Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rate and predictive factors among patients with breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer

Assessment of the effect of the American Society of Breast Surgery guidelines on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates for unilateral breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In July 2016, the American Society of Breast Surgeons published guidelines discouraging contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer. We incorporated these into practice with structured patient counseling and aimed to assess the effect of this initiative on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates.

METHODS

We evaluated female patients with unilateral breast cancer undergoing mastectomy at our institution from January 2011 to November 2022. Variables associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and trends over time were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test or χ2 analysis as appropriate.

RESULTS

Among 3,208 patients, (median age 54 years) 1,366 (43%) had a unilateral mastectomy, and 1,842 (57%) also had a concomitant contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Across all patients, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates significantly decreased post-implementation from 2017 to 2019 (55%) vs 2015 to 2016 (62%) (P = .01) but increased from 2020 to 2022 (61%). Immediate breast reconstruction rate was 70% overall (81% with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and 56% without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, P < .001). Younger age, White race, mutation status, and earlier stage were also associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Genetic testing increased from 27% pre-guideline to 74% 2020 to 2022, as did the proportion of patients with a pathogenic variant (4% pre-guideline vs 11% from 2020-2022, P < .001), of whom 91% had a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Among tested patients without a pathogenic variant and patients not tested, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates declined from 78% to 67% and 48% to 38% pre -and post-guidelines, respectively, P < .001.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of specific patient counseling was effective in decreasing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates. While recognizing that patient choice plays a significant role in the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, further educational efforts are warranted to affect contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates, particularly in the setting of negative genetic testing.

Association of Moderate-Risk Breast Cancer Genes with Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy and Bilateral Disease

BACKGROUND

The impact of ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2, the three most prevalent moderate-risk breast cancer genes, on surgical decision making is not well known.

METHODS

Our retrospective study included patients with resectable non-metastatic breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing between July 2014 and January 2020 with at least one genetic alteration (pathogenic or variant of uncertain significance [VUS] in ATM [n = 49], CHEK [n = 57], or PALB2 [n = 27]). Our objectives were to determine the rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and the rate of bilateral breast cancer. Univariable analyses (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to identify factors associated with CPM and bilateral breast cancer.

RESULTS

The rate of CPM was 39% (n = 49/127), with 54% (n = 25/46) of patients with a pathogenic mutation and 30% (n = 24/81) of patients with a VUS choosing CPM. On MVA, premenopausal status (odds ratio [OR] 3.46) and a pathogenic alteration (OR 3.01) were associated with increased use of CPM. Bilateral disease was noted in 16% (n = 22/138). Patients with pathogenic mutations had a 22% (n = 11/51) incidence of bilateral breast cancer, while patients with VUS had a 13% (n = 11/87) incidence, although this was not statistically significant on UVA or MVA. On MVA, premenopausal status was associated with a decreased risk of bilateral disease (OR 0.33, p = 0.022). During follow-up, a breast cancer event occurred in 16% (n = 22/138).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified a high rate of CPM among those with ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 alterations, including VUS. Further studies are needed to clarify reasons for CPM among patients with moderate-risk alterations.

Risk‐reducing mastectomy decisions among women with mutations in high‐ and moderate‐ penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes

Background

Women harboring mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes are at increased lifetime risk of developing breast cancer and are faced with decisions about risk management, including whether to undergo high‐risk screening or risk‐reducing mastectomy (RRM). National guidelines recommend BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers consider RRM, but that carriers of moderate penetrance mutations (e.g., ATM or CHEK2) should be managed based on family history. We aimed to investigate determinants of decision for RRM, and hypothesized that mutation status, age, family history, partner status, and breast cancer would impact RRM decision making.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study assessing RRM decisions for 279 women.

Results

Women with BRCA and moderate penetrance gene mutations, a personal history of breast cancer, or a first degree relative with a history of breast cancer were more likely to undergo RRM. Breast cancer status and age showed an interaction effect such that women with breast cancer were less likely to undergo RRM with increasing age.

Conclusion

Although national guidelines do not recommend RRM for moderate penetrance carriers, the rates of RRM for this population approached those for BRCA mutation carriers. Further insights are needed to better support RRM decision‐making in this population.

Influence of germline test results on surgical decision making in women with invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

While therapeutic mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (TM+CPM) and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) are recommended for women with pathogenic variants (PV) in some cancer predisposition genes, evidence for the utility of these surgeries for women with PV in other genes currently is insufficient. In conjunction, current guidelines recommend that clinical management should not be influenced by a return of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). Return of germline test results may, however, influence surgical decision making regardless of current guidelines. We thus evaluated surgical choices amongst a cohort of women with invasive breast cancer who underwent clinical genetic testing.

METHODS

Germline test results and all surgical procedures were extracted for women who had unilateral invasive breast cancer and had clinical testing before definitive surgery (n = 591). Results were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (PV, 17.1%), VUS (19.5%) or benign/likely benign (63.4%). Data were analyzed using chi-square tests with p<0.05 defining significance.

RESULTS

Rates of TM+CPM and BSO were not significantly different for women with VUS compared to those with benign findings. Rates of TM+CPM were significantly higher for women with PV in BRCA1 and BRCA2, PALB2, PTEN and TP53, as well in genes with insufficient data to recommend risk-reducing mastectomy. Rates of BSO were significantly higher in women with PV in BRCA1 and BRCA2, PALB2, PTEN and TP53 and BRIP1, RAD51C and RAD51D compared to those with benign findings.

CONCLUSION

Overall, surgical choices for women with a VUS were more similar to those from women with benign variants than to those with PV, however, in the group with PV in genes for which insufficient evidence exists for the benefit of risk-reducing mastectomy, rates of TM+CPM were high. Thus, while the management of women with VUS is in agreement with ACMG guidelines, patients with mutations in other cancer genes demonstrate a preference for more aggressive breast surgeries.

Experiences of individuals with a variant of uncertain significance on genetic testing for hereditary cancer risks: a mixed method systematic review

The expansion of Multi-Gene Panel Testing (MGPT) has led to increased detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) among individuals with personal or family history of cancer. However, having a VUS result can impact on emotional and psychological wellbeing and cause challenges for non-geneticist healthcare providers. The purpose of this mixed methods systematic review was to examine what is currently known about the experiences of individuals with a VUS on genetic testing for inherited cancer susceptibility. The initial search was conducted in June 2020 using PUBMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsychInfo according to the Joanna Briggs methodology for systematic reviews. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included in this review identified a range of emotional reactions to a VUS result, a general lack of understanding of a VUS result and its implications, frustration with a lack of healthcare provider knowledge, and a need for clear communication with healthcare providers. This review identified critical gaps in current knowledge to guide genetic counseling praxis, specifically in the knowledge of communication patterns and methods of improving communication with healthcare providers and family members and preferred risk management strategies. This will help to improve the counseling process and the management of care during and after genetic testing.

Psychological and health behaviour outcomes following multi-gene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk: a mini-review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge of the genetic mechanisms driving hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) has recently expanded due to advances in gene sequencing technologies. Genetic testing for HBOC risk now involves multi-gene panel testing, which includes well characterized high-penetrance genes (e.g. BRCA1 and BRCA2), as well as moderate- and low-penetrance genes. Certain moderate and low penetrance genes are associated with limited data to inform cancer risk estimates and clinical management recommendations, which create new sources of genetic and clinical uncertainty for patients.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review is to evaluate the psychological and health behaviour outcomes associated with multi-gene panel testing for HBOC risk. The search was developed in collaboration with an Information Specialist (Princess Margaret Cancer Centre) and conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCare, PsycINFO, Epub Ahead of Publication.

RESULTS

Similar to the BRCA1/2 literature, individuals with a pathogenic variant (PV) reported higher levels of testing-related concerns and cancer-specific distress, as well as higher uptake of prophylactic surgery in both affected and unaffected individuals compared to those with variant of uncertain significance (VUS) or negative result. A single study demonstrated that individuals with a PV in a moderate penetrance gene reported higher rates of cancer worry, genetic testing concerns and cancer-related distress when compared to women with high penetrance PV. Analysis of cancer screening and prevention outcomes based upon gene penetrance were limited to two studies, with conflicting findings.

CONCLUSION

The findings in this review emphasize the need for studies examining psychological and health behavior outcomes associated with panel testing to include between group differences based upon both variant pathogenicity and gene penetrance. Future studies evaluating the impact of gene penetrance on patient-reported and clinical outcomes will require large samples to be powered for these analyses given that a limited number of tested individuals are found to have a PV.

Timely cancer genetic counseling and testing for young women with breast cancer: impact on surgical decision-making for contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy

PURPOSE

Genetic testing (GT) can identify individuals with pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in breast cancer (BC) predisposition genes, who may consider contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM). We report on CRRM rates in young women newly diagnosed with BC who received GT through a multidisciplinary clinic.

