American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins--Gynecology; ACOG Committee on Genetics; Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 103: Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:957-966. [PMID: 19305347 DOI: 10.1097/aog.0b013e3181a106d4]

NSGC practice guideline: risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this document is to present a current and comprehensive set of practice recommendations for effective genetic cancer risk assessment, counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The intended audience is genetic counselors and other health professionals who care for individuals with, or at increased risk of, hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: research on how women respond to genetic testing

Researchers are exploring how women with an identified risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) or a diagnosis of breast or ovarian cancer choose to undergo testing, respond to the results, engage in prevention or screening and make decisions for the future. Nurses will need to develop knowledge of genetics, genetic testing and conditions such as HBOC to provide optimal care for their patients.

[Guideline for the prevention and early detection of breast and ovarian cancer in high risk patients, particularly in women from HBOC (hereditary breast and ovarian cancer) families]

The Austrian guideline for prevention and early detection of breast and ovarian cancer in high risk patients--particularly in women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families--were established with particular consideration of the most recent position paper of the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) by the authors mentioned above. The guideline is aimed at facilitating and standardizing the care and early detection strategies in women with an elevated life time risk for breast and ovarian cancer.

Gynecologic care for breast cancer survivors: assisting in the transition to wellness

Currently, there are >2 million survivors of breast cancer in the United States. Two years after cancer treatment, patients may transition to primary care providers and/or gynecologists. Many of these survivors may have difficulties with menopausal symptoms. If they do not know already, some of these women may want or need risk assessment for hereditary- or treatment-induced second cancers. At least 20% will also have significant psychologic, sexual, and/or relationship difficulties that require attention. All of the women will need assistance to learn and follow recommendations for surveillance, detecting recurrence, and promoting wellness. Thus, gynecologists play a critical role in helping these patients in their health care transitions. To assist the gynecologists, we have reviewed the evaluation and management of common sequelae of breast cancer diagnoses and treatments.

A self-administered family history questionnaire improves identification of women who warrant referral to genetic counseling for hereditary cancer risk

OBJECTIVES

This study was undertaken to assess a self-administered family history questionnaire in order to better identify women within a gynecologic oncology practice for referral to genetic counseling services.

METHODS

Returning patients at an outpatient gynecologic oncology clinic completed a self-administered family health history questionnaire and a detailed telephone interview. A genetic counselor separately assessed blinded information garnered from the questionnaire, structured genetic interview, and electronic medical records to determine whether these data warranted referral to genetic counseling based on established criteria. The structured genetic interview was considered the gold standard to which the questionnaire and medical record information were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 45 total participants in the study, 26 (58%) were identified from the structured genetic interview as meeting criteria for referral to genetic counseling. The questionnaire identified 21 (81%) of these 26 referrals, while the medical record identified 13 (50%) of these 26 referrals. This led to a 62% increase in referral capture by the questionnaire. The median time to complete the questionnaire was 17 min (range 5-57 min). Thirty-four participants (75.6%) had more family members with cancer identified on the questionnaire compared to the electronic medical record. The questionnaire identified fewer family members with cancer in the five cases that were missed for appropriate referral.

CONCLUSIONS

Current standard clinical practices are insufficient at identifying patients in need of referral to genetic counseling. A self-administered questionnaire improves recognition of candidates for genetic counseling in a gynecologic oncology practice.

Long-term psychosocial outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing: differences across affected status and risk-reducing surgery choice

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have documented the short-term impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) testing; however, little research has examined the long-term impact of testing. We conducted the first long-term prospective study of psychosocial outcomes in a U.S. sample of women who had BRCA1/2 testing.

METHODS

Participants were 464 women who underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Prior to testing, we measured sociodemographics, clinical variables, and cancer specific and general distress. At long-term follow-up (Median = 5.0 years; Range = 3.4-9.1 years), we assessed cancer-specific and genetic testing distress, perceived stress, and perceived cancer risk. We evaluated the impact of BRCA1/2 test result and risk-reducing surgery on long-term psychosocial outcomes.

RESULTS

Among participants who had been affected with breast or ovarian cancer, BRCA1/2 carriers reported higher genetic testing distress (β = 0.41, P < 0.0001), uncertainty (β = 0.18, P < 0.0001), and perceived stress (β = 0.17, P = 0.005) compared with women who received negative (i.e., uninformative) results. Among women unaffected with breast/ovarian cancer, BRCA1/2 carriers reported higher genetic testing distress (β = 0.39, P < 0.0001) and lower positive testing experiences (β = 0.25, P = 0.008) than women with negative results. Receipt of risk-reducing surgery was associated with lower perceived cancer risk (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first prospective long-term study in a U.S. sample, we found modestly increased distress in BRCA1/2 carriers compared with women who received uninformative or negative test results. Despite this modest increase in distress, we found no evidence of clinically significant dysfunction.

IMPACT

Although a positive BRCA1/2 result remains salient among carriers years after testing, testing does not seem to impact long-term psychologic dysfunction.

Ovarian incidentaloma

Incidental adnexal masses occur with relatively high frequency in post-menopausal women, with a prevalence rate of 3.3-18% in asymptomatic patients. Unilocular, benign-appearing ovarian cysts represent the vast majority of abnormal findings at transvaginal ultrasonography. As many as 80% will resolve over a period of several months; if persistent, unchanged, less than 10 cm, and with normal CA-125 values, the likelihood of an invasive cancer is sufficiently low that observation should be offered. More recent investigations support the use of secondary imaging modalities such as MRI, which may help differentiate benign from malignant masses. Surgical management plays a key role when patients are symptomatic regardless of age, menopausal and have documented changes in cyst characteristics, experience elevations in tumor markers or have symptoms suggestive of a hormone-producing neoplasm. High level, evidence-based screening guidelines have yet to be developed.

Genetic risk and gynecologic cancers

Although most gynecologic malignancies are sporadic, hereditary cancer syndromes cause a substantial portion of these cancers. Given that the diagnosis of these syndromes has prognostic and therapeutic implications for the patient, as well as preventive implications for her family members, genetic testing is now an accepted part of the management of the patient who has gynecologic cancer.

Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results to health care providers following genetic testing at a tertiary care center

Individuals at high risk for hereditary cancers often receive genetic counseling and testing at tertiary care centers; however, they may receive care for long-term management of their cancer risk in community settings. Communication of genetic test results to health care providers outside of tertiary care settings can facilitate the long-term management of high risk individuals. This study assessed women's communication of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic test results to health care providers outside of tertiary care settings (termed "outside" health care providers, or OHCPs) and women's perceptions regarding communication of results. Women (n = 312) who underwent BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic counseling and testing completed a questionnaire assessing whether or not they shared test results with OHCPs and perceptions regarding the communication of test results to OHCPs. Most (72%) shared genetic test results with OHCPs. Women with no personal history of cancer were more likely to have shared results compared to women with a personal history of cancer. Mutation status did not significantly predict sharing of genetic information. Most reported positive perceptions regarding the disclosure of genetic test results to OHCPs. The majority did not report any concerns about potential insurance discrimination (88%) and indicated that OHCPs were able to appropriately address their questions (81%). Although most women shared their genetic test results with OHCPs, those with a personal history of cancer may need further encouragement to share this information. Tertiary care centers should facilitate outreach and education with OHCPs in order to assure appropriate long-term cancer risk management for high risk populations.

Genetics, genomics, and cancer risk assessment: State of the Art and Future Directions in the Era of Personalized Medicine

Scientific and technologic advances are revolutionizing our approach to genetic cancer risk assessment, cancer screening and prevention, and targeted therapy, fulfilling the promise of personalized medicine. In this monograph, we review the evolution of scientific discovery in cancer genetics and genomics, and describe current approaches, benefits, and barriers to the translation of this information to the practice of preventive medicine. Summaries of known hereditary cancer syndromes and highly penetrant genes are provided and contrasted with recently discovered genomic variants associated with modest increases in cancer risk. We describe the scope of knowledge, tools, and expertise required for the translation of complex genetic and genomic test information into clinical practice. The challenges of genomic counseling include the need for genetics and genomics professional education and multidisciplinary team training, the need for evidence-based information regarding the clinical utility of testing for genomic variants, the potential dangers posed by premature marketing of first-generation genomic profiles, and the need for new clinical models to improve access to and responsible communication of complex disease risk information. We conclude that given the experiences and lessons learned in the genetics era, the multidisciplinary model of genetic cancer risk assessment and management will serve as a solid foundation to support the integration of personalized genomic information into the practice of cancer medicine.

