Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Breast Cancer in Young Women (Premenopausal Breast Cancer)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Disease

  • 1650 Accesses

Abstract

Breast cancer in women of childbearing age (premenopausal breast cancer) accounts for almost one-quarter of all breast cancer diagnoses in the United States. Advances in diagnosis and treatment have led to improved outcomes in this population that echo those in the postmenopausal population. Despite these advances, premenopausal women with breast cancer still show a significantly worse prognosis than their postmenopausal counterparts. Differences in presentation, tumor phenotype, and options for therapy may explain some of the difference in outcome. However, research is underway to identify the inherent differences that lead to differential outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, Bassett LW, Berry D, Bland KI, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(17):3628–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Leal CB, Schmitt FC, Bento MJ, Maia NC, Lopes CS. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Histologic categorization and its relationship to ploidy and immunohistochemical expression of hormone receptors, p53, and c-<I>erb</I>B-2 protein. Cancer. 1995;75(8):2123–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith BD, Jiang J, McLaughlin SS, Hurria A, Smith GL, Giordano SH, et al. Improvement in breast cancer outcomes over time: are older women missing out? J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(35):4647–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fredholm H, Eaker S, Frisell J, Holmberg L, Fredriksson I, Lindman H. Breast cancer in young women: poor survival despite intensive treatment. PLoS One. 2009;4(11):e7695.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Crowe Jr JP, Gordon NH, Shenk RR, Zollinger Jr RM, Brumberg DJ, Shuck JM. Age does not predict breast cancer outcome. Arch Surg. 1994;129(5):483–7; discussion 7–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nixon AJ, Neuberg D, Hayes DF, Gelman R, Connolly JL, Schnitt S, et al. Relationship of patient age to pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis for patients with stage I or II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12(5):888–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. de la Rochefordiere A, Asselain B. Age as prognostic factor in premenopausal breast carcinoma. Lancet. 1993;341(8852):1039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yıldırım E, Dalgıç T, Berberoğlu U. Prognostic significance of young age in breast cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2000;74(4):267–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up: a randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(5_Part_1):305–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, Johns L, Waller M, Bobrow L. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years’ follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;368(9552):2053–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Calonge NPD, DeWitt TG, Dietrich AJ, Gregory KD, Grossman D, Isham G, et al. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Checka CM, Chun JE, Schnabel FR, Lee JToth H. The relationship of mammographic density and age: implications for breast cancer screening. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(3):W292–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Boyd N, Martin L, Chavez S, Gunasekara A, Salleh A, Melnichouk O, et al. Breast-tissue composition and other risk factors for breast cancer in young women: a cross-sectional study. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(6):569–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15(6):1159–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis 2013 (cited 9 Apr 2013). Available from: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast-screening.pdf.

  16. Feig S. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening. Radiol Clin North Am. 2010;48(5):879–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Le-Petross HT, Whitman GJ, Atchley DP, Yuan Y, Gutierrez-Barrera A, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Effectiveness of alternating mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for screening women with deleterious BRCA mutations at high risk of breast cancer. Cancer. 2011;117(17):3900–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lowry KP, Lee JM, Kong CY, McMahon PM, Gilmore ME, Cott Chubiz JE, et al. Annual screening strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: a comparative effectiveness analysis. Cancer. 2012;118(8):2021–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Passaperuma K, Warner E, Causer PA, Hill KA, Messner S, Wong JW, et al. Long-term results of screening with magnetic resonance imaging in women with BRCA mutations. Br J Cancer. 2012;107(1):24–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Pavic D, Koomen MA, Kuzmiak CM, Lee YH, Pisano ED. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2004;3(6):527–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Daniel BL, Ikeda DM, Stockdale FE, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 2006;295(20):2374–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Podo F, Sardanelli F, Canese R, D’Agnolo G, Natali PG, Crecco M, et al. The Italian multi-centre project on evaluation of MRI and other imaging modalities in early detection of breast cancer in subjects at high genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2002;21(3 Suppl):115–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F, Manoukian S, Bergonzi S, Trecate G, et al. Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk italian 1 study): final results. Invest Radiol. 2011;46(2):94–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Warner E. Impact of MRI surveillance and breast cancer detection in young women with BRCA mutations. Ann Oncol. 2011;22 Suppl 1:i44–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, Catzavelos GC, Di Prospero LS, Yaffe MJ, et al. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(15):3524–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, Causer PA, Zubovits JT, Jong RA, et al. Surveillance of brca1 and brca2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004;292(11):1317–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Berg W, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, Jong RA, Pisano ED, Barr RG, et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening mri to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA. 2012;307(13):1394–404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S, Arand B, Bieling H, König R, et al. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1450–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kuhl CK, Kuhn W, Schild H. Management of women at high risk for breast cancer: new imaging beyond mammography. Breast. 2005;14(6):480–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Brandt KR, Craig D, Hoskins TL, Henrichsen TL, Bendel EC, Brandt SR, Mandrekar J. Can digital breast tomosynthesis replace conventional diagnostic mammography views for screening recalls without calcifications? A comparison study in a simulated clinical setting. Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(2):291–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, Eben EB, Ekseth U, Haakenaasen U, et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology. 2013;267(1):47–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sun Y, Wei W, Yang H-W, Liu J-L. Clinical usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality to mammography for diagnosis of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(3):450–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Miles RC, Gullerud RE, Lohse CM, Jakub JW, Degnim AC, Boughey JC. Local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery: multivariable analysis of risk factors and the impact of young age. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(4):1153–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Elkhuizen PH, van de Vijver MJ, Hermans J, Zonderland HM, van de Velde CJ, Leer JW. Local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy for invasive breast cancer: high incidence in young patients and association with poor survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;40(4):859–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, Davies C, Elphinstone P, Evans E, Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dragun AE, Pan J, Riley EC, Kruse B, Wilson MR, Rai S, et al. Increasing use of elective mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic surgery among breast conservation candidates: a 14-year report from a comprehensive cancer center. Am J Clin Oncol. 2013;36(4):375–80.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lee MC, Rogers K, Griffith K, Diehl KA, Breslin TM, Cimmino VM, et al. Determinants of breast conservation rates: reasons for mastectomy at a comprehensive cancer center. Breast J. 2009;15(1):34–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McGuire KP, Santillan AA, Kaur P, Meade T, Parbhoo J, Mathias M, et al. Are mastectomies on the rise? A 13-year trend analysis of the selection of mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy in 5865 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(10):2682–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Feigelson HS, James TA, Single RM, Onitilo AA, Aiello Bowles EJ, Barney T, et al. Factors associated with the frequency of initial total mastectomy: results of a multi-institutional study. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(5):966–75.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Bedrosian I, Hu C-Y, Chang GJ. Population-based study of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival outcomes of breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(6):401–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Graves K, Peshkin B, Halbert C, DeMarco T, Isaacs C, Schwartz M. Predictors and outcomes of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among breast cancer survivors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;104(3):321–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Howard-McNatt M, Schroll RW, Hurt GJ, Levine EA. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer patients who test negative for BRCA mutations. Am J Surg. 2011;202(3):298–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Stucky CC, Gray RJ, Wasif N, Dueck AC, Pockaj BA. Increase in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: echoes of a bygone era? Surgical trends for unilateral breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17 Suppl 3:330–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: a trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(33):5203–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zendejas B, Moriarty JP, O’Byrne J, Degnim AC, Farley DR, Boughey JC. Cost-effectiveness of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy versus routine surveillance in patients with unilateral breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(22):2993–3000.