METHODS

Clinical data were reviewed for patients seen between November 2014 and June 2019. Patients with non-metastatic, unilateral BC diagnosed at age ≤ 45 and completed GT prior to surgery were included. Associations between surgical intervention and age, BC stage, family history, and GT results were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 194 patients, 30 (15.5%) had a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, NBN, NF1), with 66.7% in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Of 164 (84.5%) uninformative results, 132 (68%) were negative and 32 (16.5%) were variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, 67 (34.5%) had CRRM, including 25/30 (83.3%) PV/LPV carriers and 42/164 (25.6%) non-carriers. A positive test result (p < 0.01) and significant family history were associated with CRRM (p = 0.02). For the 164 with uninformative results, multivariate analysis showed that CRRM was not associated with age (p = 0.23), a VUS, (p = 0.08), family history (p = 0.10), or BC stage (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of young women with BC, the identification of a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene and a significant family history were associated with the decision to pursue CRRM. Thus, incorporation of genetic services in the initial evaluation of young patients with a new BC could contribute to the surgical decision-making process.

Association Between Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer and Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Among Multiethnic Women Diagnosed With Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Increasing usage of multigene panel testing has identified more patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P or LP) variants in low-moderate penetrance genes or variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Our study evaluates the association between genetic test results and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women diagnosed with unilateral stage 0-III breast cancer between 2013 and 2020 who underwent genetic testing. We examined whether genetic test results were associated with CPM using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 707 racially or ethnically diverse women, most had benign or likely benign (B or LB) variants, whereas 12.5% had P or LP and 17.9% had VUS. Racial or ethnic minorities were twice as likely to receive VUS. Patients with P or LP variants had higher CPM rates than VUS or B or LB (64.8% v 25.8% v 25.9%), and highest among women with P or LP variants in high-penetrance genes (74.6%). On multivariable analysis, P or LP compared with B or LB variants were significantly associated with CPM (odds ratio = 4.24; 95% CI, 2.48 to 7.26).

CONCLUSION

Women with P or LP variants on genetic testing were over four times more likely to undergo CPM than B or LB. Those with VUS had similar CPM rates as B or LB. Our findings suggest appropriate genetic counseling and communication of cancer risk to multiethnic breast cancer survivors.

Contralateral risk-reducing local therapy in breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2 mutations: systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Unilateral breast cancer (UBC) patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants have a higher risk of developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and need contralateral risk-reducing local treatments, including contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) and prophylactic irradiation (CPI). The aim of our study was to systematically explore the efficacy of CRRM and CPI in reducing CBC risk and increasing survival.

METHODS

A search was done, and eligible randomized trials and cohort studies should include and compare UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants who have and have not received contralateral risk-reducing local treatment. Random-effects meta-analysis was used in this study. Primary outcomes of the studies included overall survival (OS) and the incidence of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and secondary outcomes included breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

A total of five studies with 1769 UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants were enrolled in our meta-analysis. CRRM was correlated with a lower risk of CBC in UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants (summary RR = 0.07; 95%CI 0.03-0.13, I2 = 3%), a significantly increased OS (summary RR, 1.15; 95%CI 1.04-1.26, I2 = 26%) and a significantly increased BCSS (summary RR, 1.18; 95%CI 1.07-1.31, I2 = 64%) compared with surveillance. CPI also decreased the risk of CBC (RR 0.02; 95%CI 0.05-0.88) but did not significantly improve OS (RR 0.97; 95%CI 0.90-1.05) and BCSS (RR 0.97; 95%CI 0.90-1.05) compared with surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

CRRM reduces CBC risk and increases OS and BCSS in UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants, and could be offered as a risk-reducing local treatment. For those who oppose CRRM, CPI could be offered for CBC-risk reduction, while its survival benefit is still uncertain.

Influencers of the Decision to Undergo Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy among Women with Unilateral Breast Cancer

Simple Summary

In this survey study, we examined survey responses from 397 women with stage 0 to III unilateral breast cancer and found that partners, physicians, and the media were significant relative to the patient’s own influence in their decision to undergo a CPM. The findings of this study may inform policy by highlighting the need for educational aids, programs, or tools that help women with unilateral breast cancer make informed, evidence-based decisions regarding CPM efficacy.