Analysis of insurance preauthorization requests for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing: experience of the Humana Genetic Guidance Program

Published evidence-based guidelines help healthcare providers identify appropriate individuals for BRCA1/2 genetic testing. Health plans often use these guidelines to help make coverage and reimbursement decisions. Humana, a major health plan, launched the Humana Genetic Guidance Program to further facilitate the appropriate use of genetic testing through education.

AIM

Identify opportunities to improve medical appropriateness for BRCA1/2 test requests by providing genetic education to providers.

MATERIALS & METHODS

BRCA1/2 insurance preauthorization requests submitted to the program were evaluated against guideline-based coverage criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 22% of the requests did not meet criteria, and in approximately a quarter of those requests, the clinical history suggested testing for a different cancer syndrome or another affected relative.

CONCLUSION

This report demonstrates the program's effectiveness and illustrates the need for additional provider education regarding genetic testing from a payer's perspective.

Genetic risk prediction in complex disease

Attempting to classify patients into high or low risk for disease onset or outcomes is one of the cornerstones of epidemiology. For some (but by no means all) diseases, clinically usable risk prediction can be performed using classical risk factors such as body mass index, lipid levels, smoking status, family history and, under certain circumstances, genetics (e.g. BRCA1/2 in breast cancer). The advent of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) has led to the discovery of common risk loci for the majority of common diseases. These discoveries raise the possibility of using these variants for risk prediction in a clinical setting. We discuss the different ways in which the predictive accuracy of these loci can be measured, and survey the predictive accuracy of GWAS variants for 18 common diseases. We show that predictive accuracy from genetic models varies greatly across diseases, but that the range is similar to that of non-genetic risk-prediction models. We discuss what factors drive differences in predictive accuracy, and how much value these predictions add over classical predictive tests. We also review the uses and pitfalls of idealized models of risk prediction. Finally, we look forward towards possible future clinical implementation of genetic risk prediction, and discuss realistic expectations for future utility.

Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study

BACKGROUND

Genetic counseling and testing is recommended for women at high but not average risk of ovarian cancer. National estimates of physician adherence to genetic counseling and testing recommendations are lacking.

METHODS

Using a vignette-based study, we surveyed 3200 United States family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician/gynecologists and received 1878 (62%) responses. The questionnaire included an annual examination vignette asking about genetic counseling and testing. The vignette varied patient age, race, insurance status, and ovarian cancer risk. Estimates of physician adherence to genetic counseling and testing recommendations were weighted to the United States primary care physician population. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent patient and physician predictors of adherence.

RESULTS

For average-risk women, 71% of physicians self-reported adhering to recommendations against genetic counseling or testing. In multivariable modeling, predictors of adherence against referral/testing included black versus white race (relative risk [RR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.31), Medicaid versus private insurance (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.29), and rural versus urban location. Among high-risk women, 41% of physicians self-reported adhering to recommendations to refer for genetic counseling or testing. Predictors of adherence for referral/testing were younger patient age [35 vs 51 years [RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.41-2.24]), physician sex (female vs male [RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.64]), and obstetrician/gynecologist versus family medicine specialty (RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.31-2.05). For both average-risk and high-risk women, physician-estimated ovarian cancer risk was the most powerful predictor of recommendation adherence.

CONCLUSION

Physicians reported that they would refer many average-risk women and would not refer many high-risk women for genetic counseling/testing. Intervention efforts, including promotion of accurate risk assessment, are needed.

Microscopic and early-stage ovarian cancers in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: building a model for early BRCA-associated tumorigenesis

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is the cornerstone of ovarian cancer prevention in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Occult fallopian tube and ovarian cancers have been reported in a small percentage of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers undergoing RRSO. Here, we review our single-institution experience with RRSO in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers to characterize cases of microscopic cancers in these patients. At the time of RRSO, 7.9% of BRCA1 mutation carriers were diagnosed with microscopic fallopian tube or ovarian cancers and no cases were diagnosed in BRCA2 mutation carriers. The majority of the microscopic cancers include cases that were confined to the fallopian tubes, although there were also cases involving ovaries only or peritoneal washings only. This suggests that the site of origin may be in the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum for BRCA-associated serous cancers. However, an analysis of early-stage (stages I and II) ovarian and fallopian tube cancers diagnosed in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers confirms that the ovary is a preferred site for tumor growth with 11 of 14 early-stage cancers having a dominant ovarian mass. Overall, these data suggest that cancer initiation may occur in the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, but tumor growth and progression are favored in the ovary. We present an updated model for BRCA1/2 mutation-associated ovarian and fallopian tube carcinogenesis, which may aid in identifying improved prevention strategies for high-risk women who delay or decline RRSO.

Awareness and utilization of BRCA1/2 testing among U.S. primary care physicians

BACKGROUND

Testing for mutations in the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) has been commercially available since 1996.

PURPOSE

This study sought to determine, among U.S. primary care physicians, the level of awareness and utilization of BRCA testing and the 2005 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations.

METHODS

In 2009, data were analyzed on 1500 physician respondents to the 2007 DocStyles national survey (515 family practitioners, 485 internists, 250 pediatricians, and 250 obstetricians/gynecologists).

RESULTS

Overall, 87% of physicians were aware of BRCA testing, and 25% reported having ordered testing for at least one patient in the past year. Ordering tests was most prevalent among obstetricians/gynecologists in practice for more than 10 years, with more affluent patients. Physicians were asked to select indications for BRCA testing from seven different clinical scenarios representing increased (4) or low-risk (3) situations consistent with the USPSTF guidelines. Among ordering physicians (pediatricians excluded), 45% chose at least one low-risk scenario as an indication for BRCA testing. Only 19% correctly selected all of the increased-risk and none of the low-risk scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial majority of primary care physicians are aware of BRCA testing and many report having ordered at least one test within the past year. A minority, however, appear to consistently recognize the family history patterns identified by the USPSTF as appropriate indications for BRCA evaluation. These results suggest the need to improve providers' knowledge about existing recommendations-particularly in this era of increased BRCA direct-to-consumer marketing.

Management of the asymptomatic BRCA mutation carrier

Current management of an asymptomatic BRCA mutation carrier includes early initiation and intensive cancer screening in combination with risk reduction strategies. The primary objectives of these interventions are earlier detection and cancer prevention to increase quality of life and prolonged survival. Existing recommendations are often based on the consensus of experts as there are few, supportive, randomized control trials. Management strategies for unaffected patients with BRCA mutations are continually redefined and customized as more evidence-based knowledge is acquired with regard to current intervention efficacy, mutation-related histology, and new treatment modalities. This review provides an outline of current, supported management principles, and interventions in the care of the asymptomatic BRCA mutation carrier. Topics covered include surveillance modalities and risk reduction achieved through behavioral modification, chemoprevention, and prophylactic surgery.

The Roles of Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/Computed Tomography in Ovarian Cancer: Diagnosis, Assessing Response, and Detecting Recurrence

The potential roles of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in ovarian cancer include noninvasive characterization of an ovarian mass, staging, and treatment planning. This article assesses these roles for predicting and monitoring response to treatment, restaging, and early diagnosis of recurrence.

Benign breast disease

Benign breast diseases are among the most common diagnoses that the busy obstetrician-gynecologist will see in practice. Moreover, breast cancer will undoubtedly be diagnosed numerous times in an obstetrician-gynecologist's career. An ability to accurately and promptly diagnose both benign and malignant breast diseases is within the purview of the generalist obstetrician-gynecologist. A thorough understanding of benign breast diseases, including appropriate diagnostic techniques, is vitally important in well-women care. In addition, a working knowledge of breast cancer risk factors with the ability to identify women at high risk and either refer or initiate risk reduction methods is equally important. This review outlines common benign breast diseases stratified by future risk of breast cancer and discusses appropriate management after diagnosis.

