Incident malignancies among older long-term breast cancer survivors and an age-matched and site-matched nonbreast cancer comparison group over 10 years of follow-up

BACKGROUND Of the approximately 2.4 million American women with a history of breast cancer, 43% are aged ≥ 65 years and are at risk for developing subsequent malignancies. METHODS Women from 6 geographically diverse sites included 5-year breast cancer survivors (N = 1361) who were diagnosed between 1990 and 1994 at age ≥ 65 years with stage I or II disease and a comparison group of women without breast cancer (N = 1361). Women in the comparison group were age-matched and site-matched to breast cancer survivors on the date of breast cancer diagnosis. Follow-up began 5 years after the index date (survivor diagnosis date or comparison enrollment date) until death, disenrollment, or through 15 years after the index date. Data were collected from medical records and electronic sources (cancer registry, administrative, clinical, National Death Index). Analyses included descriptive statistics, crude incidence rates, and Cox proportional hazards regression models for estimating the risk of incident malignancy and were adjusted for death as a competing risk. RESULTS Survivors and women in the comparison group were similar: >82% were white, 55% had a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 0, and ≥ 73% had a body mass index ≤ 30 kg/m(2) . Of all 306 women (N = 160 in the survivor group, N = 146 in the comparison group) who developed a first incident malignancy during follow-up, the mean time to malignancy was similar (4.37 ± 2.81 years vs 4.03 ± 2.76 years, respectively; P = .28), whereas unadjusted incidence rates were slightly higher in survivors (1882 vs 1620 per 100,000 person years). The adjusted hazard of developing a first incident malignancy was slightly elevated in survivors in relation to women in the comparison group, but it was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.47). CONCLUSIONS Older women who survived 5 years after an early stage breast cancer diagnosis were not at an elevated risk for developing subsequent incident malignancies up to 15 years after their breast cancer diagnosis.

AMR-Me inhibits PI3K/Akt signaling in hormone-dependent MCF-7 breast cancer cells and inactivates NF-κB in hormone-independent MDA-MB-231 cells

AMR-Me, a C-28 methylester derivative of triterpenoid compound Amooranin isolated from Amoora rohituka stem bark and the plant has been reported to possess multitude of medicinal properties. Our previous studies have shown that AMR-Me can induce apoptosis through mitochondrial apoptotic and MAPK signaling pathways by regulating the expression of apoptosis related genes in human breast cancer MCF-7 cells. However, the molecular mechanism of AMR-Me induced apoptotic cell death remains unclear. Our results showed that AMR-Me dose-dependently inhibited the proliferation of MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 cells under serum-free conditions supplemented with 1 nM estrogen (E2) with an IC50 value of 0.15 µM, 0.45 µM, respectively. AMR-Me had minimal effects on human normal breast epithelial MCF-10A + ras and MCF-10A cells with IC50 value of 6 and 6.5 µM, respectively. AMR-Me downregulated PI3K p85, Akt1, and p-Akt in an ERα-independent manner in MCF-7 cells and no change in expression levels of PI3K p85 and Akt were observed in MDA-MB-231 cells treated under similar conditions. The PI3K inhibitor LY294002 suppressed Akt activation similar to AMR-Me and potentiated AMR-Me induced apoptosis in MCF-7 cells. EMSA revealed that AMR-Me inhibited nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-κB) DNA binding activity in MDA-MB-231 cells in a time-dependent manner and abrogated EGF induced NF-κB activation. From these studies we conclude that AMR-Me decreased ERα expression and effectively inhibited Akt phosphorylation in MCF-7 cells and inactivate constitutive nuclear NF-κB and its regulated proteins in MDA-MB-231 cells. Due to this multifactorial effect in hormone-dependent and independent breast cancer cells AMR-Me deserves attention for use in breast cancer prevention and therapy

Chemotherapy for isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer (CALOR): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND Patients with isolated locoregional recurrences (ILRR) of breast cancer have a high risk of distant metastasis and death from breast cancer. We aimed to establish whether adjuvant chemotherapy improves the outcome of such patients. METHODS The CALOR trial was a pragmatic, open-label, randomised trial that accrued patients with histologically proven and completely excised ILRR after unilateral breast cancer who had undergone a mastectomy or lumpectomy with clear surgical margins. Eligible patients were enrolled from hospitals worldwide and were centrally randomised (1:1) to chemotherapy (type selected by the investigator; multidrug for at least four courses recommended) or no chemotherapy, using permuted blocks, and stratified by previous chemotherapy, oestrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor status, and location of ILRR. Patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive ILRR received adjuvant endocrine therapy, radiation therapy was mandated for patients with microscopically involved surgical margins, and anti-HER2 therapy was optional. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00074152. FINDINGS From Aug 22, 2003, to Jan 31, 2010, 85 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy and 77 were assigned to no chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 4·9 years (IQR 3·6-6 ·0), 24 (28%) patients had disease-free survival events in the chemotherapy group compared with 34 (44%) in the no chemotherapy group. 5-year disease-free survival was 69% (95% CI 56-79) with chemotherapy versus 57% (44-67) without chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·046). Adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more effective for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative ILRR (pinteraction=0·046), but analyses of disease-free survival according to the oestrogen-receptor status of the primary tumour were not statistically significant (pinteraction=0·43). Of the 81 patients who received chemotherapy, 12 (15%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and intestinal infection. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended for patients with completely resected ILRR of breast cancer, especially if the recurrence is oestrogen-receptor negative. FUNDING US Department of Health and Human Services, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Frontier Science and Technology Research Foundation, Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Swedish Cancer Society, Oncosuisse, Cancer Association of South Africa, Foundation for Clinical Research of Eastern Switzerland (OSKK), Grupo Español de Investigación en Cáncer de Mama (GEICAM), and the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists' Group (BOOG).

Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy as second conservative treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence: multicentric study of the GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group

PURPOSE To analyse the clinical outcome after salvage lumpectomy and multi-catheter brachytherapy (MCB) for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). MATERIAL AND METHODS Between 09/00 and 09/10, 217 patients presenting an IBTR underwent lumpectomy and MCB (low, pulsed, or high-dose rate). Survival rates without second local recurrence (2nd LR), distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) were analysed as well as late effects and cosmetic results. Univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA) based on IBTR data were performed to find prognostic factors for 2nd LR, DM, and OS. RESULTS Median follow-up after the IBTR was 3.9 years [range: 1.1-10.3]. Five and 10-year actuarial 2nd LR rates were 5.6% [range: 1.5-9.5] and 7.2% [range: 2.1-12.1], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial DM rates were 9.6% [range: 5.7-15.2] and 19.1% [range: 7.8-28.3], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial OS rates were 88.7% [range: 83.1-94.8] and 76.4% [range: 66.9-87.3], respectively. In MVA, histological grade was prognostic factor for 2nd LR (p=0.008) and OS (p=0.02); while tumour size was prognostic factor for DM (p=0.03). G3-4 complication rate was 11%. Excellent/good cosmetic result was achieved in 85%. CONCLUSION This study suggests that in case of IBTR, lumpectomy plus MCB is feasible and effective in preventing 2nd LR with an OS rate at least equivalent to those achieved with salvage mastectomy.

Adjuvant treatment of premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: design of the TEXT and SOFT trials

OBJECTIVES In 2003 the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) initiated the TEXT and SOFT randomized phase III trials to answer two questions concerning adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: 1-What is the role of aromatase inhibitors (AI) for women treated with ovarian function suppression (OFS)? 2-What is the role of OFS for women who remain premenopausal and are treated with tamoxifen? METHODS TEXT randomized patients to receive exemestane or tamoxifen with OFS. SOFT randomized patients to receive exemestane with OFS, tamoxifen with OFS, or tamoxifen alone. Treatment was for 5 years from randomization. RESULTS TEXT and SOFT successfully met their enrollment goals in 2011. The 5738 enrolled women had lower-risk disease and lower observed disease-free survival (DFS) event rates than anticipated. Consequently, 7 and 13 additional years of follow-up for TEXT and SOFT, respectively, were required to reach the targeted DFS events (median follow-up about 10.5 and 15 years). To provide timely answers, protocol amendments in 2011 specified analyses based on chronological time and median follow-up. To assess the AI question, exemestane + OFS versus tamoxifen + OFS, a combined analysis of TEXT and SOFT became the primary analysis (n = 4717). The OFS question became the primary analysis from SOFT, assessing the unique comparison of tamoxifen + OFS versus tamoxifen alone (n = 2045). The first reports are anticipated in mid- and late-2014. CONCLUSIONS We present the original designs of TEXT and SOFT and adaptations to ensure timely answers to two questions concerning optimal adjuvant endocrine treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Trial Registration TEXT: Clinicaltrials.govNCT00066703 SOFT: Clinicaltrials.govNCT00066690.

Exemestane Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women With Early Breast Cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27—A Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial

PURPOSE In patients with hormone-dependent postmenopausal breast cancer, standard adjuvant therapy involves 5 years of the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole. The steroidal inhibitor exemestane is partially non-cross-resistant with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors and is a mild androgen and could prove superior to anastrozole regarding efficacy and toxicity, specifically with less bone loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS We designed an open-label, randomized, phase III trial of 5 years of exemestane versus anastrozole with a two-sided test of superiority to detect a 2.4% improvement with exemestane in 5-year event-free survival (EFS). Secondary objectives included assessment of overall survival, distant disease-free survival, incidence of contralateral new primary breast cancer, and safety. RESULTS In the study, 7,576 women (median age, 64.1 years) were enrolled. At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 4-year EFS was 91% for exemestane and 91.2% for anastrozole (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.18; P = .85). Overall, distant disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were also similar. In all, 31.6% of patients discontinued treatment as a result of adverse effects, concomitant disease, or study refusal. Osteoporosis/osteopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, vaginal bleeding, and hypercholesterolemia were less frequent on exemestane, whereas mild liver function abnormalities and rare episodes of atrial fibrillation were less frequent on anastrozole. Vasomotor and musculoskeletal symptoms were similar between arms. CONCLUSION This first comparison of steroidal and nonsteroidal classes of aromatase inhibitors showed neither to be superior in terms of breast cancer outcomes as 5-year initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer by two-way test. Less toxicity on bone is compatible with one hypothesis behind MA.27 but requires confirmation. Exemestane should be considered another option as up-front adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Trastuzumab treatment beyond progression in advanced breast cancer: patterns of care in six Swiss breast cancer centers.

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab is an established treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer (BC). We analyzed Swiss patterns of care in patients with HER2-positive BC after disease progression on trastuzumab-containing therapy for metastatic BC (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed in six Swiss BC centers. Patients with HER2-positive MBC treated with at least one infusion of trastuzumab for advanced disease between January 2006 and December 2007 were identified. Treatment patterns in first and further lines were analyzed. RESULTS All of the 72 identified patients received trastuzumab as their first palliative anti-HER2 therapy, either as monotherapy (n = 23) or in combination with chemotherapy (typically taxane or vinorelbine; n = 49). Median time to progression was 8.1, 8.0 and 7.9 months in the monotherapy, trastuzumab-taxane and trastuzumab-vinorelbine cohorts, respectively. After progression on first-line anti-HER2 therapy, trastuzumab was continued in 67 of 68 patients who received further therapy. One patient received second-line lapatinib plus capecitabine. The median duration of anti-HER2 therapy was 20 months. Patients received a median of 4 lines of anti-HER2 therapy. CONCLUSIONS Durable responses were achieved with repeated exposure to anti-HER2 therapy. In a selected patient population, trastuzumab monotherapy appears to be a reasonable first-line treatment option.

Adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative breast cancer (BEATRICE): primary results of a randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer and pathological complete response rates in the neoadjuvant setting. Micrometastases are dependent on angiogenesis, suggesting that patients might benefit from anti-angiogenic strategies in the adjuvant setting. We therefore assessed the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for women with triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS For this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial we recruited patients with centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive breast cancer from 360 sites in 37 countries. We randomly allocated patients aged 18 years or older (1:1 with block randomisation; stratified by nodal status, chemotherapy [with an anthracycline, taxane, or both], hormone receptor status [negative vs low], and type of surgery) to receive a minimum of four cycles of chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab (equivalent of 5 mg/kg every week for 1 year). The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population, safety analyses were done on all patients who received at least one dose of study drug, and plasma biomarker analyses were done on all treated patients consenting to biomarker analyses and providing a measurable baseline plasma sample. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00528567. FINDINGS Between Dec 3, 2007, and March 8, 2010, we randomly assigned 1290 patients to receive chemotherapy alone and 1301 to receive bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Most patients received anthracycline-containing therapy; 1638 (63%) of the 2591 patients had node-negative disease. At the time of analysis of IDFS, median follow-up was 31·5 months (IQR 25·6-36·8) in the chemotherapy-alone group and 32·0 months (27·5-36·9) in the bevacizumab group. At the time of the primary analysis, IDFS events had been reported in 205 patients (16%) in the chemotherapy-alone group and in 188 patients (14%) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] in stratified log-rank analysis 0·87, 95% CI 0·72-1·07; p=0·18). 3-year IDFS was 82·7% (95% CI 80·5-85·0) with chemotherapy alone and 83·7% (81·4-86·0) with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. After 200 deaths, no difference in overall survival was noted between the groups (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·64-1·12; p=0·23). Exploratory biomarker assessment suggests that patients with high pre-treatment plasma VEGFR-2 might benefit from the addition of bevacizumab (Cox interaction test p=0·029). Use of bevacizumab versus chemotherapy alone was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 or worse hypertension (154 patients [12%] vs eight patients [1%]), severe cardiac events occurring at any point during the 18-month safety reporting period (19 [1%] vs two [<0·5%]), and treatment discontinuation (bevacizumab, chemotherapy, or both; 256 [20%] vs 30 [2%]); we recorded no increase in fatal adverse events with bevacizumab (four [<0·5%] vs three [<0·5%]). INTERPRETATION Bevacizumab cannot be recommended as adjuvant treatment in unselected patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to assess the potential effect of bevacizumab on overall survival.

A critical evaluation of secondary cancer risk models applied to Monte Carlo dose distributions of 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional conformal and hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer

The comparison of radiotherapy techniques regarding secondary cancer risk has yielded contradictory results possibly stemming from the many different approaches used to estimate risk. The purpose of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of different available risk models applied to detailed whole-body dose distributions computed by Monte Carlo for various breast radiotherapy techniques including conventional open tangents, 3D conformal wedged tangents and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). First, organ-specific linear risk models developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII committee were applied to mean doses for remote organs only and all solid organs. Then, different general non-linear risk models were applied to the whole body dose distribution. Finally, organ-specific non-linear risk models for the lung and breast were used to assess the secondary cancer risk for these two specific organs. A total of 32 different calculated absolute risks resulted in a broad range of values (between 0.1% and 48.5%) underlying the large uncertainties in absolute risk calculation. The ratio of risk between two techniques has often been proposed as a more robust assessment of risk than the absolute risk. We found that the ratio of risk between two techniques could also vary substantially considering the different approaches to risk estimation. Sometimes the ratio of risk between two techniques would range between values smaller and larger than one, which then translates into inconsistent results on the potential higher risk of one technique compared to another. We found however that the hybrid IMRT technique resulted in a systematic reduction of risk compared to the other techniques investigated even though the magnitude of this reduction varied substantially with the different approaches investigated. Based on the epidemiological data available, a reasonable approach to risk estimation would be to use organ-specific non-linear risk models applied to the dose distributions of organs within or near the treatment fields (lungs and contralateral breast in the case of breast radiotherapy) as the majority of radiation-induced secondary cancers are found in the beam-bordering regions.

Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND Suppression of ovarian estrogen production reduces the recurrence of hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer in premenopausal women, but its value when added to tamoxifen is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 3066 premenopausal women, stratified according to prior receipt or nonreceipt of chemotherapy, to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression. The primary analysis tested the hypothesis that tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression would improve disease-free survival, as compared with tamoxifen alone. In the primary analysis, 46.7% of the patients had not received chemotherapy previously, and 53.3% had received chemotherapy and remained premenopausal. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 67 months, the estimated disease-free survival rate at 5 years was 86.6% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 84.7% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.04; P=0.10). Multivariable allowance for prognostic factors suggested a greater treatment effect with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression than with tamoxifen alone (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98). Most recurrences occurred in patients who had received prior chemotherapy, among whom the rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 82.5% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 78.0% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.02). At 5 years, the rate of freedom from breast cancer was 85.7% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence vs. tamoxifen, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not provide a significant benefit in the overall study population. However, for women who were at sufficient risk for recurrence to warrant adjuvant chemotherapy and who remained premenopausal, the addition of ovarian suppression improved disease outcomes. Further improvement was seen with the use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00066690.).

Neutrophil expression of ICAM1, CXCR1, and VEGFR1 in patients with breast cancer before and after adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Distinct populations of neutrophils have been identified based on the expression of intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM1, CD54) and chemokine receptor 1 (CXCR1, interleukin 8 receptor α). AIM We analyzed the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR1), a physiological negative regulator of angiogenesis, on distinct populations of neutrophils from the blood of patients before and after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Neutrophil populations were distinguished as reverse transmigrated (ICAM1(high)/CXCR1(low)), naïve (ICAM1(low)/CXCR1(high)), or tissue-resident neutrophils (ICAM1(low)/CXCR1(low)), and their VEGFR1 expression quantified. RESULTS Reverse transmigrated ICAM1(high)/CXCR1(low) neutrophilic granulocytes decreased significantly after chemotherapy and these were also the cells with highest mean fluorescence intensity for VEGFR1. CONCLUSION Chemotherapy mainly reduces the number of reverse transmigrated long-lived ICAM1(high)/CXCR1(low) VEGFR1-expressing neutrophils. The decrease of antiangiogenic VEGFR1 may have a potential impact on tumour angiogenesis in patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy.

Breast cancer in younger women in Switzerland 1996-2009: A longitudinal population-based study.

BACKGROUND Breast cancer (BC) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and a leading cause of death in younger women. METHODS We analysed incidence, mortality and relative survival (RS) in women with BC aged 20-49 years at diagnosis, between 1996 and 2009 in Switzerland. Trends are reported as estimated annual percentage changes (EAPC). RESULTS Our findings confirm a slight increase in the incidence of BC in younger Swiss women during the period 1996-2009. The increase was largest in women aged 20-39 years (EAPC 1.8%). Mortality decreased in both age groups with similar EAPCs. Survival was lowest among women 20-39 years (10-year RS 73.4%). We observed no notable differences in stage of disease at diagnosis that might explain these differences. CONCLUSIONS The increased incidence and lower survival in younger women diagnosed with BC in Switzerland indicates possible differences in risk factors, tumour biology and treatment characteristics that require additional examination.

Is breast cancer risk the same for all progestogens?

The population-based case–control study CECILE investigated the impact of various menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) products on breast cancer (BC) risk in 1,555 postmenopausal women [1]. The case group (n = 739) included incident cases of in situ (!) or invasive BC in postmenopausal women. The control group (n = 816) included women from the general population within predefined quotas by age and socio-economic status (SES). While quotas by age were applied to obtain similar distributions by age among controls and among cases, quotas by SES in control women were applied to reflect the distribution by SES of women in the general population in the study area. Data of participants were obtained by a structured questionnaire during in-person interviews, and from pathology reports if applicable, respectively. Women were divided into current and past MHT user. MHTs were classified in estrogen-only therapy (ET), estrogen combined with progestin therapy (EPT) and tibolone. EPT was subdivided in three subtypes according to the progestogen constituent: natural micronized progesterone, progesterone derivatives, and testosterone derivatives. In comparison to never MHT users, any current or past MHT use (ET, EPT, tibolone) was not associated with an increased BC risk. However, in subanalysis BC risk was significantly increased for current use of EPT for 4 or more years (n = 73 cases and n = 56 controls, adjusted OR 1.55; 95 % CI 1.02–2.36). Within the group of current EPT users for 4 or more years, 14 cases had used estrogens combined with micronized progesterone (n = 17 controls), and 55 a combination with a synthetic progestogen (n = 34 controls), respectively. Compared to never MHT use, current use of EPT containing a synthetic progestogen for 4 or more years was associated with a significantly increased BC risk (adjusted OR 2.07; 95 % CI 1.26–3.39), but EPT containing micronized progesterone was not (adjusted OR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.37–1.71). 73 % of current MHT users started treatment within the first year of onset of menopause. Early EPT (n = 52 cases and n = 38 controls, adjusted OR 1.65; 95 % CI 1.02–2.69), but not early ET, starters had a significantly higher BC risk compared to never MHT users. In contrast, MHT initiation beyond 1 year after menopause was not associated with an increased BC risk. The authors concluded that: (1) ET and EPT containing natural progesterone did not increase BC risk whereas, (2) BC risk was increased in users of tibolone or EPT containing a synthetic progestogen, respectively, and that (3) MHT use early after onset of menopause was associated with an increased BC risk as compared to women who delay MHT beyond 1 or more years.