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Robson ME, Chappuis PO, Satagopan J, Wong N, Boyd J, Goffin JR, et al. A combined analysis of outcome following breast cancer: differences in survival based on BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation status and administration of adjuvant treatment. Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6(1):R8–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Evans DG, Ingham S, Baildam A, Ross G, Lalloo F, Buchan I, et al. Contralateral mastectomy improves survival in women with BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140(1):135–42.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Giuliano AE, Chung AP. Long-term follow-up confirms the oncologic safety of sentinel node biopsy without axillary dissection in node-negative breast cancer patients. Ann Surg. 2010;251(4):601–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, Morton DL, Evans SW, Krasne DL. Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg. 1995;222(3):394–9; discussion 9-401.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Ashikaga T, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(10):881–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305(6):569–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz P, Leitch AM, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2010;252(3):426–32; discussion 32–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Cardoso F, Loibl S, Pagani O, Graziottin A, Panizza P, Martincich L, et al. The European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists recommendations for the management of young women with breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(18):3355–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, Rose C, Andersson M, Bach F, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b Trial. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(14):949–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Overgaard M, Jensen MB, Overgaard J, Hansen PS, Rose C, Andersson M, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk postmenopausal breast-cancer patients given adjuvant tamoxifen: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group DBCG 82c randomised trial. Lancet. 1999;353(9165):1641–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mathews T, Hamiltom BE. Delayed childbearing: more women are having their first child later in life, NCHS data brief, no 21. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Minton SE, Munster PN. Chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea and fertility in women undergoing adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Cancer Control. 2002;9(6):466–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Wallace WH, Kelsey TW. Human ovarian reserve from conception to the menopause. PLoS One. 2010;5(1):e8772.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Pentheroudakis G, Pavlidis N, Castiglione M. Cancer, fertility and pregnancy: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2009;20 Suppl 4:178–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Loren AW, Mangu PB, Beck LN, Brennan L, Magdalinski AJ, Partridge AH, et al. Fertility preservation for patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(19):2500–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Combelles CM, Chateau G. The use of immature oocytes in the fertility preservation of cancer patients: current promises and challenges. Int J Dev Biol. 2012;56(10–12):919–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Azim AA, Costantini-Ferrando M, Oktay K. Safety of fertility preservation by ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins in patients with breast cancer: a prospective controlled study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(16):2630–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Oktay K. Fertility preservation in women with breast cancer. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2010;53(4):753–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Chung K, Donnez J, Ginsburg E, Meirow D. Emergency IVF versus ovarian tissue cryopreservation: decision making in fertility preservation for female cancer patients. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(6):1534–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Donnez J, Dolmans MM, Pellicer A, Diaz-Garcia C, Sanchez Serrano M, Schmidt KT, et al. Restoration of ovarian activity and pregnancy after transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue: a review of 60 cases of reimplantation. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(6):1503–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Bouchlariotou S, Tsikouras P, Benjamin R, Neulen J. Fertility sparing in cancer patients. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2012;21(4):282–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Del Mastro L. Temporary ovarian suppression with goserelin and ovarian function protection in patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(24):3339–40; author reply 41–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kim SS, Lee JR, Jee BC, Suh CS, Kim SH, Ting A, et al. Use of hormonal protection for chemotherapy-induced gonadotoxicity. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2010;53(4):740–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Lee MC, Gray J, Han HS, Plosker S. Fertility and reproductive considerations in premenopausal patients with breast cancer. Cancer Control. 2010;17(3):162–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Northouse LL. Breast cancer in younger women: effects on interpersonal and family relations. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1994;16:183–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Alder J, Zanetti R, Wight E, Urech C, Fink N, Bitzer J. Sexual dysfunction after premenopausal stage I and II breast cancer: do androgens play a role? J Sex Med. 2008;5(8):1898–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Al-Baghdadi O, Ewies AA. Topical estrogen therapy in the management of postmenopausal vaginal atrophy: an up-to-date overview. Climacteric. 2009;12(2):91–105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Melisko ME, Goldman M, Rugo HS. Amelioration of sexual adverse effects in the early breast cancer patient. J Cancer Surviv. 2010;4(3):247–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Sinha A, Ewies AA. Non-hormonal topical treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy: an up-to-date overview. Climacteric. 2013;16(3):305–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Lindsay R, Hart DM, Aitken JM, MacDonald EB, Anderson JB, Clarke AC. Long-term prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis by oestrogen. Evidence for an increased bone mass after delayed onset of oestrogen treatment. Lancet. 1976;1(7968):1038–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Abdalla HI, Hart DM, Lindsay R, Leggate I, Hooke A. Prevention of bone mineral loss in postmenopausal women by norethisterone. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;66(6):789–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Powles TJ, Hickish T, Kanis JA, Tidy A, Ashley S. Effect of tamoxifen on bone mineral density measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in healthy premenopausal and postmenopausal women. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(1):78–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Shapiro C, Halabi S, Gibson G, et al. CALGB 78909: phase III trial of intravenous zoledronic acid in the prevention of bone loss in localized breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2005;3(2):105–6.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Kim JE, Ahn JH, Jung KH, Kim SB, Kim HJ, Lee KS, et al. Zoledronic acid prevents bone loss in premenopausal women with early breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy: a phase III trial of the Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG-BR06-01). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;125(1):99–106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Hershman DL, McMahon DJ, Crew KD, Cremers S, Irani D, Cucchiara G, et al. Zoledronic acid prevents bone loss in premenopausal women undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(29):4739–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Hershman DL, McMahon DJ, Crew KD, Shao T, Cremers S, Brafman L, et al. Prevention of bone loss by zoledronic acid in premenopausal women undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy persist up to one year following discontinuing treatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(2):559–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Marinovich ML, Mamounas E. Meta-analysis of the association of breast cancer subtype and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(18):3342–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Colleoni M, Rotmensz N, Robertson C, Orlando L, Viale G, Renne G, et al. Very young women (<35 years) with operable breast cancer: features of disease at presentation. Ann Oncol. 2002;13(2):273–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Huober J, von Minckwitz G, Denkert C, Tesch H, Weiss E, Zahm DM, et al. Effect of neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy in different biological breast cancer phenotypes: overall results from the GeparTrio study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;124(1):133–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1687–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Griggs JJ, Somerfield MR, Anderson H, Henry NL, Hudis CA, Khatcheressian JL, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology endorsement of the cancer care Ontario practice guideline on adjuvant ovarian ablation in the treatment of premenopausal women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(29):3939–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gnant M, Mlineritsch B, Stoeger H, Luschin-Ebengreuth G, Heck D, Menzel C, et al. Adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 62-month follow-up from the ABCSG-12 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):631–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Love RR, Duc NB, Allred DC, Binh NC, Dinh NV, Kha NN, et al. Oophorectomy and tamoxifen adjuvant therapy in premenopausal Vietnamese and Chinese women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(10):2559–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Love RR, Duc NB, Dinh NV, Shen TZ, Havighurst TC, Allred DC, et al. Mastectomy and oophorectomy by menstrual cycle phase in women with operable breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(9):662–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ellis MJ, Suman VJ, Hoog J, Lin L, Snider J, Prat A, et al. Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype – ACOSOG Z1031. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(17):2342–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Takei H, Kurosumi M, Yoshida T, Hayashi Y, Higuchi T, Uchida S, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy of breast cancer: which patients would benefit and what are the advantages? Breast Cancer. 2011;18(2):85–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Klijn JG, Beex LV, Mauriac L, van Zijl JA, Veyret C, Wildiers J, et al. Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen in premenopausal metastatic breast cancer: a randomized study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(11):903–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Torrisi R, Bagnardi V, Pruneri G, Ghisini R, Bottiglieri L, Magni E, et al. Antitumour and biological effects of letrozole and GnRH analogue as primary therapy in premenopausal women with ER and PgR positive locally advanced operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2007;97(6):802–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Masuda N, Sagara Y, Kinoshita T, Iwata H, Nakamura S, Yanagita Y, et al. Neoadjuvant anastrozole versus tamoxifen in patients receiving goserelin for premenopausal breast cancer (STAGE): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(4):345–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, Wolmark N. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen for lymph node-negative breast cancer: updated findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-14 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(9):684–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, DeCillis A, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N, et al. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes and estrogen receptor-positive tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88(21):1529–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, Gray R, Arriagada R, Raina V, et al. Long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;381(9869):805–16.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, Robert NJ, Muss HB, Piccart MJ, et al. Efficacy of letrozole extended adjuvant therapy according to estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status of the primary tumor: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group MA.17. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(15):2006–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of North Carolina, 170 Manning Dr., CB#7203, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Kandace P. McGuire MD, FACS

Authors
  1. Kandace P. McGuire MD, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kandace P. McGuire MD, FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Inst of Oncology,Ist Tıp Fak, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Adnan Aydiner

  2. General Surgery, Istanbul Univ Istanbul Fac of Med, Istanbul, Turkey

    Abdullah İgci

  3. Breast Surgery,, Magee-Womens Hospital, Pittsburg, USA

    Atilla Soran

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McGuire, K.P. (2016). Breast Cancer in Young Women (Premenopausal Breast Cancer). In: Aydiner, A., İgci, A., Soran, A. (eds) Breast Disease. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26012-9_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26012-9_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26010-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26012-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation