Obesity at breast cancer (BC) diagnosis has been associated with poor outcome, although the magnitude of effect in different BC subtypes is uncertain. We report on the association of obesity or overweight at diagnosis of nonmetastatic BC with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in the following defined subtypes: hormone receptor positive/HER2 negative (HR+HER2−), HER2 positive (HER2+), and triple negative (TNBC). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases up to January 1, 2019. Study eligibility was performed independently by 2 authors. Studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) of OS and/or DFS for obesity or overweight in BC subtypes were included. The pooled hazard ratio was computed and weighted using generic inverse variance and random effects models. Twenty-seven studies were included. Obese compared with nonobese women had worse DFS in all subtypes: the hazard ratios were 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 1.41, P < .001) for HR+HER2− BC, 1.16 (95% CI = 1.06 to 1.26, P < .001) for HER2+ BC, and 1.17 (95% CI = 1.06 to 1.29, P = .001) for TNBC. OS was also worse in obese vs nonobese women (HR+HER2− BC HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.20 to 1.62, P < .001; HER2+ BC HR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.33, P = .006; and TNBC HR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.13 to 1.53, P < .001). As opposed to obesity, overweight was not associated with either DFS or OS in HER2+ BC (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.81 to 1.28, P = .85; and HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.21, P = .99, respectively) or TNBC (HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.18, P = .49; and HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.81 to 1.44, P = .17), respectively. In HR+HER2− BC, being overweight was associated with worse OS (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.22, P < .001). Obesity was associated with modestly worse DFS and OS in all BC subtypes.

Body composition assessment (ie, the measurement of muscle and adiposity) impacts several cancer-related outcomes including treatment-related toxicities, treatment responses, complications, and prognosis. Traditional modalities for body composition measurement include body mass index, body circumference, skinfold thickness, and bioelectrical impedance analysis; advanced imaging modalities include dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Each modality has its advantages and disadvantages, thus requiring an individualized approach in identifying the most appropriate measure for specific clinical or research situations. Advancements in imaging approaches have led to an abundance of available data, however, the lack of standardized thresholds for classification of abnormal muscle mass or adiposity has been a barrier to adopting these measurements widely in research and clinical care. In this review, we discuss the different modalities in detail and provide guidance on their unique opportunities and challenges.

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are revolutionizing cancer treatment, adding another important new class of systemic therapy. ADCs are a specially designed class of therapeutics that target cells expressing specific cancer antigens using directed antibody–drug delivery and release a cytotoxic chemotherapeutic payload. Over the past two decades, improvements in ADC design, development, and research, particularly in breast cancer, have led to several recent landmark publications. These advances have significantly changed various treatment paradigms and revamped traditional classifications of breast cancer with the introduction of a potential new subtype: “HER2-low”. This review will focus on several ADCs developed for breast cancer treatment, including trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and other newer emerging agents. It will provide an overview of the role of ADCs in breast cancer and discuss the opportunities and challenges they present. Additionally, our review will discuss future research directions to improve the selection of targets, combination therapies, and aim to improve drug safety. Important first-line metastatic and adjuvant clinical trials are underway, which may expand the role of ADC therapy in breast cancer. We foresee ADCs driving a new era of breast cancer treatment, adding to the steady incremental survival advantage observed in recent years.

Obesity is a known risk factor for developing endometrial cancer. However, the association of obesity with endometrial cancer (EC) outcomes has not been clearly established. This study examined how outcomes in women with early stage EC vary with body composition measured via computed tomography (CT). In this retrospective study, patients diagnosed with EC international Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages I-III and available CT scans were included. Automatica software was used to assess the areas of visceral adipose tissue, subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), and intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT) and skeletal muscle area. Of 293 patient charts assessed, 199 met eligibility criteria. Median body mass index (BMI) was 32.8 kg/m² (interquartile range [IQ] = 26.8-38.9); 61.8% had histologic subtype endometrioid carcinoma. Adjusted for age, international Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, and histologic subtype, a BMI of at least 30 vs less than 30 kg/m² was associated with lower endometrial cancer–specific survival (ECSS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27 to 4.25) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.35 to 5.39). Higher IMAT 75th vs 25th percentile and SAT of at least 225.6 vs less than 225.6 cm² were associated with lower ECSS (HR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.1 to 2.13, and HR = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.13 to 5.88) and OS (HR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.02, and HR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.2 to 5.01), respectively. The association of visceral adipose tissue (75th vs 25th percentile) with ECSS and OS was not statistically significant (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.91 to 2.22, and HR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.81 to 1.89). Higher BMI, IMAT, and SAT were associated with higher mortality from EC and lower OS. A better understanding of the mechanisms underlying these relationships could inform strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are a new class of therapeutic agents designed to target specific antigens on tumor cells, combining the specificity of monoclonal antibodies with the cytotoxicity of chemotherapy agents. ADCs have been available for over a decade, but in gynecological cancers, these agents are relatively new with great promise ahead. More than 80% of ongoing trials in gynecological cancers are evaluating ADCs’ safety and efficacy, of which 40% are early-phase trials. Around twenty ADCs are currently under investigation, either alone or in combination with chemotherapies or immune checkpoint inhibitors. Among them, mirvetuximab soravtansine has been recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with high folate-α receptor expression, as a single agent or in combination. Tisotumab vedotin and trastuzumab deruxtecan are also now approved by the FDA in patients with pre-treated cervical and uterine cancers and further investigation is ongoing. Overall, the toxicity profiles of ADCs are acceptable. Ocular toxicity is one of the specific side effects of some ADCs, but most of the cases are manageable with the use of prophylactic steroids and dose adjustments. This review aims to provide an overview of the fundamental and operational features of ADCs and examine the latest and most promising data, with a particular focus on the Canadian viewpoint.

Background: Anthracycline-taxane is the standard chemotherapy strategy for treating high-risk early breast cancer despite the potentially life-threatening adverse events caused by anthracyclines. Commonly, the combination of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) is considered an alternative option. However, the efficacy of TC compared to anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy is unclear. This study compares disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and cardiotoxicity between adjuvant TC and anthracycline-taxane for stages I–III, HER2-negative breast cancer. Methods: A systematic search on MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized-controlled trials published until 11 March 2024, yielded 203 studies with 11,803 patients, and seven trials were included. Results: TC results in little to no difference in DFS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.98–1.20; moderate-certainty of evidence); OS (1.02, 95% CI 0.89–1.16; high-certainty of evidence); and cardiotoxicity (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.16–1.76; high-certainty of evidence), compared to anthracycline-taxane. In the subgroup analysis, patients with ≥4 lymph nodes had improved DFS from anthracycline-taxane over TC. Conclusions: Overall, there was no difference between TC and anthracycline-taxane in DFS, OS and cardiotoxicity. In women with ≥4 nodes, anthracycline-taxane was associated with a substantial reduction in relapse events, compared to TC. Our study supports the current standard of practice, which is to use anthracycline-taxane and TC chemotherapy as a reasonable option in select cases.