Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background The role of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has increasingly been called into question among patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes. Two recent trials have failed to show a survival difference in sentinel node-positive breast cancer patients who were randomized either to undergo completion ALND or not. Neither of the trials, however, included breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy or those with tumors larger than 5 cm, and power was debatable to show a small survival difference. Methods The prospective randomized SENOMAC trial includes clinically node-negative breast cancer patients with up to two macrometastases in their sentinel lymph node biopsy. Patients with T1-T3 tumors are eligible as well as patients prior to systemic neoadjuvant therapy. Both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy, with or without breast reconstruction, are eligible interventions. Patients are randomized 1:1 to either undergo completion ALND or not by a web-based randomization tool. This trial is designed as a non-inferiority study with breast cancer-specific survival at 5 years as the primary endpoint. Target accrual is 3500 patients to achieve 80% power in being able to detect a potential 2.5% deterioration of the breast cancer-specific 5-year survival rate. Follow-up is by annual clinical examination and mammography during 5 years, and additional controls after 10 and 15 years. Secondary endpoints such as arm morbidity and health-related quality of life are measured by questionnaires at 1, 3 and 5 years. Discussion Several large subgroups of breast cancer patients, such as patients undergoing mastectomy or those with larger tumors, have not been included in key trials; however, the use of ALND is being questioned even in these groups without the support of high-quality evidence. Therefore, the SENOMAC Trial will investigate the need of completion ALND in case of limited spread to the sentinel lymph nodes not only in patients undergoing any breast surgery, but also in neoadjuvantly treated patients and patients with larger tumors. Trial registration NCT 02240472 , retrospective registration date September 14, 2015 after trial initiation on January 31, 2015.

In luminal breast cancer, adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors (eg, abemaciclib) improve invasive disease-free survival. In patients with T1–2, grade 1–2 tumours, and one or two sentinel lymph node metastases, completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) is the only prognostic tool available that can reveal four or more nodal metastases (pN2–3), which is the only indication for adjuvant abemaciclib in this setting. However, this technique can lead to substantial arm morbidity in patients. We aimed to pragmatically describe the potential benefit and harm of this strategy on the individual patient level in patients from the ongoing SENOMAC trial. In the randomised, phase 3, SENOMAC trial, patients aged 18 years or older, of any performance status, with clinically node-negative T1–T3 breast cancer and one or two sentinel node macrometastases from 67 sites in five European countries (Denmark, Germany, Greece, Italy, and Sweden) were randomly assigned (1:1), via permutated block randomisation (random block size of 2 and 4) stratified by country, to either cALND or its omission (ie, they had a sentinel lymph node biopsy only). The primary outcome is overall survival, which is yet to be reported. In this post-hoc analysis, patients from the SENOMAC per-protocol population, with luminal oestrogen-receptor positive, HER2-negative, T1–2, histological grade 1–2 breast cancer, with tumour size of 5 cm or smaller were selected to match the characteristics of cohort 1 of the monarchE trial who would only have an indication for adjuvant abemaciclib if found to have 4 or more nodal metastases. The primary study objective was to determine the number of patients who developed patient-reported severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function after cALND (as measured by the Lymphedema Functioning, Disability, and Health [Lymph-ICF] Questionnaire) 1 year after surgery to avoid one invasive disease-free survival event at 5 years with 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib, using invasive disease-free survival event data from cohort 1 of the monarchE trial. The SENOMAC trial is registered with ClincialTrials.gov, NCT02240472, and is closed to accrual and ongoing. Between Jan 31, 2015, and Dec 31, 2021, 2766 patients were enrolled in SENOMAC and randomly assigned to cALND (n=1384) or sentinel node biopsy only (n=1382), of whom 2540 were included in the per-protocol population. 1705 (67%) of 2540 patients met this post-hoc study's eligibility criteria, of whom 802 (47%) had a cALND and 903 (53%) had a sentinel lymph node biopsy only. Median age at randomisation was 62 years (IQR 52–71), 1699 (>99%) of 1705 patients were female, and six (<1%) were male. Among 1342 patients who responded to questionnaires, after a median follow-up of 45·2 months (IQR 25·6–59·8; data cutoff Nov 17, 2023), patient-reported severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function was reported in 84 (13%) of 634 patients who had cALND versus 30 (4%) of 708 who had sentinel lymph node biopsy only (χ2 test p<0·0001). To avoid one invasive disease-free survival event at 5 years with adjuvant abemaciclib, cALND would need to be performed in 104 patients, and would result in nine patients having severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function 1 year after surgery. As a method to potentially identify an indication for abemaciclib, and subsequently avoid invasive disease-free survival events at 5 years with 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib, cALND carries a substantial risk of severe or very severe arm morbidity and so cALND should be discouraged for this purpose. Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Cancer Society, the Nordic Cancer Union, and the Swedish Breast Cancer Association.

