Track the companies that matter to you. It's FREE! Click one of these fan favorites to get started: Apple; Google; Ford.



Angelina Jolie's Selfless Act Heightens Breast Cancer Awareness

Don't let it get away!

Keep track of the stocks that matter to you.

Help yourself with the Fool's FREE and easy new watchlist service today.

I admit to not being a big fan of many of her movies -- possibly the only man on the planet who will admit so -- but there's little denying that movie sensation Angelina Jolie has a history of selfless acts and humanitarian giving that's second to none., for instance, recently highlighted six celebrities that they felt best personified selflessness. Not surprisingly, Jolie and her partner, Brad Pitt, were the first celebrities mentioned because of their countless acts of humanitarian kindness. Included in MagforWomen's mention was the founding of the Jolie-Pitt Foundation, which was launched with a $1 million personal donation to social organizations such as Doctors Without Borders and Global Action for Children. Both Jolie and Pitt work with numerous other social organizations in addition to the two mentioned here.

Yet for all of her acts of selflessness, perhaps none shines more true, nor reflects more bravery, than her decision to publicly announce in a New York Times op-ed this week that she had a double mastectomy in February.

The motivation behind Jolie's big decision was complicated. Her mother passed away from breast cancer at the young age of 56 and she wanted to ensure she'd live a long life to see her children grow up. However, the reasoning behind the surgery appears spot on with her testing positive for the BRCA1 gene mutation, which presents carriers with a significantly higher risk of getting breast and ovarian cancer. Based on Jolie's op-ed, she had an 87% chance of developing breast cancer according to her doctors and a 50% chance of developing ovarian cancer. With her mother having died from the disease, she made the preventative choice to reduce her chances of developing breast cancer by having a double mastectomy to about 5%. 

But, even more noteworthy than Jolie's act itself is the incredible amount of breast cancer awareness that will be raised by going public with this often private matter.

Times and treatments are changing
The scope of breast cancer treatment is improving. What's worth understanding is that there are multiple ways of treating breast cancer, with complete breast removal as just one of the effective options. Treatment options really depend on whether the patient is dealing with preventative, early stage, or late-stage disease.

Preventative treatments
In terms of preventative measures, genetic companies have made big strides over the past couple of decades with regard to disease detection. Myriad Genetics (NASDAQ: MYGN  ) , for example, offers the BRACAnalysis genetic test to help determine if patients carry the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation that's responsible for a majority of hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. In addition to having a higher propensity to developing breast or ovarian cancer, BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene carriers are more susceptible to developing a second primary cancer. This test offered by Myriad gives patients a quick answer as to whether they're a carrier, helping them determine the next best course of action, which can include increased cancer screenings, hormone therapy, or, in Jolie's case, a preventative mastectomy.

Diagnostics can also play an important role in early and late-stage breast cancer diagnoses. Navidea Biopharmaceuticals (NYSEMKT: NAVB  ) had Lymphoseek, its external lymph-node imaging and intra-operative lymphatic mapping diagnostic device, approved by the Food and Drug Administration earlier this year to help doctors stage cancer. Discovering whether breast cancer has invaded adjacent lymph nodes has never been easier or safer thanks to Lymphoseek, and it can dramatically aid physicians in determining the best course of action for breast cancer patients.

Early-stage treatments
The early-stage disease is dealt with mostly through hormonal therapies, which reduce the amount of estrogen in a woman's body and slow or stop tumor development. Generic versions of AstraZeneca's Arimidex and Novartis' (NYSE: NVS  ) Femara are two examples of aromatase inhibitors that work on post-menopausal women by temporarily blocking the activity of the aromatase enzyme that is responsible for making estrogen.

However, there are additional options available for women who aren't post-menopausal. For these women, a drug class known as SERMs are a viable treatment option. Drugs in this class bind to estrogen receptors and act both as an agonist and antagonist in that they suppress estrogen production in the breast, but can mimic its production in other parts of the body like the uterus. Perhaps the most famous SERM is AstraZeneca's Tamoxifen, which, in generic forms today, is still widely used.  

Late-stage treatments
Next to preventative diagnostics, perhaps the biggest moves by pharmaceutical companies with regard to breast cancer are being made in late-stage therapies. Roche's Herceptin is a staple among the physicians with regard to treating metastatic breast cancer. Between Herceptin -- which is actually approved by the FDA to treat early and late-stage breast cancer -- and Perjeta, which was approved last June in combination with Herceptin and docetaxel, Roche is working vigilantly to extend patients' progression-free survival and quality of life.

A new type of treatment that involves utilizing antibodies to carry toxins also shows plenty of promise. These antibodies work by releasing a toxin once they come into contact with very specific protein signatures released by the targeted cancer cells, and could be the key to targeted cancer treatments. One example is Roche and ImmunoGen's (NASDAQ: IMGN  ) Kadcyla, which was approved by the FDA in February as a second-line treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer. The drug combines the HER2 protein-blocking power of Herceptin and uses ImmunoGen's targeted antibody payload technology to deliver the chemotherapy agent directly to the cancer cells. With minimal healthy tissue death, Kadcyla improved progression-free survival and median overall survival by 3.2 months and 5.8 months, respectively, as compared to another current standard of treatment, which is GlaxoSmithKline's and Roche's Xeloda.

Even further down the road, Pfizer's (NYSE: PFE  ) Palbociclib, a clinical-stage therapy that received the rare breakthrough therapy designation earlier this year, could be a game-changer. In mid-stage trials as a first-line treatment for patients with ER+, HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, and in combination with Novartis' Femara, Palbociclib more than tripled progression-free survival to 26.1 months from 7.5 months.

In sum, genetic testing is getting faster and cheaper; pharmaceutical drug delivery, targeting, and effectiveness are getting better; and the side effects associated with chemotherapy agents aren't worsening.

The battle for social awareness
Awareness and being proactive are half the battle when it comes to fighting breast cancer.

In terms of cancer-related deaths, breast cancer will claim more women's lives per year than lung and bronchus cancer, colon and rectum cancer, and corpus and uterus cancer... combined! And those are the second, third, and fourth most-deadly cancers for women, respectively.

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

This is how much of a concern breast cancer is for women and all the more reason why social awareness, like the type we witnessed from Angelina Jolie this week, is needed to bring this danger to light.

Regardless of how you feel about Angelina Jolie the actress, her courage in sharing her medical struggles -- knowing well that she's a highly followed public figure -- has created a scenario where women should be encouraged to get preventative breast cancer screenings and/or diagnostic testing. The purpose of Jolie's op-ed was the hope that "other women can benefit from my experience." I feel pretty confident that Jolie's hope will be translated into reality as we move forward. 

If you'd like to read a more thorough analysis of what's currently going on with breast cancer treatments and where we're headed, I'd encourage you to look into our "Tackling Cancer" series.


Read/Post Comments (9) | Recommend This Article (21)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 11:35 AM, KombatKarl wrote:

    I have no problem with what she did, but "selfless" is hardly the correct word to describe this. Since selfless means "having no concern for self", then what she did was the complete opposite of selfless. She did it ONLY for the concern of herself: she doesn't want to die of breast cancer, or at least severely cut down her risk of it.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 11:41 AM, ems79 wrote:

    I agree with KombatKarl, this would be better described as courageous.

    Not even necessarily because she took the step to do it, but because she is speaking out about it. She could have just as easily hidden this away and never talked about it. She is raising awareness not only for the disease but for a potential (drastic such as it is) course of pre-emptive action.

    This could not have been an easy decision for her.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 12:27 PM, marketmommy wrote:

    To Kombatkarl:

    I don't think Seth was describing her decision to have the surgery as selfless, but rather her making that decision public as selfless. As an actress, her physical image is important, and she will be scrutinized physically in a whole new way by her male fans. This is evidenced by some of the hateful chatter online in response to her op-ed. Making such a personal decision public, especially as she is known to many primarily for her beauty, is definitely selfless, I think.

    Yes, her surgery was for her, and her family. But it definitely takes a selfless person, IMO, to undercut her "most beautiful woman in the world" title with a "just had a double-mastectomy" one.

