HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > her2group
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-22-2006, 06:28 AM   #1
Lani
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,778
Mindblowing statistics--women who underwent propylactic reductn mammoplasty decreased

their risk of breast cancer, but also their risk of melanoma, lung cancer and ovarian cancer! Evaluated over 30,000 Swedish women (ignore typo in second paragraph...read further) Again, it goes to show there is a lot more that is NOT known than is known!

Instead of trying to enlarge breasts, should women past forty try to "lift" their breasts by reduction mammoplasty to decrease their risk, especially those at high risk? These statistics may still end up being a fluke, although with such large numbers it is unlikely. A prospective clinical trial will take years to confirm this retrospective study. Perhaps it is because without the
self-consciousness of having their breasts bounce around so much with exercise they exercised more, or lost weight to avoid having their breasts appear even smaller as their girth increased with age, or because those who were health-conscious enough to have such a procedure prophylactically also ate more fresh fruits and vegetables...Or perhaps the data are real and there is some hormonal feedback mechanism (there are a multitude of these) by which all these different tumors are prevented even though surgery in general is felt to set off an inflammatory reaction which can encourage the growth of tumors already present elsewhere (micromets, etc) The possible explanations are endless...


Breast reduction may offer prophylactic mastectomy alternative
Epidemiologic results suggest that breast reduction surgery may offer an alternative to prophylactic mastectomy in women at high risk of developing breast cancer.

The study, published in the journal Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, focuses on 30,44 Swedish women who underwent reduction mammoplasty between 1965 and 1993, and were followed-up using data from the Swedish Cancer Registry until 2002.

Of note, breast cancer occurred in just 443 of the breast reduction patients compared with 624 cases that would have been expected using data from the general population, giving a significantly reduced standardized incidence ratio of 0.71.

This ratio was not significantly altered after taking into consideration age at time of surgery, number of years since surgery, or calendar year of surgery, lead investigator Jon Fryzek (International Epidemiology Institute, Rockville, Maryland, USA) and co-workers observe.

Interestingly, breast reduction surgery was associated with a significant 25% reduction in expected lung cancer diagnoses, with borderline significant reductions also found for ovarian cancer and melanoma, at 20% and 25%, respectively.

"Our study of over 30,000 women with long-term follow-up offers further evidence that women undergoing breast reduction surgery have reduced breast cancer risk," Fyzek's team concludes.

Recognizing that the procedure may be of use for women at high risk of breast cancer who find the disfiguration of prophylactic mastectomy unacceptable, the researchers suggest: "As the evidence from large-scale cohort studies accumulates, direct testing of this reduction in risk through clinical trials should be considered."



Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 97: 131–134

http://www.springerlink.com/(j2g3k2b...ferrer=default
Lani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2006, 10:10 AM   #2
al from Canada
Senior Member
 
al from Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 722
My thought on this is: there is a positive correlation between body mass index and BC. We also know that Most BC is fuelled by estrogen, which is also manufactured in fat cell. Breast reduction makes sense. less breast = less fat = less estrogen production = less cancer.

What I ounder is how many HER2++ cancers happen in small breasted or dense breasted women?

Al
__________________
Primary care-giver to and advocate for Linda, who passed away April 27, 2006.
al from Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2006, 01:49 PM   #3
Becky
Senior Member
 
Becky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Stockton, NJ
Posts: 4,179
It also equals less breast tissue (ie: ducts and lobes where the cancers really begin).


Becky
Becky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2006, 07:38 PM   #4
RobinP
Senior Member
 
RobinP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 943
I think what you stated is possible Al. I also know that small breasted women can have lots of ducts with just less fat around them. Sometimes I wonder if these delicate networks of ducts can get damaged more easily, potentially promoting oncogensis, in thin small breasted women since there is less fat cushing the ducts. I also worry and wonder if consrictive bras can ride up over breast tissue, damaging the ductal structures and cells.Interesting, most cancers start in the ducts.
PS. Didn't you present a study that stated a lot of thin women get her2 bc Lani? If so, I wonder how many of them were also small breasted? A lot of times being thin ties into having less fat on the chest as well.
__________________
Robin
2002- dx her2 positive DCIS/bc TX Mast, herceptin chemo

Last edited by RobinP; 05-22-2006 at 07:41 PM..
RobinP is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter