Effects of tamoxifen on normal breast tissue histological composition: Results from a randomised six-arm placebo-controlled trial in healthy women

Tamoxifen prevents recurrence of breast cancer and is suggested for preventive risk-reducing therapy. Tamoxifen reduces mammographic density, a proxy for therapy response, but little is known about its effects in remodelling normal breast tissue. Our study, a substudy within the double-blinded dose-determination trial KARISMA, investigated tamoxifen-specific changes in breast tissue composition and histological markers in healthy women. We included 83 healthy women randomised to 6 months daily intake of 20, 10, 5, 2.5, 1 mg of tamoxifen or placebo. The groups were combined to “no dose” (0-1 mg), “low-dose” (2.5-5 mg) or “high-dose” (10-20 mg) of tamoxifen. Ultrasound-guided biopsies were collected before and after tamoxifen exposure. In each biopsy, epithelial, stromal and adipose tissues was quantified, and expression of epithelial and stromal Ki67, oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) analysed. Mammographic density using STRATUS was measured at baseline and end-of-tamoxifen-exposure. We found that different doses of tamoxifen reduced mammographic density and glandular-epithelial area in premenopausal women and associated with reduced epithelium and increased adipose tissue. High-dose tamoxifen also decreased epithelial ER and PR expressions in premenopausal women. Premenopausal women with the greatest reduction in proliferation also had the greatest epithelial reduction. In postmenopausal women, high-dose tamoxifen decreased the epithelial area with no measurable density decrease. Tamoxifen at both low and high doses influences breast tissue composition and expression of histological markers in the normal breast. Our findings connect epithelial proliferation with tissue remodelling in premenopausal women and provide novel insights to understanding biological mechanisms of primary prevention with tamoxifen.     

Inter-rater reliability of the Swedish modified version of the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (SwePASS) in the acute phase after stroke

Background: Before implementation of the new scale, the Swedish modified version of the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (SwePASS), to clinical practice, it is fundamental to analyze its measurement properties.Objective: To examine the inter-rater reliability of the SwePASS in the acute phase after stroke.

Methods: Day 3 to day 7 after admission to a stroke unit, 64 persons with stroke were assessed twice, using the SwePASS, by two physiotherapists. Inter-rater reliability was determined using percentage-agreement and the rank-invariant method: relative position, relative concentration, and relative rank variance.

Results: The raters showed a percentage agreement of ≥75% in the assessments using the SwePASS. For 9 of the 12 items, the percentage agreement was >80%. For 8 of the 12 items, there was a statistically significant change in position, revealed in relative position values between 0.08 and 0.15. Three items had statistically significant positive relative concentration values between ?0.11 and 0.10. Except for a statistically significant negligible relative variance value of 0.01 for the items 1 and 8, there was no relative variance.

Conclusions: The SwePASS shows an acceptable inter-rater reliability, albeit with potential for improvement. The reliability can be improved by a consensus how to interpret the scale between the raters prior to implementation in the clinic.     

The economics of general thromboembolic prophylaxis

The clinical and economic effects of each of 3 alternatives—no prophylaxis, general prophylaxis, and selective treatment—have been assessed in conjunction with 3 types of surgery—general surgery, the subset surgery for cholelithiasis, and elective hip surgery. The costs of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications have been calculated from the figures for 28 patients hospitalized at the Department of Surgery, Malmö General Hospital, Malmö, Sweden. The anticipated number of thromboembolic complications—and thus even the number of fatal pulmonary embolisms—can be minimized in all 3 types of surgery by means of general prophylaxis. General prophylaxis with low-dose heparin is, however, accompanied by the greatest incidence of hemorrhagic complications. Health care costs are minimized with general prophylaxis in elective hip and general surgery, while no prophylaxis is the best alternative in surgery for cholelithiasis. From the patient's point of view, general prophylaxis minimizes the duration of thromboembolic disease in general surgery as well as in elective hip surgery. In surgery for cholelithiasis, however, no differences in health loss for the individual are shown between the 2 main alternatives, no prophylaxis and general prophylaxis. Selective treatment means treatment after diagnosis of thrombosis with some screening method. The alternative selective treatment was the least satisfactory of those 3 studied.

