is the modelling of the dose-response relationship and the importance of both systematic and random dosimetric errors for analyses in the various exposed groups. It is well recognised that measurement error can alter substantially the shape of this relationship and hence the derived population risk estimates. Particular attention has been devoted to the issue of shared errors, common in many datasets, and particularly important in occupational settings. We propose a modification of the regression calibration method which is particularly suited to studies in which there is a substantial amount of shared error, and in which there may also be curvature in the true dose response. This method can be used in settings where there is a mixture of Berkson and classical error. In fits to synthetic datasets in which there is substantial upward curvature in the true dose response, and varying (and sometimes substantial) amounts of classical and Berkson error, we show that the coverage probabilities of all methods for the linear coefficient \(\alpha\) are near the desired level, irrespective of the magnitudes of assumed Berkson and classical error, whether shared or unshared. However, the coverage probabilities for the quadratic coefficient \(\beta\) are generally too low for the unadjusted and regression calibration methods, particularly for larger magnitudes of the Berkson error, whether this is shared or unshared. In contrast Monte Carlo maximum likelihood yields coverage probabilities for \(\beta\) that are uniformly too high. The extended regression calibration method yields coverage probabilities that are too low when shared and unshared Berkson errors are both large, although otherwise it performs well, and coverage is generally better than these other three methods. A notable feature is that for all methods apart from extended regression calibration the estimates of the quadratic coefficient \(\beta\) are substantially upwardly biased.

BACKGROUND

While neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been shown to increase rates of breast conservation surgery (BCS) for breast cancer, response rates in invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) appear lower than other histologic subtypes. Some data suggest higher response rates to NAC in premenopausal versus postmenopausal patients, but this has not been studied in ILC. We evaluated the rates of successful BCS after NAC in patients with ILC stratified by menopausal status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from a single-institution cohort of 666 patients with stage I-III hormone receptor positive HER-2 negative ILC. We used t-tests, chi-squared tests, and multivariable logistic regression to investigate rates of NAC use, attempted BCS, and associations between NAC and successful BCS by menopausal status.

RESULTS

In 217 premenopausal and 449 postmenopausal patients, NAC was used more often in the premenopausal group (15.2% vs. 9.8%, respectively, p = 0.041). Among those who attempted breast conservation (51.3% of pre- and 64.8% of postmenopausal cohorts), NAC was not associated with successful BCS in either group. Interestingly, for postmenopausal patients, receipt of NAC was significantly associated with increased rates of completion mastectomy in those who had positive margins at the first attempt at BCS.

CONCLUSION

NAC was not associated with successful BCS in either premenopausal or postmenopausal patients with ILC. Although premenopausal patients were more likely to receive NAC, these data suggest that menopausal status may not be a good predictor of response to chemotherapy. Better predictors of response and more efficacious treatment for patients with ILC are needed.