CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » Breast Cancer

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 15 No. 1
Pages: 1  2  
Next
REVIEW ARTICLE 

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy

By Karin Gwyn, MD, MSC1, Richard Theriault, DO, MBA2 | January 1, 2001
1Medical Oncology Fellow 2Professor, Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

ABSTRACT: The care of a pregnant breast cancer patient is a challenging clinical situation that historically has placed the welfare of the mother in conflict with that of the fetus. For the woman in this situation, the emotions usually associated with pregnancy can be overshadowed by the emotions aroused by a diagnosis of breast cancer and its subsequent treatment. The majority of published information on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy has consisted of retrospective chart reviews, case reports, and anecdotes. There is a paucity of published data from the prospective study of women who are pregnant at the time of their breast cancer diagnosis. This review will endeavor to address the diagnosis, staging, and subsequent treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy. The limited information available for this group of women on the outcomes of labor, delivery, and neonatal health will also be reviewed. This review will not specifically address pregnancy that occurs after diagnosis and subsequent treatment for breast cancer. However, some data, particularly those of an epidemiologic nature, address breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy or within the year following delivery. [ONCOLOGY 15(1):39-51, 2001]

Introduction

Although breast cancer is one of the most common cancers associated with pregnancy, it is still an uncommon event, with estimates ranging from 1 in 3,000 to 3 in 10,000 deliveries to women with breast cancer.[1-4] A review of 32 series of reports on pregnancy-associated breast cancer published between 1937 and 1982 estimated that 0.2% to 3.8% of all breast cancers coincided with pregnancy or lactation.[5] The prevalence of pregnancy at diagnosis of breast cancer has been reported to be approximately 1.5% in a large Canadian series of consecutive and unselected patients with breast cancer.[6]

In women 30 years of age or younger, the incidence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer may be quite high, as two case series—one from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and the other from M. D. Anderson Cancer Center—reported prevalences of 9.7% and 25.6%, respectively.[7,8] As more women delay childbearing, it has been postulated that the incidence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer will parallel the increased incidence of breast cancer with age.[9,10]

Diagnosis

The pregnant breast cancer patient usually presents with a mass or thickening in her breast.[11] The physiologic changes that occur in the pregnant woman’s breast—the engorgement and hypertrophy—are believed to contribute to the delay in diagnosis of a breast mass that is common in this unique group of patients.

A number of studies have documented delays of 3 months or longer in pregnant or lactating women.[12,13] In one study, patient-related factors created a 6- vs 4-month delay when pregnant and nonpregnant breast cancer patients were compared. Physician-related factors were responsible for 3- vs 2-month delays, respectively.[14]

Socioeconomic status, cultural background, and other psychosocial factors are thought to contribute to patient-based delays in diagnosis, while education (in particular, familiarity with pregnancy-associated breast cancer) is the key factor thought to contribute to physician-based delays in diagnosis.

Role of Mammography

Although approximately 80% of breast biopsies performed in pregnant women yield benign lesions, a breast mass that persists for 2 to 4 weeks warrants further investigation.[12] The effectiveness of mammography in diagnosing breast cancer during pregnancy is controversial. In a small series reported by Max and Klamer,[15] six of eight pregnant women with a breast mass that subsequently proved to be breast cancer were found to have normal mammograms. The false-negative mammograms were attributed to increased water content and loss of contrasting fat in the pregnant breast.

A slightly larger study of 23 women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer found abnormal mammograms in 18 women.[16] In a small Canadian study of pregnancy-associated breast cancer, five of eight women in the study had abnormal mammographic findings.[17] Although there is some debate as to the accuracy and utility of mammography in the diagnosis of a breast mass in a pregnant patient, the procedure can be performed safely with the use of abdominal shielding and may yield important information.

Breast Ultrasonography

The utility of breast ultrasonography during pregnancy, which may differentiate a solid mass from a cystic mass, has been evaluated in small studies. In the study by Liberman et al,[16] a focal solid mass was seen in six of the six cases examined. However, only two of the four pregnant breast cancer patients who underwent breast ultrasound had lesions that were suspicious for malignancy in the Canadian study.[17] Although these studies were small, breast ultrasound and ultrasound of nodal basins, if clinically indicated, likely play a role in the initial staging of the pregnant patient with a breast mass.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Studies evaluating the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of breast masses in pregnant or lactating women have not been published. MRI has been used in pregnancy for fetal imaging, and, among studies published thus far (with limited follow-up of the infants), there do not appear to be any serious sequelae for the fetus.[18,19]

Biopsy

Despite the results of either the mammogram or breast ultrasound, a clinically suspicious breast mass, regardless of whether the patient is pregnant, requires biopsy for definitive diagnosis. A number of small studies have demonstrated the accuracy of fine-needle aspiration in diagnosing pregnancy-associated breast cancer.[20,21,22] The accurate interpretation of a fine-needle aspiration from a pregnant patient with a breast mass requires a pathologist skilled in the diagnosis of breast pathology coincident with the changes seen in the pregnant or lactating breast.

Core biopsies allow for a diagnosis of invasion, but there are rare reports in the literature of the development of milk fistulas.[23] If necessary, either an incisional or excisional biopsy can be performed relatively safely during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy.[24] Ultimately, the nature of a breast mass in a pregnant patient should be established with the least invasive and technically most accurate method(s) available.

Pathologic Features of Breast Cancer During Pregnancy

Few studies have assessed or compared the pathologic features of the primary breast tumor in the pregnant patient with that of the nonpregnant patient.

Hormone Receptors

In their series of pregnant breast cancer patients, Tobon and Horowitz[25] reported infiltrating ductal carcinoma in 13 of 14 patients, negative or very low estrogen-receptor (ER) status in 7 patients, and positive progesterone(Drug information on progesterone)-receptor (PR) status in 5 patients. In another study of 14 pregnant breast cancer patients, 6 women had tumors that were both ER and PR negative, 3 had ER- and PR-positive tumors, and the remaining 5 had tumors that were either ER positive and PR negative or ER negative and PR positive.[26]

A case-control study by Ishida et al[27] found that women diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy were significantly less likely to have ER- or PR-positive tumors, compared to nonpregnant controls. Bonnier et al[28] reported that women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer were significantly more likely to have ER- and PR-negative tumors and a diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer, compared to nonpregnant controls.

In the M. D. Anderson prospective cohort of pregnant breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy, 65% of tumors were negative for both receptors.[29] However, in a smaller case-control study of 15 pregnant breast cancer patients and their respective nonpregnant controls, no significant difference was seen in ER or PR status when the tumors of these two groups were compared.[30]

Some investigators believe that the ligand-binding assay used to measure ER and PR positivity may be less accurate during pregnancy. The first mechanism by which a ligand-binding assay may produce a false-negative result during pregnancy is associated with the increased estrogen and progesterone levels that downregulate ER levels to the point at which they are no longer detectable. Secondly, the accuracy of the ligand-binding assay depends on the availability of the unbound receptor, and it is possible that all binding sites in a pregnant woman could be occupied as a result of increased estrogen levels.

In the majority of published case-control studies, ER and PR positivity was primarily determined using the ligand-binding assay. In the study by Elledge et al,[30] a greater proportion of the tumors of the pregnant breast cancer patients were found to be ER and PR positive when immunohistochemistry and not the ligand-binding assay was used.

Genetic Factors

In the only published study of HER2/neu expression in pregnant breast cancer patients, 58% of tumors stained positive for HER2/neu in this patient group, compared to 16% of tumors in age-matched nonpregnant controls.[30] In this study, HER2/neu positivity was ascertained using a rabbit polyclonal antiserum generated against the carboxy-terminal synthetic peptide of HER2/neu. It is difficult to draw conclusions about the pathologic profile of tumors for this unique group of breast cancer patients, because the majority of studies are small or retrospective in nature, or use techniques that are not generally employed in the modern analysis of breast tumors.

The effect of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations upon the incidence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer is unclear, although a small Swedish study found that significantly more women with BRCA1 vs BRCA2 mutations had pregnancy-associated breast cancer.[31] However, another small study compared women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer and no history of familial breast cancer to women with sporadic breast cancer and found a higher rate of allelic deletion at the BRCA2 locus in women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer (88% vs 20%).[32]

Staging

For women with breast cancer, regardless of whether they are pregnant at the time of diagnosis, the tumor/node/metastasis (TNM) system is used to stage the disease. The TNM system can also be used to assess prognosis and to formulate a treatment plan. A number of case series and case-control studies have reported that, compared to nonpregnant breast cancer patients, women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer present with more advanced-stage disease, larger tumors, and an increased likelihood of positive lymph nodes and metastatic disease.[7,27,28,33,34] The patient’s stage of disease at the time of diagnosis may have significant psychosocial implications, particularly if the pregnant patient presents with metastatic disease.

Initial staging of the pregnant breast cancer patient involves a thorough physical examination of the breast and regional lymph node-bearing areas, with careful documentation of all abnormalities. Regional nodal disease that is clinically suspicious for metastases should be evaluated further using ultrasound and subsequent fine-needle aspiration for cytologic confirmation.

Metastatic disease must also be ruled out, particularly in the lung, liver, or bone—the three most common sites of metastases. There are no contraindications for chest radiography in the pregnant patient, but abdominal shielding should be used. The ability to evaluate the lower lung parenchyma with chest radiography later in the pregnancy, when the gravid uterus is pressing against the diaphragm, may be more difficult. Abdominal ultrasound for the evaluation of liver metastases is obviously safe, but the results may be more difficult to interpret if the patient has developed fatty infiltration of the liver during pregnancy.

Computed tomography (CT) scanning of the abdomen and pelvis is generally not used during pregnancy because of the risk of fetal exposure to radiation. MRI may be useful when further visceral organ evaluation is required, as there have been no reports of harm to the fetus from exposure to MRI.[18,19] Although it has been reported that bone scans can be performed safely during pregnancy if there is adequate hydration and an indwelling catheter is used for 8 hours to prevent retention of radioactivity in the bladder, a screening MRI of the thoracic and lumbosacral spine may be a more palatable option in patients with no complaints suggestive of bony metastases outside the spine.[35]

When data from 12 studies were evaluated, a 3% and 7% true-positive yield of bone metastases was found on routine bone scans in patients with stage I and II breast cancer, respectively.[36] In patients with clinical stage III breast cancer, however, a 25% true-positive yield has been reported. Since it is not uncommon for pregnant breast cancer patients to present with later-stage disease, one should appropriately stage the patient, recognizing that some modifications need to be made to protect the fetus.

Monitoring the Pregnancy

The pregnant breast cancer patient requires careful and continuous monitoring of her pregnancy by a medical team highly skilled in the management of maternal and fetal health. This team, in conjunction with the oncologist, will assess and monitor the health of the mother and fetus.

Ultrasonography should be used to determine gestational age and the expected date of delivery, as both of these dates play a significant role in treatment planning. As the pregnancy progresses, fetal maturity should be monitored by ultrasound. In some cases, amniocentesis may be necessary to determine pulmonary maturity, particularly if induction of labor is being considered. Amniocentesis may also be recommended in the initial assessment of the pregnant breast cancer patient if the patient is felt to be at higher than average risk for karyotype abnormalities or if there are abnormalities detected by ultrasound that warrant further investigation.

Pages: 1  2  
Next
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

This article reviewed

Commentary (Danforth): Breast Cancer During Pregnancy

Commentary (Overmoyer): Breast Cancer During Pregnancy






 
RELATED CONTENT

ASCO: Yoga Reduces Insomnia in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Hormone Therapy
June 18, 2013
Postmenopausal Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer
ONCOLOGY,  June 17, 2013
Fertility Preservation and Breast Cancer: A Complex Problem
ONCOLOGY,  June 17, 2013
Metaplastic Mammary Carcinoma With Discrepant Hormone Receptor Results by IHC and RT-PCR
ONCOLOGY,  June 17, 2013
Supreme Court Ruling Invalidates Myriad’s BRCA Gene Patents
June 14, 2013
 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
   SEARCH MEDICA RX
   Browse drugs by name:
A B C D E F G H I J
K L M N O P Q R S T
U V W X Y Z All      
   Search for drugs:
Search

 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
  • ASCO: Yoga Reduces Insomnia in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Hormone Therapy
  • Physical Activity Across the Cancer Continuum
  • Exercise After Cancer Diagnosis: Time to Get Moving
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • ASCO: Vinegar Screening Significantly Reduces Cervical Cancer Mortality
  • ASCO: Sulforaphane in Prostate Cancer Found Worthy of Further Investigation
  • Study: Recurrent Heartburn Ups Risk for Throat Cancer
  • HER2-Directed Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer
  • Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation: The Current State of Our Knowledge
  • It’s Time for Clinicians to Reconsider Their Proscription Against the Use of Soyfoods by Breast Cancer Patients
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • ASCO: No Benefit From Avastin in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter



CancerNetwork on Facebook
 
SearchMedica SEARCH RESULTS

Find peer-reviewed literature and websites for practicing medical professionals

CME on Breast Cancer
Evidence on Breast Cancer
Guidelines on Breast Cancer
Patient Education on Breast Cancer
Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer
Practical Articles on Breast Cancer
Research and Reviews on Breast Cancer
All "Breast Cancer" results

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy