Management of BRCA1/2 associated breast cancer: a systematic qualitative review of the state of knowledge in 2006

Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: An Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Clinical Practice Guideline

BACKGROUND

The use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after the diagnosis of breast cancer by mammography and/or ultrasound is inconsistent.

METHODS

After conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing preoperative breast MRI versus no MRI, we reconvened to prepare a clinical practice guideline on this topic.

RESULTS

Based on the evidence that MRI improved recurrence, decreased the rates of reoperations (re-excisions or conversion mastectomy), and increased detection of synchronous contralateral breast cancer, we recommend that preoperative breast MRI should be considered on a case-by-case basis in patients diagnosed with breast cancer for whom additional information about disease extent could influence treatment. Based on stronger evidence, preoperative breast MRI is recommended in patients diagnosed with invasive lobular carcinoma for whom additional information about disease extent could influence treatment. For both recommendations, the decision to proceed with MRI would be conditional on shared decision-making between care providers and the patient, taking into account the benefits and risks of MRI as well as patient preferences. Based on the opinion of the Working Group, preoperative breast MRI is also recommended in the following more specific situations: (a) to aid in surgical planning of breast conserving surgery in patients with suspected or known multicentric or multifocal disease; (b) to identify additional lesions in patients with dense breasts; (c) to determine the presence of pectoralis major muscle/chest wall invasion in patients with posteriorly located tumours or when invasion of the pectoralis major muscle or chest wall is suspected; (d) to aid in surgical planning for skin/nipple-sparing mastectomies, autologous reconstruction, oncoplastic surgery, and breast conserving surgery with suspected nipple/areolar involvement; and (e) in patients with familial/hereditary breast cancer but who have not had recent breast MRI as part of screening or diagnosis.

Association between BRCA mutational status and survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating role of BRCA mutations on the survival outcomes in breast cancer (BC) patients have given confounding results and hence, in this meta-analysis, we assessed the impact of BRCA mutations on survival in BC patients.

METHODS

Studies comparing survival outcomes of BC patients having BRCA mutations against wildtype BRCA phenotype were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCCS) were the outcomes. Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed for survival based on triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and follow-up durations. The meta-analysis was performed as per PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Altogether, 30 articles with 35,972 patients (mean age 45.6 years) were included. Patients with BRCA 1 mutation had significantly lower OS (HR [95% CI] 1.2 [1.08, 1.33]; P < 0.001), BRCA 2 mutation had significantly lower DFS (HR [95% CI] 1.35 [1.1, 1.67]; P = 0.0049) and BCSS (HR [95%CI] 1.46 [1.26, 1.7]; P < 0.0001), and TNBC patients with BRCA 1 mutation had significantly poor DFS (HR [95% CI] 1.65 [1.08, 2.54]; P = 0.0216). Based on follow-up duration, the OS in BRCA 1-mutated patients revealed significantly poorer outcomes in studies with ≤ 5 years (HR 1.48) and > 5 years (HR 1.14) of follow-up. In BRCA 2 -mutated patients, the OS was significantly poorer in studies with > 5 years of follow-up (HR 1.39, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

BC patients with BRCA 1 or BRCA 2 mutations had poor survival outcomes and hence screening patients with BC for BRCA mutations might help in strategizing their treatment and improving their survival.

Germline BRCA Mutation and Clinical Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients Focusing on Survival and Failure Patterns: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Koreans

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a BRCA mutation on survival and failure patterns, focusing on the risk of ipsilateral recurrence and contralateral breast cancer in patients. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 300 patients with breast cancer who underwent genetic screening for BRCA1/2 genes and were treated at Samsung Medical Center between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2010. Ultimately, clinical outcomes of 273 patients were analyzed. Results: The median follow-up duration was 102 months (range, 1 to 220 months). Patients with BRCA1/2-mutated tumors had a shorter 10-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate compared to those with non-mutated tumors (62.8% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.02). Regarding failure patterns, patients with BRCA1/2-mutated tumors showed a higher incidence of contralateral breast cancer than those with non-mutated tumors (BRCA1/2 non-mutated vs. mutated tumors: 4.9% vs. 26.0%, p < 0.001). BRCA mutation status remained a significant prognostic factor for contralateral breast recurrence-free survival (HR: 4.155; 95% CI: 1.789–9.652; p = 0.001). Korean patients with a BRCA mutation showed inferior DFS compared to those without a BRCA mutation. Conclusions: BRCA mutation status is a strong predictor of recurrence in contralateral breast cancer. Strategies such as prophylactic treatment and active surveillance should be discussed with breast cancer patients who have a BRCA mutation.

The association between non-breast and ovary cancers and BRCA mutation in first- and second-degree relatives of high-risk breast cancer patients: a large-scale study of Koreans

Background

As a large-scale study of Koreans, we evaluated the association between BRCA mutation and the prevalence of non-breast and ovary cancers in first- and second-degree relatives of high-risk breast cancer patients.

Methods

We organized familial pedigrees of 2555 patients with breast cancer who underwent genetic screening for BRCA1/2 in Samsung Medical Center between January 2002 and May 2018. Families with a member that had a history of cancer other than of the breast or ovary were regarded positive for other primary cancer.

Results

The median age of the population was 40 years (range, 19 to 82 years). BRCA mutation was detected in 377 (14.8%) of the patients. The BRCA-positive group had a higher frequency of family history of breast or ovarian cancer (p <  0.001), bilateral breast cancer (p = 0.021), and the male gender (p = 0.038). There were 103 (27.3%) patients who had multiple risk factors in the BRCA-positive group, while there were 165 (7.6%) patients who had multiple risk factors in the BRCA-negative group (p <  0.001). BRCA mutation was detected in 215 (11.7%) of the 1841 families without history of other primary cancers. Among the 714 families with histories of other primary cancers, 162 (22.7%) had BRCA mutation, and this was significantly more frequent (p < 0.001) than in those without a history. The occurrence of other primary cancers in families of high-risk patients was associated with a younger age at diagnosis (p = 0.044), bilateral breast cancer (p = 0.006), and BRCA mutations (p < 0.001). The most common site for the occurrence of another type of primary cancer was the stomach. In the BRCA-positive group, the proportional incidences of stomach, pancreas, colorectal, lung, and uterine cancer were 13.8, 4.0, 7.7, 8.8, and 5.0%, respectively; these were all relatively higher than those in the BRCA-negative group.

Conclusions

We confirmed that BRCA mutation was associated with having multiple risk factors and an increased prevalence of non-breast and ovary cancers in first- and second-degree relatives of high-risk breast cancer patients. Due to the possibility of inherited cancer risk, genetic counseling with options for risk assessment and management should be provided to both patients and families of BRCA mutation carriers.

Germline breast cancer susceptibility gene mutations and breast cancer outcomes

Background

It is unclear whether germline breast cancer susceptibility gene mutations affect breast cancer related outcomes. We wanted to evaluate mutation patterns in 20 breast cancer susceptibility genes and correlate the mutations with clinical characteristics to determine the effects of these germline mutations on breast cancer prognosis.

Methods

The study cohort included 480 ethnic Chinese individuals in Taiwan with at least one of the six clinical risk factors for hereditary breast cancer: family history of breast or ovarian cancer, young age of onset for breast cancer, bilateral breast cancer, triple negative breast cancer, both breast and ovarian cancer, and male breast cancer. PCR-enriched amplicon-sequencing on a next generation sequencing platform was used to determine the germline DNA sequences of all exons and exon-flanking regions of the 20 genes. Protein-truncating variants were identified as pathogenic.

Results

We detected a 13.5% carrier rate of pathogenic germline mutations, with BRCA2 being the most prevalent and the non-BRCA genes accounting for 38.5% of the mutation carriers. BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to be diagnosed of breast cancer with lymph node involvement (66.7% vs 42.6%; P = 0.011), and had significantly worse breast cancer specific outcomes. The 5-year disease-free survival was 73.3% for BRCA mutation carriers and 91.1% for non-carriers (hazard ratio for recurrence or death 2.42, 95% CI 1.29–4.53; P = 0.013). After adjusting for clinical prognostic factors, BRCA mutation remained an independent poor prognostic factor for cancer recurrence or death (adjusted hazard ratio 3.04, 95% CI 1.40–6.58; P = 0.005). Non-BRCA gene mutation carriers did not exhibit any significant difference in cancer characteristics or outcomes compared to those without detected mutations. Among the risk factors for hereditary breast cancer, the odds of detecting a germline mutation increased significantly with having bilateral breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio 3.27, 95% CI 1.64–6.51; P = 0.0008) or having more than one risk factor (odds ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.22–3.51; P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Without prior knowledge of the mutation status, BRCA mutation carriers had more advanced breast cancer on initial diagnosis and worse cancer-related outcomes. Optimal approach to breast cancer treatment for BRCA mutation carriers warrants further investigation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4229-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Tumor characteristics and prognosis in familial breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Approximately 5-10% of breast cancers are hereditary and their biology and prognosis appear to differ from those of sporadic breast cancers. In this study we compared the biological features and clinical characteristics of non metastatic breast cancer in patients with BRCA mutations versus patients with a family history suggesting hereditary breast cancer but without BRCA mutations (BRCA wild type) versus patients with sporadic disease, and correlated these findings with clinical outcome.

METHODS

We retrieved the clinical and biological data of 33 BRCA-positive, 66 BRCA-wild type and 1826 sporadic breast cancer patients contained in a single institution clinical database between 1980 and 2012. Specifically, we recorded age, tumor size, nodal status, treatment type, pattern of relapse, second primary incidence, outcome (disease-free survival and overall survival), and biological features (estrogen receptor [ER], progesterone receptor [PgR], tumor grade, proliferation and c-erbB2 status). Median follow-up was 70 months.

RESULTS

BRCA-positive patients were significantly younger than sporadic breast cancer patients, and less likely to be ER-, PgR- or c-erbB2-positive than women with BRCA-wild type or sporadic breast cancer. Tumor size and grade, nodal status and proliferation did not differ among the three groups. Rates of radical mastectomy were 58, 42 and 37%, and those of conservative surgery were 42, 58 and 63% in women with BRCA-positive, BRCA-wild type and sporadic breast cancer (p = 0.03), respectively. The incidence of contralateral breast cancer was 12, 14 and 0% (p <0.0001) and the incidence of second primary tumors (non breast) was 9, 1 and 2% (p <0.0001) in BRCA-positive, BRCA-wild type and sporadic breast cancer, respectively. Median disease-free survival in years was 29 in BRCA-wild type, 19 in BRCA-positive and 14 in sporadic breast cancer patients (log-rank = 0.007). Median overall survival in years was not reached for BRCA-wild type, 19 for BRCA-positive and 13 for sporadic breast cancer patients (log-rank <0.0001). At multivariate analyses only BRCA-wild type status was related to a significant improvement in overall survival versus the sporadic breast cancer group (HR = 0,51; 95% CI (0,28-0,93) p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

The biology and outcome of breast cancer differ between patients with BRCA mutations, patients with a family history but no BRCA mutations and patients with sporadic breast cancer.

Will supplemental screening ultrasound increase breast cancer overdiagnosis?

Overdiagnosis refers to the detection of cancers that would never come to light in a patient's lifetime and are only identified by means of screening. Exactly how much overdiagnosis currently exists with screening mammography is uncertain. Because we do not know for certain which tumors would ultimately lead to death if left untreated and which would not, we cannot directly measure overdiagnosis and how best to estimate it is a matter of controversy. A conservative estimate of overdiagnosis with mammography would be on the order of 10%, but estimates have ranged as high as 54%. We know from multiple studies that ultrasound (US) screening mostly detects small, invasive, node-negative cancers; and in the ACRIN 6666 study, there was a greater tendency for US-only-detected tumors to be low grade than those detected with mammography. However, the population of patients undergoing screening US can be expected to differ from the average screening mammography population in that they will have higher breast density, they will be younger, and they may also have higher breast cancer risk than the population undergoing screening mammography. These factors may be associated with more aggressive tumors. There is no way to know whether we will be increasing overdiagnosis without performing a large randomized controlled study with very long-term follow-up. Even if some cancers are overdiagnosed with US, there will be a greater proportion of lethal breast cancers that are successfully treated because of screening US. The more important task is to learn how to correctly diagnose and appropriately treat nonlethal cancers.

Outcomes and recurrence patterns according to breast cancer subtypes in Korean women

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and patterns of recurrence in the different subtypes of breast cancer. We analyzed 1432 stage I-III breast cancer patients who had undergone surgery at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between June 2003 and August 2011. Five subtypes were defined according to estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Site-specific recurrence was estimated using Gray's test. The median follow-up period was 53 months. There were 22 local recurrences, 18 cases of contralateral breast cancer, 19 regional nodal recurrences, and 70 distant metastases. The 5-year BCFIs by subtype were luminal B-HER2 (+), 94.2 %; luminal A, 93.9 %; luminal B-HER2 (-), 91.4 %; HER2, 83.1 %; and triple-negative, 81.9 % (p < 0.001). Cases with the luminal A had a 5-year OS rate of 98.3 % that was the longest compared to those of cases with luminal B-HER2 (-), 95.8 %; luminal B-HER2 (+), 98.0 %; HER2, 90.8 %; and triple-negative, 89.9 % (p < 0.001). The triple-negative had a higher rate of local recurrence at the first site than others (p = 0.013). HER2 and triple-negative had higher rates of nodal recurrence at the first site than others (p < 0.001). The outcomes and patterns of site-specific recurrence in Korean breast cancer patients were different for each subtype. Defining recurrence patterns by breast cancer subtypes can help determine the appropriate method of surveillance and treatment.

[Synchronous bilateral breast cancer in Morocco: epidemiological and clinical characteristics]

Préciser la fréquence, les facteurs de risque et le pronostic du cancer du sein bilatéral, à partir d'une étude rétrospective de 22 cas de cancer du sein bilatéral synchrone dans un pays du Maghreb. De 2002 à 2010, 625 patientes étaient prises en charge pour cancer du sein au service de Gynécologie-Obstétrique «C» du centre hospitalier universitaire de Casablanca. 22 cas de cancer bilatéral synchrone étaient diagnostiqués. Nos résultats sont comparés avec ceux de la littérature. La fréquence de la bilatéralité du cancer du sein synchrone était de 3,52% (22/625). L'intervalle de temps moyen entre les deux cancers est de 4 mois (0 à 6 mois). Les patientes âgées de moins de 40 ans lors du premier cancer avaient six fois plus de risque de développer un cancer au niveau du sein controlatéral que les femmes âgées de plus de 40 ans. Les patientes atteintes d'une tumeur T3 ou T4 avaient un risque neuf fois plus élevé que les autres. 90,9% (2/22) des cas des premiers cancers sont des adénocarcinomes infiltrants. Les types histologiques du premier et du douzième cancer étaient identiques dans 86,4% (19/22) des cas. Quant au pronostic, il dépend à la fois du stade du premier et du deuxième cancer et le traitement de ce dernier doit obéir aux mêmes règles du traitement du premier cancer. L'incidence du cancer bilatéral synchrone du sein est de 3,52% dans notre série. Le cancer du sein unilatéral constitue un facteur de risque de développement d'un cancer du sein controlatéral. Une surveillance à vie est nécessaire au cours d'un cancer du sein pour détecter un cancer controlatéral.

Cumulative risk of second primary contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers with a first breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are at a higher risk of breast cancer and of subsequent contralateral breast cancer (CBC). This study aims to evaluate the evidence of the effect of the BRCA1/2-carriership on CBC cumulative risk in female breast cancer patients. The literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to June 2013 for studies on CBC risk after a first primary invasive breast cancer in female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. A qualitative synthesis was carried out and the methodological quality of the studies evaluated. Cumulative risks of CBC after 5, 10 and 15 years since the first breast cancer diagnosis were pooled by BRCA1/2 mutation status. A total number of 20 articles, out of 1324 retrieved through the search, met the inclusion criteria: 18 retrospective and 2 prospective cohort studies. Cumulative risks of up to five studies were pooled. The cumulative 5-years risk of CBC for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers was 15% (95% CI: 9.5%-20%) and 9% (95% CI: 5%-14%), respectively. This risk increases with time since diagnosis of the first breast cancer; the 10-years risk increased up to 27% and 19%, respectively. The 5-years cumulative risk was remarkably lower in non-BRCA carriers (3%; 95% CI: 2%-5%) and remained so over subsequent years (5%; 95% CI: 3%-7%). In conclusion, risk of CBC increases with length of time after the first breast cancer diagnosis in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Studies addressing the impact of treatment-related factors and clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer on this risk are warranted.

Evaluation of the Dutch BRCA1/2 clinical genetic center referral criteria in an unselected early breast cancer population

In this study, we evaluated the diagnostic value of the Dutch Clinical Genetic Center (CGC) referral guidelines for BRCA1/2 mutation testing in 903 early breast cancer patients, unselected for family history, diagnosed in a cancer hospital before the age of 50 years in 1974-2002; most prevalent Dutch pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations had been analyzed on coded DNA in a research setting. Forty-nine (5.4%) of the patients were proven to be BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We found that 78% and 69% of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers identified met the criteria for referral to the CGC based on age, family history and synchronous multiple tumors; reflected by a combined sensitivity of 75.5% and specificity of 63.2%. More than half of the BRCA1 mutation carriers, that is, 58% had a triple-negative tumor. The highest AUC was obtained by shifting the age at diagnosis threshold criterion from 40 to 35 years and by adding a 'triple-negative breast cancer' criterion with an age threshold of 45 years; the specificity increased to 71.2%, whereas the sensitivity remained the same; that is, a referral of fewer patients will lead to the identification of at least the same number of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Two-thirds of the BRCA1/2 mutation carriers identified in this research setting had been referred for counseling and testing. Our results indicate that, awaiting a possibly more extended mutation screening of all breast cancer patients, the triple-negative status of a breast cancer should be added to the CGC referral criteria.

Genetic testing today

BACKGROUND

The commercial introduction of next-generation sequencing has made it possible to test for mutations in all known or suspected breast cancer predisposition genes in one panel, at one time, for about the same cost as a BRCA gene test. Clinicians are increasingly presented with the challenge of advising patients with mutations in rare breast cancer predisposition genes.

METHODS

Literature review and personal experience with panel tests.

RESULTS

Panel tests are more likely to identify a variant of uncertain clinical significance than a deleterious mutation. In addition, not all of the genes included in panel tests are unequivocally linked to increased breast cancer risk, and for most genes the penetrance is highly variable, making it difficult to translate a specific mutation into an absolute breast cancer risk. The three-generation cancer family history should be used to select truly high-risk families for panel testing, and then referred to again when the results are received in order to guide risk-management decisions. Knowing a breast cancer patient's mutation status can influence decisions about local-regional and systemic therapy, but turnaround times for many tests are still too long to incorporate them into the initial evaluation of a new breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

The commercialization of next-generation sequencing has the potential to greatly enhance the identification and management of individuals with an inherited predisposition to breast cancer. A period of uncertainty is anticipated before the full potential of this new technology is realized.

Local approaches to hereditary breast cancer

The diagnostic and local treatment modalities of hereditary breast cancer (HBC) are evolving based on emerging evidence from new imaging, radiotherapy and surgical studies. The optimal selection of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for the individual HBC patient remains an area of active research in this relatively new patient population. In this context, some rational pathways of intervention are currently available to both reduce cancer risk in mutation carriers without a cancer diagnosis, as well as to reduce the risk of recurrence or new cancers among the carriers already diagnosed with a malignancy. It is encouraging to notice to what degree certain interventions have successfully reduced both the risk of malignancy and the anxiety associated with this genetic diagnosis. This updated report aims at summarizing the most recent findings, while it identifies the areas of uncertainty that remain, and continue to present difficult challenges, particularly among younger HBC patients.

Cost-effectiveness of MRI for breast cancer screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

Background

Women with mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at high risk of developing breast cancer and, in British Columbia, Canada, are offered screening with both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography to facilitate early detection. MRI is more sensitive than mammography but is more costly and produces more false positive results. The purpose of this study was to calculate the cost-effectiveness of MRI screening for breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in a Canadian setting.

Methods

We constructed a Markov model of annual MRI and mammography screening for BRCA1/2 carriers, using local data and published values. We calculated cost-effectiveness as cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained (QALY), and conducted one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Results

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of annual mammography plus MRI screening, compared to annual mammography alone, was $50,900/QALY. After incorporating parameter uncertainty, MRI screening is expected to be a cost-effective option 86% of the time at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000/QALY, and 53% of the time at a willingness-to-pay of $50,000/QALY. The model is highly sensitive to the cost of MRI; as the cost is increased from $200 to $700 per scan, the ICER ranges from $37,100/QALY to $133,000/QALY.

Conclusions

The cost-effectiveness of using MRI and mammography in combination to screen for breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is finely balanced. The sensitivity of the results to the cost of the MRI screen itself warrants consideration: in jurisdictions with higher MRI costs, screening may not be a cost-effective use of resources, but improving the efficiency of MRI screening will also improve cost-effectiveness.

BRCA1 mutations drive oxidative stress and glycolysis in the tumor microenvironment: implications for breast cancer prevention with antioxidant therapies

Mutations in the BRCA1 tumor suppressor gene are commonly found in hereditary breast cancer. Similarly, downregulation of BRCA1 protein expression is observed in the majority of basal-like breast cancers. Here, we set out to study the effects of BRCA1 mutations on oxidative stress in the tumor microenvironment. To mimic the breast tumor microenvironment, we utilized an in vitro co-culture model of human BRCA1-mutated HCC1937 breast cancer cells and hTERT-immortalized human fibroblasts. Notably, HCC1937 cells induce the generation of hydrogen peroxide in the fibroblast compartment during co-culture, which can be inhibited by genetic complementation with the wild-type BRCA1 gene. Importantly, treatment with powerful antioxidants, such as NAC and Tempol, induces apoptosis in HCC1937 cells, suggesting that microenvironmental oxidative stress supports cancer cell survival. In addition, Tempol treatment increases the apoptotic rates of MDA-MB-231 cells, which have wild-type BRCA1, but share a basal-like breast cancer phenotype with HCC1937 cells. MCT4 is the main exporter of L-lactate out of cells and is a marker for oxidative stress and glycolytic metabolism. Co-culture with HCC1937 cells dramatically induces MCT4 protein expression in fibroblasts, and this can be prevented by either BRCA1 overexpression or by pharmacological treatment with NAC. We next evaluated caveolin-1 (Cav-1) expression in stromal fibroblasts. Loss of Cav-1 is a marker of the cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF) phenotype, which is linked to high stromal glycolysis, and is associated with a poor prognosis in numerous types of human cancers, including breast cancers. Remarkably, HCC1937 cells induce a loss of Cav-1 in adjacent stromal cells during co-culture. Conversely, Cav-1 expression in fibroblasts can be rescued by administration of NAC or by overexpression of BRCA1 in HCC1937 cells. Notably, BRCA1-deficient human breast cancer samples (9 out of 10) also showed a glycolytic stromal phenotype, with intense mitochondrial staining specifically in BRCA1-deficient breast cancer cells. In summary, loss of BRCA1 function leads to hydrogen peroxide generation in both epithelial breast cancer cells and neighboring stromal fibroblasts, and promotes the onset of a reactive glycolytic stroma, with increased MCT4 and decreased Cav-1 expression. Importantly, these metabolic changes can be reversed by antioxidants, which potently induce cancer cell death. Thus, antioxidant therapy appears to be synthetically lethal with a BRCA1-deficiency in breast cancer cells and should be considered for future cancer prevention trials. In this regard, immunostaining with Cav-1 and MCT4 could be used as cost-effective biomarkers to monitor the response to antioxidant therapy.

Management of women with BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer

SUMMARY BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer differs from sporadic breast cancer as studies show that mutation carriers have a higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer, and also have differential sensitivity to chemotherapeutic agents. With the more readily available BRCA genetic testing, BRCA mutation status should be considered in high-risk women, including women who are diagnosed with breast cancer at an early age, have a strong family history or have tumors with triple-negative status. This article reviews the risk-reducing surgeries, including the prophylactic contralateral mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, in women diagnosed with BRCA-associated breast cancer. Additionally, the sensitivity of BRCA-defective breast cancer cell lines to platinum cytotoxic compounds, PARP and endocrine therapy is reviewed.

Managing the breast in patients who test positive for hereditary breast cancer

PURPOSE AND METHODS

The patient who tests positive for hereditary breast cancer has several important decisions to make regarding management of the breasts. Before making an informed decision, the physician must first review the screening assessment to make sure that the patient does not harbor an undiagnosed breast malignancy. In the absence of a malignancy, the management options for the breast range from nonoperative surveillance to prophylactic mastectomy to prevent cancer. In the event that a breast malignancy is diagnosed after a positive genetic test, implications for management of both the affected and the unaffected breast must be considered.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The clinical assessment of the patient who tests positive is discussed. If routine pretest mammograms were negative, should additional diagnostic studies be performed to exclude an undetected/occult malignancy, and if so, what are the roles of magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasonography, digital mammogram, and detection of breast cancer circulating tumor cells? Medical management may include increased surveillance and chemopreventative therapy, including tamoxifen and oral contraceptives. Surgical interventions may be undertaken to reduce risk in people with a genetic susceptibility gene for breast or ovarian cancer; risk-reducing surgical options include mastectomy with or without reconstruction and nipple-sparing techniques. Finally, we discuss management decisions for women who test positive and who are diagnosed with a primary breast cancer, compared to women who have no obvious primary tumor but test positive.

Serum levels of IGF-I and BRCA penetrance: a case control study in breast cancer families

High serum levels of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) are associated with an increased risk of sporadic breast cancer (BC). The aim of the present work is to evaluate the association between IGF-I and hereditary BC risk, using a case-control approach. The work represents an "ad interim" cross-sectional analysis of an ongoing study with a prospective design whose aim is to recruit a cohort of women belonging to high genetic risk families to test potential modulators of penetrance and prognosis. The odd of exposure to high serum IGF-I levels among women with a previous diagnosis of BC ("cases") was compared with the odd among unaffected "controls". The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by unconditional logistic regression, controlling for confounders. We analysed 308 women (209 cases and 99 controls) at high genetic risk of BC. The adjusted OR of BC for the upper tertile of serum IGF-I versus the lowest one was 3.5 (95%CI 1.4-8.8). Excluding from the analysis 64 women under current Tamoxifen or GnRH analogues treatment, the adjusted OR of BC became 3.7 (95%CI 1.4-9.9). The association became stronger restricting the analysis to the 161 women (97 cases and 64 controls) with a proven BRCA mutation. If confirmed by a prospective approach, the association between IGF-I and familial BC will open further options for reducing BC risk in susceptible women.

Inherited and acquired alterations in development of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women, accounting for about 30% of all cancers. In contrast, breast cancer is a rare disease in men, accounting for less than 1% of all cancers. Up to 10% of all breast cancers are hereditary forms, caused by inherited germ-line mutations in "high-penetrance," "moderate-penetrance," and "low-penetrance" breast cancer susceptibility genes. The remaining 90% of breast cancers are due to acquired somatic genetic and epigenetic alterations. A heterogeneous set of somatic alterations, including mutations and gene amplification, are reported to be involved in the etiology of breast cancer. Promoter hypermethylation of genes involved in DNA repair and hormone-mediated cell signaling, as well as altered expression of micro RNAs predicted to regulate key breast cancer genes, play an equally important role as genetic factors in development of breast cancer. Elucidation of the inherited and acquired genetic and epigenetic alterations involved in breast cancer may not only clarify molecular pathways involved in the development and progression of breast cancer itself, but may also have an important clinical and therapeutic impact on improving the management of patients with the disease.

BRCA mutation testing in determining breast cancer therapy

BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer differs from sporadic breast cancer with regard to future cancer risks and sensitivity to systemic therapies. Now that rapid genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is available at the time of breast cancer diagnosis, BRCA mutation status can be considered when making treatment and prevention decisions for BRCA mutation carriers with breast cancer. This article reviews surgical options for management of affected BRCA mutation carriers with emphasis on the risks of ipsilateral recurrence and contralateral breast cancer. The roles of breast-conserving surgery, prophylactic mastectomy, and oophorectomy are reviewed. In addition, the sensitivity of BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer to endocrine therapy, platinum chemotherapy, and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors is reviewed.

New insights into the prevention and treatment of familial breast cancer

Individuals who inherit a deleterious mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at very high risk for breast cancer but there are several strategies available for successfully managing this risk. Breast cancers that develop in the context of germline BRCA gene mutation present challenges for management but also opportunities. DNA damaging agents, like cisplatin, and the new class of drugs called PARP inhibitors exploit the underlying defect in DNA damage repair to great effect.

Hereditary breast cancer: clinical features and risk reduction strategies

Risk-reduction interventions for BRCA-related breast cancer are relevant not only for clinical decisions in breast cancer patients but also for healthy subjects who are potential candidates to undergo similar interventions. The literature on the impact of different surgical options and adjuvant systemic approaches aimed towards risk reduction for ipsilateral and contralateral breast cancer recurrences is briefly reviewed. Breast-conserving surgery is associated with a higher probability of local recurrence, but is counterbalanced by effectiveness of chemotherapy in reducing this risk. Consistent support for the hypothesis that antiestrogens are effective in reducing contralateral breast cancer risks is available from the literature. On the other hand, data on chemoprevention approaches for healthy subjects are too preliminary to draw any conclusions. Studies including conventional and newer hormonal drugs are needed to demonstrate the benefit of chemoprevention approaches. These may also deepen our knowledge on possible differences in the likelihood of clinical benefit to be expected among BRCA1- and BRCA2-altered tumours.

Pathology of hereditary breast cancer

Background

Hereditary breast cancer runs in families where several members in different generations are affected. Most of these breast cancers are caused by mutations in the high penetrance genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 accounting for about 5% of all breast cancers. Other genes that include CHEK2, PTEN, TP53, ATM, STK11/LKB1, CDH1, NBS1, RAD50, BRIP1 and PALB2 have been described to be high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, all contributing to the hereditary breast cancer spectrum. However, in still a part of familial hereditary breast cancers no relationship to any of these breast cancer susceptibility genes can be found. Research on new susceptibility genes is therefore ongoing.

Design

In this review we will describe the function of the today known high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes and the consequences of their mutated status. Furthermore, we will focus on the histology, the immunophenotype and genotype of breast cancers caused by mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and the other high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Finally, an overview of the clinical implications of hereditary breast cancer patients will be provided.

Conclusion

This information leads to a better understanding of the morphological, immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics of different types of hereditary breast cancers. Further, these characteristics offer clues for diagnosis and new therapeutic approaches.

Germline genetic variation, cancer outcome, and pharmacogenetics

Studies of the role of germline or inherited genetic variation on cancer outcome can fall into three distinct categories. First, the impact of highly penetrant but lowly prevalent mutations of germline DNA on cancer prognosis has been studied extensively for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations as well as mutations related to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. These mainly modest-sized analyses have produced conflicting results. Although some associations have been observed, they may not be independent of other known clinical or molecular prognostic factors. Second, the impact of germline polymorphisms on cancer prognosis is a burgeoning field of research. However, a deeper understanding of potentially confounding somatic changes and larger multi-institutional, multistage studies may be needed before consistent results are seen. Third, research examining the impact of germline genetic variation on differential treatment response or toxicity (pharmacogenetics) has produced some proof-of-principle results. Putative germline pharmacogenetic predictors of outcome include DPYD polymorphisms and fluorouracil toxicity, UGT1A1 variation and irinotecan toxicity, and CYP2D6 polymorphisms and tamoxifen efficacy, with emerging data on predictors of molecularly targeted or biologic drugs. Here we review data pertaining to these germline outcome and germline toxicity relationships.

Breast cancer in the personal genomics era

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with a complex etiology that develops from different cellular lineages, progresses along multiple molecular pathways, and demonstrates wide variability in response to treatment. The "standard of care" approach to breast cancer treatment in which all patients receive similar interventions is rapidly being replaced by personalized medicine, based on molecular characteristics of individual patients. Both inherited and somatic genomic variation is providing useful information for customizing treatment regimens for breast cancer to maximize efficacy and minimize adverse side effects. In this article, we review (1) hereditary breast cancer and current use of inherited susceptibility genes in patient management; (2) the potential of newly-identified breast cancer-susceptibility variants for improving risk assessment; (3) advantages and disadvantages of direct-to-consumer testing; (4) molecular characterization of sporadic breast cancer through immunohistochemistry and gene expression profiling and opportunities for personalized prognostics; and (5) pharmacogenomic influences on the effectiveness of current breast cancer treatments. Molecular genomics has the potential to revolutionize clinical practice and improve the lives of women with breast cancer.

Effect of BRCA1/2 mutation on short-term and long-term breast cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Reports of BRCA genetic mutations and risk of death or recurrence are inconsistent. This study aimed to compare overall and disease-free breast cancer survival rates between BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and non-carriers for short-term and long-term outcomes separately. We searched the PUBMED and EMBASE databases and retrieved 452 articles using keywords that included breast cancer, BRCA mutation, and survival. Seventeen articles were selected for systematic review and among them 11 were included in our meta-analysis. We used the random-effects model to calculate the summary hazard ratio and corresponding 95% confidence interval. BRCA1 mutation carriers had significantly lower short-term and long-term overall survival rates (OSR) relative to non-carriers (HR = 1.92 [95% CI = 1.45-2.53]; 1.33 [1.12-1.58], respectively), while both short-term and long-term OSR of BRCA2 carriers did not differ from non-carriers (HR = 1.30 [95% CI = 0.95-1.76]; 1.12 [95% CI = 0.86-1.45], respectively). For short-term progression-free survival rate (PFSR), BRCA1 mutation carriers had a significantly lower rate than non-carriers (HR = 1.54 [95% CI = 1.12-2.12]), while BRCA2 mutation carriers had a similar PFSR (HR = 1.23 [95% CI = 0.96-1.58]). For long-term PFSRs, we found no significant results. Our results suggest that BRCA1 mutation decreases short-term and long-term OSRs and short-term PFSR, however, BRCA2 mutation does not affect either short-term or long-term survival rate, which is attributed to the different carcinogenic pathways for BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Genomic alterations in histopathologically normal breast tissue from BRCA1 mutation carriers may be caused by BRCA1 haploinsufficiency

Multiple biopsies of normal breast tissue from 10 BRCA1 mutation carriers have been analyzed using array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Normal breast tissue from five age-matched control subjects without a family history of breast cancer was included for reference purposes. We repeatedly found multiple low copy number aberrations at a significantly higher frequency in histopathologically normal tissue from BRCA1 mutation carriers than in normal control tissue. Some of these aberrations were similar across samples from different patients and linked to biological functions such as transcriptional regulation and DNA binding. We also observed a high degree of genomic heterogeneity between samples from the same patient, suggestive of tissue heterogeneity and etiological clonality in the breast epithelium. We show that neither loss of heterozygosity nor promoter methylation of the wild-type BRCA1 allele is the predominant mechanistic origin of the observed genomic instability. Instead, we propose that haploinsufficiency of BRCA1 might be the underlying cause responsible for initiation of breast cancer in these predisposed women, making cells vulnerable to mitotic recombination. We also propose that loss of ERalpha expression is preceded by genetic instability in the initiation of BRCA1-dependent tumorigenesis, indicating that the breast epithelium of BRCA1 mutation carriers may initially be estrogen-responsive. Our results imply that genomic instability instigated by BRCA1 haploinsufficiency may be required for breast cancer initiation in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Finding molecular markers of tumor initiation and progression, for the potential use in early disease detection, may be of great clinical importance for the improved management of at-risk women.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation analysis among Indian women from south India: identification of four novel mutations and high-frequency occurrence of 185delAG mutation

Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes profoundly increase the risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer among women. To explore the contribution of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in the development of hereditary breast cancer among Indian women, we carried out mutation analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in 61 breast or ovarian cancer patients from south India with a positive family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. Mutation analysis was carried out using conformation-sensitive gel electrophoresis (CSGE) followed by sequencing. Mutations were identified in 17 patients (28.0%); 15 (24.6%) had BRCA1 mutations and two (3.28%) had BRCA2 mutations. While no specific association between BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations with cancer type was seen, mutations were more often seen in families with ovarian cancer. While 40% (4/10) and 30.8% (4/12) of families with ovarian or breast and ovarian cancer had mutations, only 23.1% (9/39) of families with breast cancer carried mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. In addition, while BRCA1 mutations were found in all age groups, BRCA2 mutations were found only in the age group of < or =40 years. Of the BRCA1 mutations, there were three novel mutations (295delCA; 4213T-->A; 5267T-->G) and three mutations that have been reported earlier. Interestingly, 185delAG, a BRCA1 mutation which occurs at a very high frequency in Ashkenazi Jews, was found at a frequency of 16.4% (10/61). There was one novel mutation (4866insT) and one reported mutation in BRCA2. Thus, our study emphasizes the importance of mutation screening in familial breast and/or ovarian cancers, and the potential implications of these findings in genetic counselling and preventive therapy.

Gene promoter methylation is associated with increased mortality among women with breast cancer

To better understand breast cancer etiology and progression, we explored the association between promoter methylation status of three breast cancer-related genes (BRCA1, APC, and p16) and survival in a large cohort of women with breast cancer. About 800 archived tumor tissues were collected from women diagnosed with a first primary invasive or in situ breast cancer in 1996-1997. The vital status of the participants was followed through the end of year 2005 with a mean follow-up time of 8.0 years. Promoter methylation was assessed by methylation-specific PCR (for BRCA1) and MethyLight (for APC and p16). The association of promoter methylation and breast cancer mortality was evaluated by Cox-proportional hazards models. Methylated promoters were found in 59.0, 48.4, and 3.6% of the tumor samples for BRCA1, APC, and p16, respectively. Breast cancer-specific mortality was strongly associated with promoter methylation of p16 [HR and 95% CI: 3.53 (1.83-6.78)], whereas the associations with of BRCA1 and APC were less pronounced [HR and 95% CI: 1.81 (1.18-2.78) and 1.46 (0.98-2.17), respectively]. Similar associations were observed with all-cause mortality. As the number of methylated genes increased, the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality also increased in a dose-dependent manner (P, trend = 0.01). Importantly, even with our results stratified by hormone receptor status, promoter methylation of the three genes remained predictive of mortality. Our results suggest that promoter methylation could be promising epigenetic markers to be considered for breast cancer survival.

Breast cancer in young women: poor survival despite intensive treatment

Background

Breast cancer is uncommon in young women and correlates with a less favourable prognosis; still it is the most frequent cancer in women under 40, accounting for 30–40% of all incident female cancer. The aim of this study was to study prognosis in young women, quantifying how much stage at diagnosis and management on the one hand, and tumour biology on the other; each contribute to the worse prognosis seen in this age group.

Methodology/Principal Findings

In a registry based cohort of women aged 20–69 (n = 22 017) with a primary diagnosis of invasive breast cancer (1992–2005), women aged 20–34 (n = 471), 35–39 (n = 858) and 40–49 (n = 4789) were compared with women aged 50–69 years (n = 15 899). The cumulative 5-year relative survival ratio and the relative excess mortality (RER) were calculated. The cumulative 5-year relative survival ratio was lowest in women aged 20–34. The RER was 2.84 for women aged 20–34 and decreased with increasing age (RER 1.76 and 1.17 for women aged 35–39 and 40–49, respectively). The excess risk was, however, present only in disease stages I and II. For women aged 20–34 with stage I disease RER was 4.63, and 6.70 in the subgroup with tumour size 1–10 mm. The absolute difference in stage I between the youngest and the reference groups amounted to nearly 8%, with a 90% 5-year survival in women aged 20–34. In stages IIa and IIb, the relative excess risk was not as dramatic, but the absolute differences approached 15%. The youngest women with small tumours generally received more aggressive treatment than women in older age groups.

Conclusions

After correction for stage, tumour characteristics and treatment, age remained an independent risk factor for breast cancer death in women <35 years of age. The excess risk for young women was only seen in early stages of disease and was most pronounced in women with small tumours. Young women affected by breast cancer have a high risk of dying compared to their middle-aged counterparts even if diagnosed early and receiving an intense treatment.

Eleven years disease-free: role of chemotherapy in metastatic BRCA2-related breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast, staged as pT1N3, was diagnosed in a 41-year-old premenopausal French-Canadian woman. Rapid nodal recurrence progressed to diffuse bone metastases, despite tamoxifen and megestrol. Following enrollment in an in-house study protocol, she received high-dose anthracycline-based induction chemotherapy followed by tandem autologous bone marrow transplantation with high-dose alkylator and platinum-based conditioning regimens. Upon full remission, protocol-mandated locoregional breast and prophylactic cranial radiation was delivered. Complete clinical and radiologic remission has been maintained in the 11 years since study enrolment, which prompted further investigation.

INVESTIGATIONS

Pedigree construction and BRCA1/2 mutation analysis.

DIAGNOSIS

A BRCA2 8765delAG mutation was identified, in the context of unusual and sustained complete remission from widely metastatic breast cancer.

MANAGEMENT

The patient is now followed at a multidisciplinary high-risk prevention clinic because BRCA2 mutations are associated with increased risk of ovarian and breast cancers. This case supports the possibility of differential treatment response in BRCA2-positive breast cancer, although this remains to be conclusively demonstrated.

Sensitivity to First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

Purpose

Preclinical as well as a few small retrospective, neoadjuvant studies suggest that breast cancer (cells) without functional BRCA1 or BRCA2 protein have an increased sensitivity to some chemotherapeutic agents causing double-strand DNA breaks. In this study we assessed the sensitivity to standard first-line chemotherapy of metastatic BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer, compared with sporadic breast cancer patients.

Patients and Methods

From the Family Cancer Clinic database, we selected 93 BRCA1- and 28 BRCA2-associated breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease before January 1, 2007. Objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) after start of first-line chemotherapy were compared with those of sporadic patients, matched for year of birth, age at diagnosis of primary breast cancer, and year of detection of metastatic disease.

Results

The chemotherapy regimens most frequently used were anthracycline-based (n = 147) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF)/CMF like (n = 68). As compared to sporadic patients, BRCA2-associated patients had a significantly higher OR (89% v 50%; P = .001), a longer PFS (hazard ratio multivariate [HRmult] 0.64; P = .04) and a prolonged OS (HRmult, 0.53; P = .005) after start of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. For BRCA1-associated patients, a nonsignificant trend for an increased OR (66% v 50%; P = .07), and a longer PFS (HRmult, 0.79; P = .14) after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer was observed, but not for OS.

Conclusion

BRCA2-associated breast cancer is more sensitive to standard first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer in comparison with sporadic breast cancer, especially to anthracyclines. For BRCA1-associated breast cancer no statistically significant higher sensitivity was observed.

BRCA1 promoter methylation is associated with increased mortality among women with breast cancer

Promoter-CpG island hypermethylation has been proposed as an alternative mechanism to inactivate BRCA1 in the breast where somatic mutations of BRCA1 are rare. To better understand breast cancer etiology and progression, we explored the association between BRCA1 promoter methylation status and prognostic factors as well as survival among women with breast cancer. Promoter methylation of BRCA1 was assessed in 851 archived tumor tissues collected from a population-based study of women diagnosed with invasive or in situ breast cancer in 1996-1997, and who were followed for vital status through the end of 2002. About 59% of the tumors were methylated at the promoter of BRCA1. The BRCA1 promoter methylation was more frequent in invasive cancers (P = 0.02) and among premenopausal cases (P = 0.05). BRCA1 promoter methylation was associated with increased risk of breast cancer-specific mortality (age-adjusted HR 1.71; 95% CI: 1.05-2.78) and all-cause mortality (age-adjusted HR 1.49; 95% CI: 1.02-2.18). Neither dietary methyl intakes in the year prior to the baseline interview nor the functional polymorphisms in one-carbon metabolism were associated with BRCA1 methylation status. Our study is the first epidemiological investigation on the prognostic value of BRCA1 promoter methylation in a large population-based cohort of breast cancer patients. Our results indicate that BRCA1 promoter methylation is an important factor to consider in predicting breast cancer survival.

Potential excess mortality in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers beyond breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancers, and melanoma

BACKGROUND

Although the increase in risk of developing breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers has been studied extensively, its impact on mortality is not well quantified. Further, possible effect of BRCA mutations on non-cancer mortality risk has not been examined.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Using mortality data from the relatives of 5,287 genotyped participants, of whom 120 carried a BRCA Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation, in a community-based study of the Ashkenazi Jewish population in the Washington D.C area, we examined the association between the three Ashkenazi BRCA founder mutations and risk of overall and non-cancer mortality. To examine risks beyond the established effects of these mutations, we analyzed the data excluding both deaths and follow-up times after reported diagnosis of melanoma and cancer of the breast, ovary, prostate, and pancreas. Using an extension of the kin-cohort method that accounts for informative censoring, we estimated that, in the absence of breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers, and melanoma, female carriers had a life expectancy that was 6.8 years lower (95% CI: 1.2-10.5) than non-carriers. In male mutation carriers, the reduction in life expectancy, in the absence of prostate and pancreatic cancers and melanoma, was 3.7 (95% CI: -0.4, 6.8) years. When deaths and follow-up times after any cancer diagnosis were excluded, the difference in life expectancy was 5.7 years for women (95% CI: -0.1, 10.4) and 3.7 years for men (95% CI: -0.4, 6.9). An overall test of association for men and women together showed a statistically significant association between BRCA1/2 mutations and increased non-cancer mortality (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

These findings suggest that there may be unknown effects of BRCA1/2 mutations on non-neoplastic diseases that cause death at older ages.

Can genetic testing guide treatment in breast cancer?

In the last 15 years, our understanding of genes that predispose to breast cancer has increased enormously. Germline alleles have been identified that have a modest effect on the risk of breast cancer, but there remain only a handful of genes in which mutation substantially elevates the risk of breast cancer. These include BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53 and PTEN. Whilst breast cancer occurring in patients in Li-Fraumeni and Cowden's syndrome families is of great importance, the more frequent scenario is that of women, or indeed of men, presenting with breast cancer with an underlying germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Should these individuals be treated differently because they have had a breast cancer or are at risk of the disease because of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation? In this review, we consider whether BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation influences the choice of breast screening and breast cancer prevention strategies. Furthermore, for women with an established breast cancer whether their mutation directly influences (1) baseline prognosis, (2) the results of local surgical and radiation therapy, (3) the benefits from adjuvant systemic therapy and finally (4) whether selection or avoidance of particular systemic agents is guided by the presence of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation?

Are mastectomy rates a reasonable quality measure of breast cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND

Quality measures of breast cancer clinical management adopted by the National Quality Forum do not address the quality of surgical performance. We evaluated mastectomy rate as one potential quality indicator.

METHODS

We reviewed the surgical management of small (stage T1; < or =2 cm) invasive breast tumors in patients treated from April 2003 through April 2007 at our institution. For patients undergoing mastectomy, factors leading to the selection of mastectomy were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 496 patients with invasive breast cancer: 433 did not undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 319 of these had pathologic tumors < or =2 cm in size. Of these, 55 (17.2%) underwent initial mastectomy. Medical contraindications to breast conservation were identified in 42 of 319 (13.2%) patients, whereas the selection of mastectomy was attributed to patient choice in 13 of 319 (4.1%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical contraindications to breast-conserving therapy were much more common than patient choice as the indication for mastectomy. Institution- or surgeon-specific mastectomy rates are unlikely to reflect the complexity of decision making in the surgical management of patients with breast cancer.

Histopathological findings and follow-up after prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction in 100 women from families with hereditary breast cancer

AIM

To survey the histopathological abnormalities in breasts of women who have undergone risk reducing mastectomy and to evaluate the effect of this measure on future breast cancer development.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Between August 1995 and October 2006 100 consecutive women with a hereditary increased risk of breast cancer underwent prophylactic mastectomy (PM) at Malmö University Hospital. Fifty of the 100 women had no previous breast cancer. Fifty were BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. All breast specimens have been examined histopathologically according to a prospective protocol. Follow-up data was collected from medical records and data in the Regional Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

In the PM specimens abnormal lesions were found in 18 women (three with invasive cancers, eight in situ cancers and seven atypical hyperplasia). In previously healthy women lesions were more frequent after the age of 40 than among younger women (p=0.03). BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to present with ADH (atypical ductal hyperplasia)/ALH (atypical lobular hyperplasia) compared to the non-carriers/untested cases (p=0.01). After a median follow-up of 52 months (range 1-136 months) none of the women have developed breast cancer in the area of the prophylactically removed breast.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalent atypical or malignant lesions are relatively a common finding in PM specimens in asymptomatic women with hereditary increased risk of breast cancer. Such findings were significantly more common above age 40 in women without previous breast cancer. The risk of newly formed breast cancer after PM is small. The clinical importance of detecting a premalignant or preinvasive lesion in the breast at PM is still unclear.