More

Breast Cancer Risk May Be Cut With Hormone-Blocker Aromasin In Some Groups

MARILYNN MARCHIONE   06/ 4/11 04:26 PM ET   AP

CHICAGO — Millions of women at higher-than-usual risk of breast cancer have a new option for preventing the disease. Pfizer Inc.'s Aromasin cut the risk of developing breast cancer by more than half, without the side effects that have curbed enthusiasm for other prevention drugs, a major study found.

It was the first test in healthy women of newer hormone-blocking pills called aromatase inhibitors, sold as Arimidex, Femara and Aromasin, and in generic form. They're used now to prevent recurrences in breast cancer patients who are past menopause, and doctors have long suspected they may help prevent initial cases, too.

Prevention drugs aren't advised for women at average risk of breast cancer. Those at higher risk because of gene mutations or other reasons already have two choices for prevention – tamoxifen and raloxifene. But these drugs are unpopular because they carry small risks of uterine cancer, blood clots and other problems.

"Here's a third breast cancer prevention drug that may in fact be safer," said Dr. Allen Lichter, chief executive of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The study was discussed Saturday at the society's annual meeting in Chicago, along with another one that could change care for thousands of women each year with breast cancer that has spread to lymph nodes. It found that giving radiation to the armpit – not just the breast – after surgery significantly lowered the chances the cancer would come back.

The prevention study involved 4,560 women from the U.S., Canada, Spain and France. They had at least one risk factor – being 60 or older, a prior breast abnormality or pre-invasive cancer, or a high score on a scale that takes into account family history and other things.

They were given daily doses of exemestane, sold as Aromasin, or dummy pills. After about three years, there were 11 cases of invasive breast cancer among those on the drug versus 32 among the others. That worked out to a 65 percent reduction in risk for those on the drug – enough of a benefit that independent monitors decided all participants should be offered it.

Serious side effects, such as broken bones, high cholesterol and heart problems, were similar in both groups. Slightly more women on the drug reported hot flashes, fatigue, sweating, insomnia and joint pain, but quality-of-life scores were similar.

Earlier studies of aromatase inhibitors found they can cause bone loss, vaginal dryness, problems having sex, joint pain and muscle aches, so it will take longer study to see if these occur, Lichter said.

The study's leader, Dr. Paul Goss of Massachusetts General Hospital, figured that 26 women would need to take exemestane for five years to prevent a single case of breast cancer. Even though this study did not compare the drug to tamoxifen, previous studies suggested 96 women would need to take it for five years for each breast cancer prevented.

"This is a new option for prevention of invasive breast cancer for a wide pool of women," without the serious side effects of tamoxifen or raloxifene, Goss said.

Still, it could be a tough sell. These women have only about a 2 percent to 3 percent risk, individually, of being diagnosed with breast cancer in the next five years. A prevention pill that cuts that chance by 65 percent means they'll have about a 1 percent risk, said Dr. Eric Winer, breast cancer chief at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.

"Many women are not willing to take a daily medicine" for such a small risk, he said.

Brand-name aromatase inhibitors cost $340 to $420 a month, although some are available as generics. Aromasin's U.S. patent expired in April and will expire in Europe and Japan in July.

Results of the study were published online by the New England Journal of Medicine. The Canadian Cancer Society, Pfizer and the Avon Foundation helped pay for the study. Goss and some other researchers have been paid speakers for Pfizer and other cancer drug makers.

A second study at the conference focused on treating breast cancer that has spread to the lymph nodes. Standard treatment is surgery followed by chemotherapy or hormone therapy and several weeks of radiation to the breast. Women with large tumors or many cancerous nodes also get radiation to the armpit and lower neck, but doctors don't know if this helps women with smaller tumors or only one to three cancerous nodes – a common situation.

Dr. Timothy Whelan of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, led a study of 1,832 such women. All received standard treatment with radiation to the breast, and half also had radiation in the armpit and lower neck area.

After about five years, 90 percent of those given wider radiation were cancer-free versus 84 percent of the others, and there was a trend toward better survival with more radiation.

Lung inflammation and lymphedema – painful arm swelling caused by poor drainage – were more common with wider radiation, but doctors said these side effects were worth the benefit of fewer cancer recurrences.

The results are "potentially practice-changing" and will encourage doctors to offer wider radiation, Whelan said.

The National Cancer Institute and Canadian Cancer Society paid for the study.

Worldwide, about 1.3 million women are diagnosed with breast cancer each year and nearly 500,000 women die of the disease. Last year in the United States, there were about 207,000 new cases and 40,000 deaths from breast cancer.

___

Online:

Breast cancer: http://bit.ly/iIrUxt

Breast cancer risk calculator: http://cancer.gov/bcrisktool

___

Marilynn Marchione can be followed at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTHY LIVING

CHICAGO — Millions of women at higher-than-usual risk of breast cancer have a new option for preventing the disease. Pfizer Inc.'s Aromasin cut the risk of developing breast cancer by more than ...
CHICAGO — Millions of women at higher-than-usual risk of breast cancer have a new option for preventing the disease. Pfizer Inc.'s Aromasin cut the risk of developing breast cancer by more than ...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 60
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
camanokat
Outta this world
04:45 AM on 06/05/2011
Why are you editing a link that claims a cure of cancer?
06:15 AM on 06/05/2011
They are not, the one part way down works perfectly are you sure it is not your browser?
photo
camanokat
Outta this world
02:37 PM on 06/05/2011
Could be. I use Firefox now because IE was awful.
06:19 AM on 06/05/2011
If I had a £1 or $1 for every link to a cure for cancer I have seen I would be rather rich. JFK said the USA would go to the moon and cure cancer by the end of the decade, guess which of the two turned out to be more difficult. Why because going to the moon required only what was already known.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Trittydi
Special on pap smears at Walgreen's this week ....
03:21 AM on 06/05/2011
New cancer study over at Grassroots Health - a nonprofit advocacy agency for Vitamin D3. VD3 can prevent or cure MOST cancers - but it takes a lot of it.
www.grassrootshealth.net

More on the same study:
Higher VD3 Intake Needed to Reduce Cancer Risk:
http://health.ucsd.edu/news/2011/02-22-vitamin-D-cancer-risk.htm

The medical industry and big pharma want you to think that taking large amounts of VD3 can harm you - it can't. And they REALLY don't want people to know that.

Water is More Toxic Than VD3 - Dr. Cannell of the Vitamin D Council
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oc2Od7Yytk

Dr. Prendergast - Man with Lung Cancer Given Six Weeks to Live Cured with VD3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PYsXQ16Ztg

Vitamin D conspiracy leads straight to Big Pharma:
http://www.healthiertalk.com/vitamin-d-conspiracy-leads-straight-big-pharma-3396

Vitamin D Report Panelist Has Ties to Big Pharma:
http://www.anh-usa.org/action-alert-is-the-institute-of-medicine-in-bed-with-big-pharma/

Betrayal of a Nation: Why U.S. health authorities are keeping you vitamin D deficient and who stands to gain:
http://www.naturalnews.com/032202_vitamin_D_deficiency_disease.html

Vitamin D qualified cancer health claim submission being readied:
http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Regulation/Vitamin-D-qualified-cancer-health-claim-submission-being-readied

Understanding VD3 --- VD is Unique:
http://www.wholefoodsmagazineonline.com/columns/vitamin-connection/new-research-vitamin-d-part-1-vitamin-d-unique
*
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Trittydi
Special on pap smears at Walgreen's this week ....
03:31 AM on 06/05/2011
VD3 is cheap and readily available on the internet. We buy it in 5,000, and 10,000 tablets. We also buy it in 50,000 IU capsuls. You can also buy it in 100,000 IU capsules. And it is free from the sun. Individual dosage varies greatly - the study listed above goes over the amounts that are preventative.

Now - treating an existing cancer is a whole other story. I have one link on this topic above. In addition I'll only say that VD3 is a potential treatment and you should research it carefully to find your way. Current numbers are that VD3 can prevent and even cure 90% of 78% of all cancers.

Scientists know that all cancer patients with higher blood serum levels have better outcomes. VD3 is a unique steroid hormone system that begins in the skin - and it regulates the immune system.

Resources to learn more are Grassroots health mentioned above, and the Vitamin D Council at: www.vitamindcouncil.org.
*
04:24 AM on 06/05/2011
With vitamin d it is necessary to think of it the correct way round. It is a shortage of vitamin d that is bad for you, not that vitamin d is good. Why this way round, because having sufficient vitamin d is the natural state, being short of it is not. The taking of supplements puts you back where your ancestors who lived outside were, it is not about overloading your body with excessive amounts. The amounts needed to return the body to its natural state are much higher than those recommended by the IOM.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Comicoffee
real analysis paired with a hefty dose of sarcasm
12:11 PM on 06/05/2011
It's like this with a lot of things--natural substances can't be patented, so there's far less money to be made. Consequently, pharma companies will often take a natural substance that was fine on its own, and add some kind of chemical compound to it in order to claim it as "new" and therefore patentable. Women's hormone replacement has been like this for years. Natural progesterone found in yams and some other plants is bioidentical, but instead, the companies are pushing lab-made progestins, created from mare's urine. Progestins have all sorts of side effects, including higher rates of breast cancer, but they're extremely profitable for the pharma companies, so don't expect any changes to the status quo any time soon.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Trittydi
Special on pap smears at Walgreen's this week ....
12:19 AM on 06/06/2011
They could patent it - but aren't allowed to patent vitamins - or that's what I read.
*
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Trittydi
Special on pap smears at Walgreen's this week ....
01:50 AM on 06/06/2011
And yes - they're working furiously to invent new variations of it. One such is VD2 - a non-human form which studies show is 87% less effective. So now they're going after VD3.

In the meantime it is free from the sun (if your shadow is shorter than you are) - and it is cheap and readily available on the internet.
*
photo
Ma Lucille
there is a crack ~ that's how the Light gets in
03:03 AM on 06/05/2011
ScienceDaily (Jan. 7, 2008) — A new study by two York University researchers estimates the U.S. pharmaceutical industry spends almost twice as much on promotion as it does on research and development, contrary to the industry’s claim.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080105140107.htm
OverseasVet
Stationed not deployed
03:29 AM on 06/05/2011
OMG, a company making a profit from the cancer fighting drug they developed. Those bad bad men and women. /s
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anthonytaurus
don't f&f me. you dont' know what I'll say next
11:31 AM on 06/05/2011
If anything that speaks more to the idea that these drugs do more harm than good as chemical after chemical is churned out and approved. Some of these "medications" do nothing other than kill you. If they spent more on R
photo
asmir
Cancer Awareness, We Must Find a Cure!
02:06 AM on 06/05/2011
big pharma nothing but pigs!
http://c212747.r47.cf1.rackcdn.com/DrugCompaniesExposedLrg.jpg
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Trittydi
Special on pap smears at Walgreen's this week ....
03:24 AM on 06/05/2011
They're worse than that. See my link above.
*
OverseasVet
Stationed not deployed
03:31 AM on 06/05/2011
Tinfoil hats go after their favorite strawman.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anthonytaurus
don't f&f me. you dont' know what I'll say next
12:57 AM on 06/05/2011
That's more expensive than an ounce of marijuana per month, a natural cancer fighting non-drug. And, I live in NYC. It's even cheaper when grown at home. Unfortunately, the US doesn't allow marijuana studies, controlled by the DEA (which is weird; why is a police agency in control of potential medical studies?). Fortunately, just about every other country on this planet does allow marijuana studies. Do a search. Last I checked there were some 11,000 studies from around the world proving marijuana's medical utility.

But, while "we" continue to ignore cheap and easy source of medicine, big pharmaceuticals get to charge you a few hundred a month and more for various man-made chemicals, some of which don't even work.

Good job Americans. Keep ignoring the world around you so these people can get rich off your blood. It's sad that the only way to maintain your health and sanity in this nation is by being a criminal.
photo
Ma Lucille
there is a crack ~ that's how the Light gets in
02:33 AM on 06/05/2011
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened". - Winston Churchill

http://washingtonindependent.com/110168/documents-reveal-inter-agency-politicking-that-led-to-changes-to-marijuana-entry-in-federal-cancer-treatment-database
OverseasVet
Stationed not deployed
03:45 AM on 06/05/2011
The legalization fight should not be using false claims of cancer cures, insincere economy concern, or big pharma strawman arguments. Stick to proven safety compared to the legal alternatives, the failed war on drugs and personal freedom and responsibility.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anthonytaurus
don't f&f me. you dont' know what I'll say next
05:11 AM on 06/05/2011
You say "claims of cancer cures" as if claims aren't true. I beg you to look at the information our government is posting http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional. Please, take note of the "antitummor effects portion of the Laboratory/Animal/Preclinical Studies section. It may not be a cure but it's more hope for a cure or even a safer treatment than bombarding ourselves with radiation. And there are thousands of other studies that from nations around the world that point to marijuana's anti-cancer potential.

I won't argue about the economy and outside forces.

As far as "safety compared to the legal alternatives", that's a war that looks more like it's going to backfire with the religious right willing to switch out wine for grape juice as the blood of Jesus. Of course it won't happen but it's not helping the marijuana movement much.

The war on drugs has failed for whom? There's a reason it's still alive and kicking. Someone's getting paid.

If I can put on the hat of a CEO of some multinational, I'd tell you the truth.. Your "personal freedom" costs me money. Your "responsibility" is to do what I tell you.
photo
camanokat
Outta this world
04:36 AM on 06/05/2011
About the tria ( phase 2) of DCA. Five palliative patients with primary GBM were entered into a phase II trial. Three had not responded to several chemotherapies; two were newly diagnosed. After surgical removal of tumor mass, they were treated with DCA and chemotherapy. Of the five patients tested, one died after three months. The surviving four were followed for 15 months.

Note that it is part of a complete treatment not used on its own.
11:45 PM on 06/04/2011
God bless and give comfort to all those fighting cancer.
11:35 PM on 06/04/2011
Great news on fighting cancer. It's killing allmost my whole family. I hate cancer. Keep up the fight
11:02 PM on 06/04/2011
"Hey, do you know how to reduce chances of getting cancer from drugs? Use more drugs!"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:51 PM on 06/04/2011
I was diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at 41 and after surgery, I am now a 7 year survivor. Aromasin was brand new at the time so I had to take Tamoxifen for the first six months of my post-surgery treatment and then I was put on Aromasin. Immediately, it relieved the awful side effects of Tamoxifen. I truly believe it has been a life giver for the last 10 years. I am so glad to see this study and so thankful to my doctor for being so prescient when few doctors even knew about this new drug.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joyf1
Glad I live on an island.
11:27 PM on 06/04/2011
Keep fighting the fight. Wonderful news.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ljkcan
Yes, I am prone to spelling errors
11:57 PM on 06/04/2011
I hope you are forever free of cancer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carol Stephens Briers
What has happened to my country?
10:21 PM on 06/04/2011
I took Tamoxifen for 4 years after my breast cancer, then started having some serious side effect. I stopped taking it, but we need a good replacement drug that doesn't have the major side effects!
photo
asmir
Cancer Awareness, We Must Find a Cure!
09:27 PM on 06/04/2011
Worldwide, about 1.3 million women are diagnosed with breast cancer each year and nearly 500,000 women die of the disease. Last year in the United States, there were about 207,000 new cases and 40,000 deaths from breast cancer.

Pharma has drugs shelved that could help cure cancer but this would hurt their profits! Sickening!
10:05 PM on 06/04/2011
Got any proof of that?

oh - just more conspiracy nonsense
photo
asmir
Cancer Awareness, We Must Find a Cure!
12:07 AM on 06/05/2011
read some of the thousands of replies on this article and you see how many feel!

http://hubpages.com/hub/Scientists_cure_cancer__but_no_one_takes_notice
01:15 AM on 06/05/2011
Death is no conspiracy
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chickenNgravy
10:22 PM on 06/04/2011
Is that right? You mean GP physicians, surgeons and oncologists are all in with big Pharma to keep the pizza pie rollin in? It's a big conspiracy of unethical medical providers who are strapped on the cash cow.

When all a person has to do is go to Mexico and get an infusion of Apricot Extract.

Ridiculous!
11:42 PM on 06/04/2011
My mom fell for that Mexican con game. Befor she died of cancer. Nothing stood cancer. It takes all you have ,then it kills you. Quote from her hospice nerse. R I p. Mom
01:17 AM on 06/05/2011
Or maybe swing a dead chicken over your head. That might do it. Geeeez