Safety of pregnancy after primary breast carcinoma in young women: a meta-analysis to overcome bias of healthy mother effect studies.

Onkologkliniken Sörmland, Mälarsjukhuset, Central Hospital of Eskilstuna, Eskilstuna, Sweden.
Obstetrical & gynecological survey (Impact Factor: 2.36). 12/2010; 65(12):786-93. DOI: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e31821285bf
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT An increased number of women are expected to conceive after the diagnosis of early breast cancer. Most physicians recommend that pregnancy be delayed by 2 to 3 years after diagnosis of early breast cancer, but this recommendation is based on data from trials with small patient cohorts. Furthermore, a healthy mother effect (HME) selection bias may be operative in most of these studies, because women undergoing childbearing after treatment were healthier when compared with the control group.
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials corrected for HME bias so as to assess the effect of pregnancy (at least 10 months after diagnosis) versus no pregnancy on overall survival of primary breast cancer patients less than 45 years.
We searched MEDLINE and Thomson Reuters (ISI) Web of Knowledge for eligible studies. From each study we extracted the relative hazard ratio or, if not provided, all the necessary data to impute it. In cases where the duration from diagnosis to pregnancy was not reported, we extracted relevant data to estimate it.
Our electronic search strategy yielded 1623 hits pertaining to 20 potentially eligible studies involving 49,370 premenopausal breast cancer patients. Ten studies were eligible after considering HME potential bias in matching controls. Among these, 9 studies (pregnant 1089, matched-controls 13051) contained data appropriate for analysis. Overall survival was statistically higher among patients who became pregnant compared to controls: fixed effect model estimated pooled hazard ratio for death 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.62). No study heterogeneity was observed: Q = 10.4, P = 0.17; I(2) = 48%.
The pooled available evidence indicates that in early breast cancer patients, pregnancy that occurs at least 10 months after diagnosis does not jeopardize prognosis and may actually confer significant survival benefit.
Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians.
After completing this CME activity, physicians should be better able to assess the effect pregnancy has on long-term survival in primary breast cancer patients under age 45; counsel patients on the safety of pregnancy after breast cancer diagnosis and treatment; and interpret how pregnancy may be associated with improved breast cancer survival.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An increasing number of young women are delaying childbearing; hence, more are diagnosed with breast cancer (bca) before having a family. No clear recommendations are currently available for counselling such a population on the safety of carrying a pregnancy during bca or becoming pregnant after treatment for bca. Using a Web-based search of PubMed we reviewed the recent literature about bca and pregnancy. Our objective was to report outcomes for patients diagnosed with bca during pregnancy, comparing them with outcomes for non-pregnant women, and to evaluate prognosis in women diagnosed with and treated for bca who subsequently became pregnant. "Pregnancy and bca" should be divided into two entities. Pregnancy-associated bca tends to be more aggressive and advanced in stage at diagnosis than bca in control groups; hence, it has a poorer prognosis. With respect to pregnancy after bca, there is, despite the bias in reported studies and meta-analyses, no clear evidence for a different or worse disease outcome in bca patients who become pregnant after treatment compared with those who do not. Pregnancy-associated bca should be treated as aggressively as and according to the standards applicable in nonpregnant women; pregnancy after bca does not jeopardize outcome. The guidelines addressing risks connected to pregnancy and bca lack a high level of evidence for better counselling young women about pregnancy considerations and preventing unnecessary abortions. Ideally, evidence from large prospective randomized trials would set better guidelines, and yet the complexity of such studies limits their feasibility.
    Current Oncology 03/2015; 22(Suppl 1):S8-S18. DOI:10.3747/co.22.2338 · 1.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the incidence of retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in pregnant women and in the subpopulation of pregnant women with pre-eclampsia/eclampsia compared to that in the age-matched general female population to determine if there is increased risk of RVO in pregnancy. Nationwide population-based retrospective study using data entered into the Korean national health claims database from 2007 to 2011. Of the incident RVO cases in the database, RVO cases that occurred during the pregnancy-associated period, which spanned a 52-week period from 40-weeks-before to 12-weeks-after childbirth, were identified. Of these cases, the presence of pre-eclampsia/eclampsia was determined. The standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of RVO in the general pregnant population and in the pregnant population with pre-eclampsia/eclampsia were determined with respect to the age-matched general female population. Pregnancy-related RVO was identified in 33 cases from the 1.8 million women who experience childbirth during the study period, while the expected number of cases calculated by the direct standardization to the age-matched general population was 113. Of the 33 patients, 12 patients (36.4%) had pre-eclampsia or eclampsia. The SIR for the general pregnant population in reference to the age-matched general female population was 0.29 (95% CI, 0.20-0.41). In contrast, the SIR for the pregnant population with pre-eclampsia/eclampsia in reference to the age-matched general female population and the age-matched general pregnant population was 67.50 (95% CI, 34.88-117.92) and 246.50 (95% CI, 127.37-430.59), respectively. The results suggest that pre-eclampsia/eclampsia is a risk factor for RVO, while pregnancy itself may not be a risk factor for RVO.
    PLoS ONE 03/2015; 10(3):e0120067. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0120067 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the increases in 5-year cancer survival and recent advances in fertility preserving technologies, an increasing number of women with cancer are presenting for discussion of fertility preserving options. This review will summarize the risk of infertility secondary to cancer treatment, available treatment options for fertility preservation, and techniques to reduce future risks for patients. Concerns that will be addressed include the risk of the medications and procedures, the potential delay in cancer treatment, likelihood of pregnancy complications, as well as the impact of future pregnancy on the recurrence risk of cancer. Recent advances in oocyte cryopreservation and ovarian stimulation protocols will be discussed. Healthcare providers need to be informed of available treatment options including the risks, advantages, and disadvantages of fertility preserving options to properly counsel patients.
    Obstetrics and Gynecology International 03/2012; 2012:953937. DOI:10.1155/2012/953937