Purpose None of the key randomised trials on the omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in sentinel lymph-positive breast cancer have reported external validity, even though results indicate selection bias. Our aim was to assess the external validity of the ongoing randomised SENOMAC trial by comparing characteristics of Swedish SENOMAC trial participants with non-included eligible patients registered in the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register (NKBC). Methods In the ongoing non-inferiority European SENOMAC trial, clinically node-negative cT1–T3 breast cancer patients with up to two sentinel lymph node macrometastases are randomised to undergo completion ALND or not. Both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy are eligible interventions. Data from NKBC were extracted for the years 2016 and 2017, and patient and tumour characteristics compared with Swedish trial participants from the same years. Results Overall, 306 NKBC cases from non-participating and 847 NKBC cases from participating sites (excluding SENOMAC participants) were compared with 463 SENOMAC trial participants. Patients belonging to the middle age groups ( p  = 0.015), with smaller tumours ( p  = 0.013) treated by breast-conserving therapy (50.3 versus 47.1 versus 65.2%, p  < 0.001) and less nodal tumour burden (only 1 macrometastasis in 78.8 versus 79.9 versus 87.3%, p  = 0.001) were over-represented in the trial population. Time trends indicated, however, that differences may be mitigated over time. Conclusions This interim external validity analysis specifically addresses selection mechanisms during an ongoing trial, potentially increasing generalisability by the time full accrual is reached. Similar validity checks should be an integral part of prospective clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT 02240472, retrospective registration date September 14, 2015 after trial initiation on January 31, 2015

Purpose The purpose was to investigate the effects of long-wave diathermy in combination with interferential currents (interferential therapy and long-wave diathermy at high power (ITH)) in comparison with long-wave diathermy at a power below the active treatment dose (long-wave diathermy at low power (LDL), control group) on sensory and motor symptoms in patients with chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in the lower extremities. Methods Sixty-seven patients with chronic CIPN were randomized to 12 weeks of either ITH or LDL. Follow-up assessments were performed after the treatment period and at 37 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was pain (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)), and the secondary outcomes were discomfort, nerve symptoms, subjective measurement of dizziness (Dizziness Handicap Inventory), and balance. Differences within and between groups were analyzed. Results Pain intensity decreased significantly only in the LDL group directly after the treatment period from NRS median 25 to median 12.5 ( P  = 0.017). At the 37-week follow-up, no changes were detected, irrespective of group (NRS 13 vs. 20, P  = 0.885). Discomfort decreased significantly in both groups at both 12 and 37 weeks after the baseline ( P  < 0.05). Balance disability showed significant declines in both groups at 12 and 37 weeks ( P  = 0.001/0.025 in the ITH group vs P  = 0.001/<0.001 in the LDL group). Balance ability (tightened Romberg test) increased significantly at both 12 and 37 weeks in both groups ( P  = 0.004/<0.040 in the ITH group) but did not improve in the LDL group at any of the follow-up time points ( P  = 0.203 vs P  = 0.383). The one-legged stance test was unchanged in the ITH group after 12 weeks but improved 37 weeks after baseline ( P  = 0.03). No significant changes were observed in the LDL group at any of the follow-up time points. Conclusion This study provides no support for the use of a combination of long-wave diathermy and ITH as a treatment option for patients with chronic CIPN. However, the chronic CIPN symptoms decreased with time irrespective of the treatment.

Improved cancer survival poses important questions about future life conditions of the survivor. We examined the possible influence of a breast cancer diagnosis on subsequent working and marital status, sickness absence and income. We conducted a matched cohort study including 4,761 women 40-59 years of age and registered with primary breast cancer in a Swedish population-based clinical register during 1993-2003, and 2,3805 women without breast cancer. Information on socioeconomic standing was obtained from a social database 1 year prior and 3 and 5 years following the diagnosis. In Conditional Poisson Regression models, risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated to assess the impact of a breast cancer diagnosis. Three years after diagnosis, women who had had breast cancer more often had received sickness benefits (RR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.40-1.58) or disability pension (RR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.37-1.58) than had women without breast cancer. We found no effect on income (RR = 0.99), welfare payments (RR = 0.98), or marital status (RR = 1.02). A higher use of sickness benefits and disability pension was evident in all stages of the disease, although the difference in use of sickness benefits decreased after 5 years, whereas the difference in disability pension increased. For woman with early stage breast cancer, the sickness absence was higher following diagnosis among those with low education, who had undergone mastectomy, and had received chemo- or hormonal therapy. Neither tumour size nor presence of lymph nodes metastasis was associated with sickness absence after adjustment for treatment. Even in early stage breast cancer, a diagnosis negatively influences working capacity both 3 and 5 years after diagnosis, and it seems that the type of treatment received had the largest impact. A greater focus needs to be put on rehabilitation of breast cancer patients, work-place adaptations and research on long-term sequelae of treatment.

Objectives: The study aimed to investigate the effect on survival after 6 months of treatment involving individual dietary advice and oral nutritional supplements in older malnourished adults after discharge from hospital. Methods: This multicentre randomised controlled trial included 671 patients aged 65 years who were malnourished or at risk of malnutrition when admitted to hospital between 2010 and 2014, and followed up after 8.2 years (median 4.1 years). Patients were randomised to receive dietary advice or oral nutritional supplements, separate or in combination, or routine care. The intervention started at discharge from the hospital and continued for 6 months, with survival being the main outcome measure. Results: During the follow-up period 398 (59.3%) participants died. At follow-up, the survival rates were 36.9% for dietary advice, 42.4% for oral nutritional supplements, 40.2% for dietary advice combined with oral nutritional supplements, and 43.3% for the control group (log-rank test p = 0.762). After stratifying the participants according to nutritional status, survival still did not differ significantly between the treatment arms (log-rank test p = 0.480 and p = 0.298 for the 506 participants at risk of malnutrition and the 165 malnourished participants, respectively). Conclusions: Oral nutritional supplements with or without dietary advice, or dietary advice alone, do not improve the survival of malnourished older adults. These results do not support the routine use of supplements in older malnourished adults, provided that survival is the aim of the treatment. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov with ID: NCT01057914

Folate may influence breast cancer development and progression through its role in one-carbon metabolism. However, epidemiologic data on the relation between folate and breast cancer survival are limited. We investigated whether dietary folate intake was associated with survival in 3,116 women diagnosed with breast cancer in the population-based Swedish Mammography Cohort. Participants completed a 67-item food frequency questionnaire in 1987. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for death from breast cancer and death from any cause. During 25,716 person-years of follow-up from 1987 to 2008, there were 852 deaths with 381 breast cancer deaths. Dietary folate intake was inversely associated with breast cancer and overall mortality. Women in the highest quartile of folate intake had a multivariable HR (95% CI) of death from breast cancer of 0.78 (0.58–1.03) compared to those in the lowest quartile ( P trend  = 0.03). The corresponding HR (95% CI) for death from any cause was 0.79 (0.66–0.96; P trend  = 0.004). The protective association between dietary folate intake and breast cancer death was strongest among those with ER-negative tumors (HR = 0.42; 95% = CI 0.22–0.79; P trend  = 0.01) comparing the highest to lowest quartile. Our findings suggest that folate intake before breast cancer diagnosis may improve breast cancer and overall survival. While these findings need to be confirmed in future studies, they do offer assurance that dietary folate intake at the levels observed in our population does not unfavorably affect survival after breast cancer.

Several reports have shown that less aggressive patterns of diagnostic activity and care are provided to elderly breast carcinoma patients. We sought to investigate whether differences in the management of older women with breast cancer are associated with survival. In an observational study using a population-based clinical breast cancer register of one health-care region in Sweden, we identified 9,059 women aged 50-84 y diagnosed with primary breast cancer between 1992 and 2002. The 5-y relative survival ratio was estimated for patients classified by age group, diagnostic activity, tumor characteristics, and treatment. The 5-y relative survival for breast cancer patients was lower (up to 13%) in women 70-84 y of age compared to women aged 50-69 y, and the difference was most pronounced in stage IIB-III and in the unstaged. Significant differences in disease management were found, as older women had larger tumors, had fewer nodes examined, and did not receive treatment by radiotherapy or by chemotherapy as often as the younger women. Adjustment for diagnostic activity, tumor characteristics, and treatment diminished the relative excess mortality in stages III and in the unstaged, whereas the excess mortality was only marginally affected in stage IIB. Less diagnostic activity, less aggressive treatment, and later diagnosis in older women are associated with poorer survival. The large differences in treatment of older women are difficult to explain by co-morbidity alone.

Objective To evaluate the associations between intakes of vitamins A, C, and E and risk of colon cancer. Methods Using the primary data from 13 cohort studies, we estimated study- and sex-specific relative risks (RR) with Cox proportional hazards models and subsequently pooled RRs using a random effects model. Results Among 676,141 men and women, 5,454 colon cancer cases were identified (7-20 years of follow-up across studies). Vitamin A, C, and E intakes from food only were not associated with colon cancer risk. For intakes from food and supplements (total), the pooled multivariate RRs (95% CI) were 0.88 (0.76-1.02, >4,000 vs. ≤1,000 μg/day) for vitamin A, 0.81 (0.71-0.92, >600 vs. ≤100 mg/day) for vitamin C, and 0.78 (0.66-0.92, >200 vs. ≤6 mg/day) for vitamin E. Adjustment for total folate intake attenuated these associations, but the inverse associations with vitamins C and E remained significant. Multivitamin use was significantly inversely associated with colon cancer risk (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81-0.96). Conclusions Modest inverse associations with vitamin C and E intakes may be due to high correlations with folate intake, which had a similar inverse association with colon cancer. An inverse association with multivitamin use, a major source of folate and other vitamins, deserves further study.