    Thanks for the excellent article, Seth!

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 12:50 PM, KombatKarl wrote:

    I think you're right after re-reading.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 1:14 PM, SyDVooh wrote:

    To me, this is unnecessary surgery. Just because someone has a gene that may cause breast cancer, doesn't mean that it will cause cancer. We are still in the early period of gene research. No telling what will be discovered, even in our lifetimes. We may find ways to shut down dangerous genes. Stem cell research, in the near future, may be used to cure cancer. And, the testing for and finding early cancers is getting better all the time. It makes more sense to wait and see, where medical research goes, and if your get cancer.

    Personally, I think a rich ditsy actress, made a dopey choice, and announcing it, is just a publicity stunt, since this sort of elective surgery is not covered by insurance for most people. You have to be rich to have it done. So where is the selflessness in telling the public about it? Who is this going to help really?

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 1:46 PM, deckdawg wrote:

    SyDVooh, you are entitled to your opinion, but it does not appear to be based on sound reasoning. You are right that having this particular gene mutation does not, with certainty, determine that Ms. Jolie will get breast cancer. She actually had a 13% chance of not getting breast cancer. So, she could have lived the rest of her life banking on that 13% chance. However, on the 87% probablity that she did develop breast cancer, the double masectomy (probably along with chemo and radiation) would have been the prescribed treatment. (And, even after enduring all that, she may not have lived out her life span). So, Ms. Jolie's reasoning and thought process seems quite sound, thoughtful, and rather courageous in making this very, very difficult decision. And, if this was a publicity stunt, it would in fact be the dumbest ever for a woman who makes her living as a sex symbol. In addition, you are completely wrong about this "elective" surgery not being covered by most insurance. Most insurance companies cover both the genetic testing and the prophyactic surgery for women with Ms. Jolie's family history/gene mutation.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 3:29 PM, damilkman wrote:

    Whether this is selfless or not or courageous or not, I do not understand what this has to do with investing. It is not like every other publication does not have a front page article debating the selflessness of the action. It is sort of like when political articles sneak into Scientific American. I read People Magazine for social fluff, SA for hard science, and Motley Fool for investing. Nothing wrong with a redirect into investment discussions. But no information was given to what is the impact of new treatments on said companies.

    It is not that I do not care. I have had several friends who have had breast cancer. I wish people would stay on topic. Its sort of like turning on sports talk radio and the topic of the day is peoples favorite dessert that is not chocolate when you want to hear about baseball or football.

  • Report this Comment On May 16, 2013, at 6:47 PM, billdick6 wrote:

    Least we forget: Betty Ford, lead the way, when "going public" about any cancer just was not done.

  • Report this Comment On May 17, 2013, at 3:42 PM, astronut666 wrote:

    SyDVooh, you're WAY off base here - despite a double mastectomy and years of radiation + chemo my mother still died (a real stubborn fighter!). One of my sister-in-laws died in less than a year after they discovered her breast cancer, and that was only 2 years ago, 15+ yrs since my mother passed, with much better treatments available to her.

    Everyone is different - in some the cancer cells spread very rapidly, and once it's metastasized they are essentially dead women walking, only a matter of time. Hopefully some of the new targeted genetic or stem cell therapies along the lines of Provenge will be developed for all cancers, but we're nowhere close to that being a reality right now, not even in a lab.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2433608, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 10/1/2016 3:00:29 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 17 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 18,308.15 164.70 0.91%
S&P 500 2,168.27 17.14 0.80%
NASD 5,312.00 42.85 0.81%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

9/30/2016 4:00 PM
IMGN $2.68 Up +0.03 +1.13%
ImmunoGen CAPS Rating: ****
MYGN $20.58 Down -0.12 -0.58%
Myriad Genetics CAPS Rating: ****
NAVB $0.92 Up +0.00 +0.46%
Navidea Biopharmac… CAPS Rating: *
NVS $78.96 Down -0.29 -0.37%
Novartis CAPS Rating: ****
PFE $33.87 Up +0.55 +1.65%
Pfizer CAPS Rating: ****