Expanding the criteria for BRCA mutation testing in breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Every year approximately 25% of women diagnosed with breast cancer are younger than 50 years of age, and almost 10% of them have a BRCA mutation. Not all potential carriers are identified by existing criteria for BRCA testing. We estimated the costs and benefits of different BRCA testing criteria for women with breast cancer younger than 50 years.

METHODS

We developed a Markov Monte Carlo simulation to compare six criteria for BRCA mutation testing: (1) no testing (reference); (2) medullary breast cancer in patients younger than 50 years; (3) any breast cancer in patients younger than 40 years; (4) triple negative (TN) breast cancer in patients younger than 40 years; (5) TN breast cancer in patients younger than 50 years; (6) any breast cancer in patients younger than 50 years. Net health benefits were life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy, and primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The model estimated the number of new breast and ovarian cancer cases.

RESULTS

BRCA mutation testing for all women with breast cancer who were younger than 50 years could prevent the highest number of breast and ovarian cancer cases, but with unfavorable ICERs. Testing women with TN breast cancers who were younger than 50 years was cost-effective with an ICER of $8,027 per year of life gained ($9,084 per quality-adjusted life-year), and could reduce subsequent breast and ovarian cancer risks by 23% and 41%, respectively, compared with the reference strategy.

CONCLUSION

Testing women with TN breast cancers who were younger than 50 years for BRCA mutations is a cost-effective strategy and should be adopted into current guidelines for genetic testing.

Somatic mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could expand the number of patients that benefit from poly (ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors in ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

The prevalence of BRCA(1/2) mutations in germline DNA from unselected ovarian cancer patients is 11% to 15.3%. It is important to determine the frequency of somatic BRCA(1/2) changes, given the sensitivity of BRCA-mutated cancers to poly (ADP ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP1) inhibitors and platinum analogs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In 235 unselected ovarian cancers, BRCA(1/2) was sequenced in 235, assessed by copy number analysis in 95, and tiling arrays in 65. 113 tumors were sequenced for TP53. BRCA(1/2) transcript levels were assessed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction in 220. When available for tumors with BRCA(1/2) mutations, germline DNA was sequenced.

RESULTS

Forty-four mutations (19%) in BRCA1 (n = 31)/BRCA2 (n = 13) were detected, including one homozygous BRCA1 intragenic deletion. BRCA(1/2) mutations were particularly common (23%) in high-grade serous cancers. In 28 patients with available germline DNA, nine (42.9%) of 21 and two (28.6%) of seven BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were demonstrated to be somatic, respectively. Five mutations not previously identified in germline DNA were more commonly somatic than germline (four of 11 v one of 17; P = .062). There was a positive association between BRCA1 and TP53 mutations (P = .012). BRCA(1/2) mutations were associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) after platinum-based chemotherapy in univariate (P = .032; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.98) and multivariate (P = .019) analyses. BRCA(1/2) deficiency, defined as BRCA(1/2) mutations or expression loss (in 24 [13.3%] BRCA(1/2)-wild-type cancers), was present in 67 ovarian cancers (30%) and was also significantly associated with PFS in univariate (P = .026; HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.96) and multivariate (P = .008) analyses.

CONCLUSION

BRCA(1/2) somatic and germline mutations and expression loss are sufficiently common in ovarian cancer to warrant assessment for prediction of benefit in clinical trials of PARP1 inhibitors.

Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incidence of genetic counseling referral for ovarian cancer patients who are at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

METHODS

An analysis was performed of new ovarian cancer patients who were seen at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2007. Patients at substantial (more than 20-25%) risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified and records reviewed for referral to genetic counseling. Time to referral was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 3,765 epithelial ovarian cancer patients were seen during the 9-year period. On average, 23.8% of patients met substantial-risk criteria for BRCA mutations. In 1999, only 12% of patients at substantial-risk were referred. Referral improved over time with 48% referred in 2007 (P<.001). Newly diagnosed patients were more often referred for genetic counseling than new patients with recurrent disease or those seen as second opinions. African-American women meeting substantial-risk criteria were less likely to be referred than were white or Hispanic women (P=.009).