---

Resumen Los efectos clínicos y económicos de cada una de 3 alternatives en la profilaxis tromboembólica (no profilaxis, profilaxis general con heparina de baja dosis, y tratamiento selectivo) fueron valorados en 3 tipos de cirugía: cirugía general (abdominal), el subgrupo de cirugía general para colelitiasis, y cirugía electiva de cadera. Los costos de las complicaciones tromboembólicas y hemorrágicas fueron calculados a partir de las cifras observadas en 28 pacientes hospitalizados en el Departmento de Cirugía. El número de predicción de complicaciones tromboembólicas, y el número de embolismos pulmonares fatales pueden ser minimizados en los 3 tipos de cirugía mediante la profilaxis general. Sin embargo, la profilaxis general con heparina de baja dosis se acompaña de la más alta incidencia de complicaciones hemorrágicas.Los costos de la atención pueden ser minimizados mediante la profilaxis general en cirugía electiva de cadera y en cirugía general abdominal, en tanto que la no profilaxis es la mejor alternativa para la cirugía de colelitiasis.Desde el punto de vista del paciente, la profilaxis general minimiza la duración de la enfermedad tromboembólica en la cirugía general abdominal así como en la cirugía electiva de cadera. En la cirugía para colelitiasis, sin embargo, no se demuestran diferencias entre las dos alternatives principales, no profilaxis y profilaxis general.El tratamiento selectivo significa tratamiento una vez establecido el diagnóstico de trombosis mediante algún método de tamizaje. La alternativa de tratamiento selectivo fue la menos satisfactoria de las 3 alternatives estudiadas.

---

Résumé Les effets cliniques et financiers de 3 comportements variables: absence de prophylaxie, prophylaxie, traitement sélectif ont été évalué en fonction de trois types de chirurgie: chirurgie générale, chirurgie spéciale de la lithiase biliaire, chirurgie élective de la hanche. Les coûts des complications thrombo-emboliques et hémorragiques ont été calculés à partir des données numériques concernant 28 malades hospitalisés dans le service de chirurgie. Le nombre envisagé des complications thromboemboliques et par conséquent le nombre d'embolie pulmonaire fatale a été réduit dans les 3 types de chirurgie choisis grâce au traitement prophylactique. Cependant il convient de noter que le traitement prophylactique à l'aide de faible dose d'héparine s'accompagne de complications hémorragiques plus nombreuses.Les coûts des soins de la chirurgie élective de la hanche et de la chirurgie générale sont réduits grâce au traitement prophylactique alors que l'absence de traitement prophylactique représente la meilleure modalité à observer dans le traitement de la chirurgie biliaire.En ce qui concerne le point de vue du malade le traitement prophylactique réduit la durée de la maladie thromboembolique compliquant la chirurgie générale ou la chirurgie de la hanche. En revanche dans la chirurgie de la lithiase biliaire aucun inconvénient pour la santé du malade ne s'observe que le traitement prophylactique soit ou ne soit pas appliqué.Le traitement sélectif qui répond au traitement institué après que le diagnostic ait été posé par des méthodes de dépistage est la moins satisfaisante des trois attitudes envisagées.

---

---

Supported by grant no. 00759 from the Swedish Medical Research Council.     

Ausfallhonorar wegen Nichterscheinens zu einem Exklusiv-Termin

Abstrakt 1. Nimmt ein Patient einen ihm von seinem (Zahn-)Arzt einger?umten Exklusiv-Termin nicht wahr, obwohl er auf dessen Eigenschaft ausdrücklich hingewiesen wurde, so hat er dem (Zahn-)Arzt den Behandlungsausfall abzüglich eines angemessenen Eigenanteils des (Zahn-)Arztes zu ersetzen. 2. Die Ersatzpflicht tritt auch dann ein, wenn der Patient den Termin nicht in der in dem Behandlungsvertrag vorgesehenen Frist absagt. Eine hierfür seitens des (Zahn-)Arztes bestimmte Frist von zwei Tagen vor Behandlungsbeginn stellt sich für den Patienten grunds?tzlich auch nicht als unangemessene Benachteiligung i.S. des § 307 BGB dar. 3. Ein Anspruch des Arztes entf?llt auch bei nur mündlicher Vereinbarung nicht unter dem Gesichtspunkt des § 4 Abs. 5b BMV-Z, denn diese Vorschrift ist teleologisch dahin zu reduzieren, dass nur zahn?rztliche Honoraransprüche aus erfolgten Behandlungen schriftlich vereinbart werden müssen. Soweit es jedoch um einen vertraglichen Anspruch wegen einer Leistungsst?rung geht, vermag das Schriftformerfordernis des § 4 Abs. 5b BMV-Z grunds?tzlich nicht einzugreifen. (Leits?tze des Bearbeiters)