Background:Although there are solid findings regarding the detrimental effect of alcohol consumption, the existing evidence on the effect of other dietary factors on breast cancer (BC) risk is inconclusive. This study aimed to evaluate the association between dietary patterns and risk of BC in Spanish women, stratifying by menopausal status and tumour subtype, and to compare the results with those of Alternate Healthy Index (AHEI) and Alternate Mediterranean Diet Score (aMED).Methods:We recruited 1017 incident BC cases and 1017 matched healthy controls of similar age (±5 years) without a history of BC. The association between ‘a priori' and ‘a posteriori' developed dietary patterns and BC in general and according to menopausal status and intrinsic tumour subtypes (ER+/PR+ and HER2− HER2+ and ER−/PR− and HER2−) was evaluated using logistic and multinomial regression models.Results:Adherence to the Western dietary pattern was related to higher risk of BC (OR for the top vs the bottom quartile 1.46 (95% CI 1.06–2.01)), especially in premenopausal women (OR=1.75; 95% CI 1.14–2.67). In contrast, the Mediterranean pattern was related to a lower risk (OR for the top quartile vs the bottom quartile 0.56 (95% CI 0.40–0.79)). Although the deleterious effect of the Western pattern was similarly observed in all tumour subtypes, the protective effect of our Mediterranean pattern was stronger for triple-negative tumours (OR=0.32; 95% CI 0.15–0.66 and Pheterogeneity=0.04). No association was found between adherence to the Prudent pattern and BC risk. The associations between ‘a priori' indices and BC risk were less marked (OR for the top vs the bottom quartile of AHEI=0.69; 95% CI 0.51–0.94 and aMED=0.74; 95% CI 0.46–1.18)).Conclusions:Our results confirm the harmful effect of a Western diet on BC risk, and add new evidence on the benefits of a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, legumes, oily fish and vegetable oils for preventing all BC subtypes, and particularly triple-negative tumours.

PURPOSE Operable triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) have a higher risk of relapse than non-TNBCs with standard therapy. The GEICAM/2003-11_CIBOMA/2004-01 trial explored extended adjuvant capecitabine after completion of standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients were those with operable, node-positive—or node negative with tumor 1 cm or greater—TNBC, with prior anthracycline- and/or taxane-containing chemotherapy. After central confirmation of TNBC status by immunohistochemistry, patients were randomly assigned to either capecitabine or observation. Stratification factors included institution, prior taxane-based therapy, involved axillary lymph nodes, and centrally determined phenotype (basal v nonbasal, according to cytokeratins 5/6 and/or epidermal growth factor receptor positivity by immunohistochemistry). The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival (DFS) between both arms. RESULTS Eight hundred seventy-six patients were randomly assigned to capecitabine (n = 448) or observation (n = 428). Median age was 49 years, 55.9% were lymph node negative, 73.9% had a basal phenotype, and 67.5% received previous anthracyclines plus taxanes. Median length of follow-up was 7.3 years. DFS was not significantly prolonged with capecitabine versus observation [hazard ratio (HR), 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06; P = .136]. In a preplanned subgroup analysis, nonbasal patients seemed to derive benefit from the addition of capecitabine with a DFS HR of 0.53 versus 0.94 in those with basal phenotype (interaction test P = .0694) and an HR for overall survival of 0.42 versus 1.23 in basal phenotype (interaction test P = .0052). Tolerance of capecitabine was as expected, with 75.2% of patients completing the planned 8 cycles. CONCLUSION This study failed to show a statistically significant increase in DFS by adding extended capecitabine to standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC. In a preplanned subset analysis, patients with nonbasal phenotype seemed to obtain benefit with capecitabine, although this will require additional validation.

BackgroundAccording to the “World Cancer Research Fund” and the “American Institute of Cancer Research” (WCRF/AICR) one in four cancer cases could be prevented through a healthy diet, weight control and physical activity.ObjectiveTo explore the association between the WCRF/AICR recommendations and risk of breast cancer.MethodsDuring the period 2006 to 2011 we recruited 973 incident cases of breast cancer and 973 controls from 17 Spanish Regions. We constructed a score based on 9 of the WCRF/AICR recommendations for cancer prevention:: 1)Maintain adequate body weight; 2)Be physically active; 3)Limit the intake of high density foods; 4)Eat mostly plant foods; 5)Limit the intake of animal foods; 6)Limit alcohol intake; 7)Limit salt and salt preserved food intake; 8)Meet nutritional needs through diet; S1)Breastfeed infants exclusively up to 6 months. We explored its association with BC by menopausal status and by intrinsic tumor subtypes (ER+/PR+ & HER2-; HER2+; ER&PR-&HER2-) using conditional and multinomial logistic models respectively.ResultsOur results point to a linear association between the degree of noncompliance and breast cancer risk. Taking women who met 6 or more recommendations as reference, those meeting less than 3 showed a three-fold excess risk (OR=2.98(CI95%:1.59-5.59)), especially for postmenopausal women (OR=3.60(CI95%:1.24;10.47)) and ER+/PR+&HER2- (OR=3.60(CI95%:1.84;7.05)) and HER2+ (OR=4.23(CI95%:1.66;10.78)) tumors. Noncompliance of recommendations regarding the consumption of foods and drinks that promote weight gain in premenopausal women (OR=2.24(CI95%:1.18;4.28); p for interaction=0.014) and triple negative tumors (OR=2.93(CI95%:1.12-7.63)); the intake of plant foods in postmenopausal women (OR=2.35(CI95%:1.24;4.44)) and triple negative tumors (OR=3.48(CI95%:1.46-8.31)); and the alcohol consumption in ER+/PR+&HER2- tumors (OR=1.52 (CI95%:1.06-2.19)) showed the strongest associations.ConclusionBreast cancer prevention might be possible by following the “World Cancer Research Fund” and the “American Institute of Cancer Research” recommendations, even in settings like Spain, where a high percentage of women already comply with many of them.

Purpose Isolated locoregional recurrence (ILRR) predicts a high risk of developing breast cancer distant metastases and death. The Chemotherapy as Adjuvant for LOcally Recurrent breast cancer (CALOR) trial investigated the effectiveness of chemotherapy (CT) after local therapy for ILRR. A report at 5 years of median follow-up showed significant benefit of CT for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative ILRR, but additional follow-up was required in ER-positive ILRR. Patients and Methods CALOR was an open-label, randomized trial for patients with completely excised ILRR after unilateral breast cancer. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive CT or no CT and stratified by prior CT, hormone receptor status, and location of ILRR. Patients with hormone receptor-positive ILRR received adjuvant endocrine therapy. Radiation therapy was mandated for patients with microscopically involved margins, and anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 therapy was optional. End points were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival, and breast cancer-free interval. Results From August 2003 to January 2010, 162 patients were enrolled: 58 with ER-negative and 104 with ER-positive ILRR. At 9 years of median follow-up, 27 DFS events were observed in the ER-negative group and 40 in the ER-positive group. The hazard ratios (HR) of a DFS event were 0.29 (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.67; 10-year DFS, 70% v 34%, CT v no CT, respectively) in patients with ER-negative ILRR and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.57 to 2.00; 10-year DFS, 50% v 59%, respectively) in patients with ER-positive ILRR ( P = .013). HRs were 0.29 (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.67) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.47 to 1.85), respectively, for breast cancer-free interval ( P = .034) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.19 to 1.20) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.32 to 1.55), respectively, for overall survival ( P = .53). Results for the three end points were consistent in multivariable analyses adjusting for location of ILRR, prior CT, and interval from primary surgery. Conclusion The final analysis of CALOR confirms that CT benefits patients with resected ER-negative ILRR and does not support the use of CT for ER-positive ILRR.