CONCLUSION

Although dictated family history was accurate, interpretation of risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and subsequent referral to genetic counseling was poor. Although there was significant improvement over time, 50% of substantial-risk patients still were missed. Systematic efforts to identify those ovarian cancer patients at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 are necessary.

The prospect of genome-guided preventive medicine: a need and opportunity for genetic counselors

One of the major anticipated benefits of genomic medicine is the area of preventive medicine. Commercially available genomic profiling is now able to generate risk information for a number of common conditions several of which have recognized preventive guidelines. Similarly, family history assessment affords powerful health risk prediction based on the shared genetic, physical and lifestyle environments within families. Thus, with the ability to help predict disease risk and enable preemptive health plans, genome-guided preventive medicine has the potential to improve population health on an individualized level. To realize this potential, steps to broaden access to accurate genomic health information must be considered. With expertise in genetic science, risk assessment and communication, and a patient-centered practice approach, genetic counselors are poised to play a critical role in facilitating the incorporation of genomic health risks into the burgeoning field of genome-guided preventive medicine.

Extending comprehensive cancer center expertise in clinical cancer genetics and genomics to diverse communities: the power of partnership

Rapidly evolving genetic and genomic technologies for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) are revolutionizing the approach to targeted therapy and cancer screening and prevention, heralding the era of personalized medicine. Although many academic medical centers provide GCRA services, most people receive their medical care in the community setting. However, few community clinicians have the knowledge or time needed to adequately select, apply, and interpret genetic/genomic tests. This article describes alternative approaches to the delivery of GCRA services, profiling the City of Hope Cancer Screening & Prevention Program Network (CSPPN) academic and community-based health center partnership as a model for the delivery of the highest-quality evidence-based GCRA services while promoting research participation in the community setting. Growth of the CSPPN was enabled by information technology, with videoconferencing for telemedicine and Web conferencing for remote participation in interdisciplinary genetics tumor boards. Grant support facilitated the establishment of an underserved minority outreach clinic in the regional County hospital. Innovative clinician education, technology, and collaboration are powerful tools to extend GCRA expertise from a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, enabling diffusion of evidenced-base genetic/genomic information and best practice into the community setting.

Performance of common genetic variants in breast-cancer risk models

BACKGROUND

Genomewide association studies have identified multiple genetic variants associated with breast cancer. The extent to which these variants add to existing risk-assessment models is unknown.

METHODS

We used information on traditional risk factors and 10 common genetic variants associated with breast cancer in 5590 case subjects and 5998 control subjects, 50 to 79 years of age, from four U.S. cohort studies and one case-control study from Poland to fit models of the absolute risk of breast cancer. With the use of receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis, we calculated the area under the curve (AUC) as a measure of discrimination. By definition, random classification of case and control subjects provides an AUC of 50%; perfect classification provides an AUC of 100%. We calculated the fraction of case subjects in quintiles of estimated absolute risk after the addition of genetic variants to the traditional risk model.

RESULTS

The AUC for a risk model with age, study and entry year, and four traditional risk factors was 58.0%; with the addition of 10 genetic variants, the AUC was 61.8%. About half the case subjects (47.2%) were in the same quintile of risk as in a model without genetic variants; 32.5% were in a higher quintile, and 20.4% were in a lower quintile.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of newly discovered genetic factors modestly improved the performance of risk models for breast cancer. The level of predicted breast-cancer risk among most women changed little after the addition of currently available genetic information.

Cancer genetic risk assessment and referral patterns in primary care

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to describe cancer risk assessment practices among primary care providers (PCPs).

METHODS

An electronic survey was sent to PCPs affiliated with a single insurance carrier. Demographic and practice characteristics associated with cancer genetic risk assessment and testing activities were described. Latent class analysis supported by likelihood ratio tests was used to define PCP profiles with respect to the level of engagement in genetic risk assessment and referral activity based on demographic and practice characteristics.

RESULTS

860 physicians responded to the survey (39% family practice, 29% internal medicine, 22% obstetrics/gynecology (OB/GYN), 10% other). Most respondents (83%) reported that they routinely assess hereditary cancer risk; however, only 33% reported that they take a full, three-generation pedigree for risk assessment. OB/GYN specialty, female gender, and physician access to a genetic counselor were independent predictors of referral to cancer genetics specialists. Three profiles of PCPs, based upon referral practice and extent of involvement in genetics evaluation, were defined.

CONCLUSION

Profiles of physician characteristics associated with varying levels of engagement with cancer genetic risk assessment and testing can be identified. These profiles may ultimately be useful in targeting decision support tools and services.

High poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase expression and poor survival in advanced-stage serous ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the range of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase expression in serous ovarian cancers and to determine whether expression is associated with response to therapy and outcome.

METHODS

Immunostaining for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase was performed in 186 paraffin-embedded, serous ovarian cancers. Nuclear poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression was quantified using a scoring system that assesses both staining intensity and percentage of cells staining. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression and overall survival.

RESULTS

High poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression was present in 54% of serous cancers but was not associated with stage or grade. There was no difference in the rate of complete clinical response to primary chemotherapy between cases with low poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression (70%) compared with those with high poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression (71%). However, high poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression was associated with significantly worse median overall survival (36 compared with 43 months, P=.04, hazard ratio 0.71).

CONCLUSION

Expression of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in ovarian cancers is heterogeneous, and high expression in serous ovarian cancers is associated with worse overall survival. These data suggest that evaluation of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression in the primary cancer could potentially allow selective use of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in patients most likely to respond.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

BRCA1/2 mutations and triple negative breast cancers

Identifying breast cancer patients at increased risk for carrying a mutation in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is an important objective in clinical practice. Although age at diagnosis, family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer, and ethnicity are all essential parameters to consider when assessing risk, there are limitations as to how well such factors accurately predict BRCA1/2 status, even when quantitative risk models are applied. Integrating information about triple negative (TN) disease may help refine these estimates. Among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, fewer than 10% have a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, and up to 20% present However, among BRCA1 mutation carriers at least one-third have TN breast cancers. In this paper, we review key studies that have assessed breast cancer cases with a known BRCA1/2 status and triple marker data. We also discuss how integrating such information into qualitative and quantitative risk assessments of BRCA1/2 carrier probability may improve the ability to identify women who are appropriate candidates for genetic testing. Identifying women at increased risk is critical as knowledge of mutation status may impact surgical and systemic treatment in newly diagnosed patients, as well as recommendations for ovarian cancer risk management.

Ovarian Cancer Screening and Early Detection

One of the most challenging issues in gynecologic oncology is the high mortality rate of ovarian cancer, largely due to detection of disease in advanced stages. Women with early-stage disease have a significantly improved survival rate and may not require chemotherapy. Thus, the issues to examine are whether there are methods to improve early detection, thereby resulting in a reduction in mortality. Several large, randomized, clinical trials have recently completed evaluating CA 125 and transvaginal sonography as effective strategies to accomplish this goal. These issues and the results of the recent trials will be reviewed in this article.

Ovarian cancer

The standard initial management of epithelial ovarian cancer consists of surgical staging, operative tumour debulking including total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and administration of six cycles of intravenous chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Extensive and largely retrospective experience has shown that optimum surgical debulking to leave residual tumour deposits that are less than 1 cm in size is associated with improved patient outcomes. However, 75% of patients present with advanced (stage III or IV) disease and, although more than 80% of these women benefit from first-line therapy, tumour recurrence occurs in almost all these patients at a median of 15 months from diagnosis. Second-line treatments can improve survival and quality of life but are not curative. Advances in screening and understanding of molecular pathogenesis of ovarian cancer and development of novel targeted therapies (eg, bevacizumab) and practical intraperitoneal techniques for drug delivery are most likely to improve patient outcomes.