Abstract

(1) Background: The relatively high rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among women with early stage unilateral breast cancer (BC) has raised concerns. We sought to assess the influence of partners, physicians, and the media on the decision of women with unilateral BC to undergo CPM and identify clinicopathological variables associated with the decision to undergo CPM. (2) Patients and Methods: Women with stage 0 to III unilateral BC who underwent CPM between January 2010 and December 2017. Patients were surveyed regarding factors influencing their self-determined decision to undergo CPM. Partner, physician, and media influence factors were modeled by logistic regressions with adjustments for a family history of breast cancer and pathological stage. (3) Results: 397 (29.6%) patients completed the survey and were included in the study. Partners, physicians, and the media significantly influenced patients’ decision to undergo CPM. The logistic regression models showed that, compared to self-determination alone, overall influence on the CPM decision was significantly higher for physicians (p = 0.0006) and significantly lower for partners and the media (p < 0.0001 for both). Fifty-nine percent of patients’ decisions were influenced by physicians, 28% were influenced by partners, and only 17% were influenced by the media. The model also showed that patients with a family history of BC had significantly higher odds of being influenced by a partner than did those without a family history of BC (p = 0.015). (4) Conclusions: Compared to self-determination, physicians had a greater influence and partners and the media had a lower influence on the decision of women with unilateral BC to undergo CPM. Strong family history was significantly associated with a patient’s decision to undergo CPM.

Clinical management among individuals with variant of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Improper medical use of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) remains a concern in hereditary cancer genetic testing. The goal of this study was to assess the association between pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP), VUS, and benign and likely benign (B/LB) genetic test results and cancer-related surgical and screening management. Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO were conducted from 1946 to August 26, 2020. Eligible studies included individuals with cancer genetic test result and surgical or screening management outcomes. We reviewed 885 abstracts and 22 studies that reported relevant surgical and screening outcomes were included. Meta-analysis revealed significantly higher surgical rates among individuals with P/LP than among those with VUS for therapeutic mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 7.35, 95% CI, 4.14-13.64), prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 3.05, 95% CI, 1.5-6.19), and oophorectomy (OR = 6.46, 95% CI, 3.64-11.44). There were no significant differences in therapeutic mastectomy, or breast conservation or lumpectomy rates between individuals with P/LP and VUS, or in any outcomes between patients with VUS and B/LB. Studies evaluating screening outcomes were limited, and results were conflicting. Comprehensive analysis do not indicate that a significant number of individuals with VUS results undergo inappropriate clinical management.

The Angelina Jolie effect: Contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy trends in patients at increased risk of breast cancer

Contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) rates have tripled over the last 2 decades. Reasons for this are multi-factorial, with those harbouring a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1/2 gene having the greatest survival benefit. On May 14th, 2013, Angelina Jolie shared the news of her bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM), on the basis of her BRCA1 pathogenic variant status. We evaluated the impact of this news on rates of CRRM in women with increased risk for developing breast cancer after being diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer. The prospective cohort study included all women with at least a moderate lifetime risk of developing breast cancer who attended our family history clinic (1987–2019) and were subsequently diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer. Rates of CRRM were then compared between patients diagnosed with breast cancer before and after Angelina Jolie’s announcement (pre- vs. post-AJ). Of 386 breast cancer patients, with a mean age at diagnosis of 48 ± 8 years, 268 (69.4%) were diagnosed in the pre-AJ period, and 118 (30.6%) in the post-AJ period. Of these, 123 (31.9%) underwent CRRM, a median 42 (interquartile range: 11–54) days after the index cancer surgery. Rates of CRRM doubled following AJ’s news, from 23.9% pre-AJ to 50.0% post AJ (p < 0.001). Rates of CRRM were found to decrease with increasing age at breast cancer (p < 0.001) and tumour TNM stage (p = 0.040), and to increase with the estimated lifetime risk of breast cancer (p < 0.001) and tumour grade (p = 0.015) on univariable analysis. After adjusting for these factors, the step-change increase in CRRM rates post-AJ remained significant (odds ratio: 9.61, p < 0.001). The AJ effect appears to have been associated with higher rates of CRRM amongst breast cancer patients with increased cancer risk. CRRM rates were highest amongst younger women and those with the highest lifetime risk profile. Clinicians need to be aware of how media news can impact on the delivery of cancer related services. Communicating objective assessment of risk is important when counselling women on the merits of risk-reducing surgery.

Contralateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients Who Undergo Multigene Panel Testing

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of breast cancer patients are undergoing expanded genetic testing and are being identified as germline mutation carriers. We sought to determine rates of contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) in patients with various germline mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All women ≥ 18 years of age with unilateral breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing between January 1, 2014 and August 1, 2019 at our academic institution were identified. Demographic, tumor, and treatment variables were identified from the medical record. Multivariable analyses were performed to compare factors associated with performance of CRRM.

RESULTS

We identified 1613 patients, of whom 28.1% had a pathogenic variant and 40.1% had variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, 420 patients (26.0%) underwent a CRRM. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with CRRM included age < 50 years (OR 3.8, 95% CI 3.0, 5.0), race (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3, 0.7 and OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.7 for Black and Asian women, respectively, versus White women), and the presence of any germline mutation or VUS (OR 13.2, 95% CI 8.7, 20.2 for BRCA1/2; OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.7, 5.8 for non-BRCA germline mutation; and OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3, 2.6 for VUS).

CONCLUSIONS

In breast cancer patients who undergo multigene panel testing, a sizeable number of women with pathogenic non-BRCA germline findings are opting for CRRM. Given that the risk of contralateral breast cancer in women with most pathogenic mutations other than BRCA1/2 remains poorly characterized, these data have implications for risk counseling and for ascertaining the true risks of contralateral breast cancer in this population.

Predictors of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in genetically high risk newly diagnosed breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Recent trends indicate increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, particularly those who test positive for a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1/2 genes. However, the rate of CPM among patients who test negative or choose not to be tested is surprisingly high. We aimed to identify patient predictors of CPM following breast cancer diagnosis among such patients.

METHODS

As part of a randomized controlled trial of rapid genetic counseling and testing vs. usual care, breast cancer patients completed a baseline survey within 6 weeks of diagnosis and before definitive surgery. Analyses focused on patients who opted against testing (n = 136) or who received negative BRCA1/2 test results (n = 149). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the associations between sociodemographic, clinical- and patient-reported factors with use of CPM.

RESULTS

Among patients who were untested or who received negative test results, having discussed CPM with one's surgeon at the time of diagnosis predicted subsequent CPM. Patients who were not candidates for breast-conserving surgery and those with higher levels of cancer-specific intrusive thoughts were also more likely to obtain a CPM.

CONCLUSION

The strongest predictors of CPM in this population were objective clinical factors and discussion with providers. However, baseline psychosocial factors were also independently related to the receipt of CPM. Thus, although CPM decisions are largely guided by relevant clinical factors, it is important to attend to psychosocial factors when counseling newly diagnosed breast cancer patients about treatment options.

Impact of genetic counseling on the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among younger women with breast cancer

Background: Preoperative genetic testing affects the surgical decision-making among women with breast cancer. To avoid breast-conserving surgery and to offer the possibility of mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in high-risk patients, genetic testing for pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and a pedigree-based familial breast cancer risk assessment was offered to younger women with breast cancer in Denmark. We evaluated the impact of the risk stratification through genetic counseling on the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).Material and methods: The prospective cohort study included all women with unilateral breast cancer before the age of 45 who participated in a genetic counseling program during their primary diagnostics in the Central Denmark Region (2013-2018). Each patient was followed from the time of the genetic test result to the end of follow-up to estimate the long-term uptake of CPM as a competing risk-adjusted cumulative incidence. We compared the uptake of CPM between the various genetic risk categories, ages of onset, and family histories in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, reporting hazard ratios (HR) with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: 156 females, aged 21-44, learned their genetic test result within a median of 92 days [interquartile range (IQR): 75-114]. The maximal follow-up was 3.8 years (median 1.8; IQR: 0.49-2.5), after which 33% (95% CI: 24-42%) of the patients had undergone CPM. The uptake of CPM was inversely associated with the age of onset (HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.86-0.98) and significantly higher among BRCA carriers (HR 2.9; 95% CI: 1.3-6.8) and patients from the high risk of breast cancer families (HR 5.6; 95% CI: 1.9-16) compared to the lower genetic risk categories.Conclusion: The risk stratification obtained through genetic counseling had a considerable impact on the surgical decision-making among younger women with breast cancer at long-term follow-up.

The changing surgical treatment of breast cancer in the United States: The tipping point

The surgical management of breast cancer began to change in the middle of the last decade. The use of unilateral mastectomy decreased while the rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral cancer increased sixfold from 1998 to 2011. The use of immediate breast reconstruction increased from 30% in 2005 to 45% in 2012. Four changes came together in the middle of the last decade to cause this paradigm shift in the surgical management of early breast cancer. (a) Breast MRI would be available in nearly 75% of breast imaging centers. (b) Genetic counseling would become a standard of care for patients with potential hereditary breast cancer. (c) In 2006, the FDA would approve the use of silicone-gel implants. (d) Nipple-sparing mastectomy would become a standard of care in the treatment of early breast cancer.

The Implications of Genetic Testing on Radiation Therapy Decisions: A Guide for Radiation Oncologists

The advent of affordable and rapid next-generation DNA sequencing technology, along with the US Supreme Court ruling invalidating gene patents, has led to a deluge of germline and tumor genetic variant tests that are being rapidly incorporated into clinical cancer decision-making. A major concern for clinicians is whether the presence of germline mutations may increase the risk of radiation toxicity or secondary malignancies. Because scarce clinical data exist to inform decisions at this time, the American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a group of radiation science experts and clinicians to summarize potential issues, review relevant data, and provide guidance for adult patients and their care teams regarding the impact, if any, that genetic testing should have on radiation therapy recommendations. During the American Society for Radiation Oncology workshop, several main points emerged, which are discussed in this manuscript: (1) variants of uncertain significance should be considered nondeleterious until functional genomic data emerge to demonstrate otherwise; (2) possession of germline alterations in a single copy of a gene critical for radiation damage responses does not necessarily equate to increased risk of radiation-induced toxicity; (3) deleterious ataxia-telangiesctasia gene mutations may modestly increase second cancer risk after radiation therapy, and thus follow-up for these patients after indicated radiation therapy should include second cancer screening; (4) conveying to patients the difference between relative and absolute risk is critical to decision-making; and (5) more work is needed to assess the impact of tumor somatic alterations on the probability of response to radiation therapy and the potential for individualization of radiation doses. Data on radiosensitivity related to specific genetic mutations is also briefly discussed.

The use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among elderly patients in the United States

PURPOSE

Previous studies have reported increased rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in the United States among women with unilateral breast cancer. These trends have primarily focused on younger breast cancer patients. Given the growing aging population in the United States, we sought to determine whether CPM use is also increasing in elderly patients.

METHODS

This population-based study identified patients in the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) data. We determined the rate of CPM as a proportion of all surgically treated patients and as a proportion of all mastectomies. We compared the unadjusted CPM rates over the study period using the Cochrane-Armitage test for trend. We used a logistic regression model to test for the factors associated with CPM utilization.

RESULTS

We identified 261,281 patients ≥ 65 years who underwent surgical treatment for breast cancer. For all patients treated with surgery for invasive breast cancer, the use of CPM increased from 1 in 2004 to 3% in 2014 (200% increase). Among mastectomy patients, the use of CPM increased from 3 in 2004 to 7% in 2014 (133% increase). Young age, non-Hispanic white race, lobular histology, higher grade, increased stage, negative lymph node status, and recent year of diagnosis were significantly associated with increased CPM rates.

CONCLUSIONS

For elderly patients the use of CPM has continued to increase in the United States. These observations warrant concern in light of increasing evidence that CPM does not improve oncological outcomes and is associated with increased morbidity in older patients.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rate and predictive factors among patients with breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer

Although multigene panel testing is increasingly common in patients with cancer, the relationship between its use among breast cancer patients with non-BRCA mutations or variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and disease management decisions has not been well described. This study evaluated the rate and predictive factors of CPM patients who underwent multigene panel testing. Three hundred and fourteen patients with breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing between 2014 and 2017 were included in the analysis. Of the 314 patients, 70 elected CPM. Election of CPM by gene status was as follows: BRCA carriers (42.3%), non-BRCA carriers (30.1%), and VUS (10.6%). CPM election rates did not differ between non-BRCA carriers and BRCA carriers (P = 0.6205). Among non-BRCA carriers, negative hormone receptor status was associated with CPM (P = 0.0115). For those with a VUS, hormone receptor status was not associated with CPM (P = 0.1879). Although the rate of CPM between BRCA carriers and non-BRCA carriers was not significantly different, the predictors of CPM were different in each group. Our analyses shed the light on the increasing use of CPM among patients who are non-BRCA carriers as well those with a VUS. Our study elucidates the differing predictive factors of CPM election among BRCA carriers, non-BRCA carries, and those with a VUS. Our findings reveal the need for providers to be cognizant that non-BRCA genes and VUS drive women to elect CPM despite the lack of data for contralateral breast cancer risk associated with these genes.