Commentary on changing the risk threshold for surgical prevention of ovarian cancer

Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and the Use of Hormone Replacement Therapy Below the Age of Natural Menopause: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66 October 2021: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66

This paper deals with the use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after the removal of fallopian tubes and ovaries to prevent ovarian cancer in premenopausal high risk women. Some women have an alteration in their genetic code, which makes them more likely to develop ovarian cancer. Two well-known genes which can carry an alteration are the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Examples of other genes associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer include RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 and Lynch syndrome genes. Women with a strong family history of ovarian cancer and/or breast cancer, may also be at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women at increased risk can choose to have an operation to remove the fallopian tubes and ovaries, which is the most effective way to prevent ovarian cancer. This is done after a woman has completed her family. However, removal of ovaries causes early menopause and leads to hot flushes, sweats, mood changes and bone thinning. It can also cause memory problems and increases the risk of heart disease. It may reduce libido or impair sexual function. Guidance on how to care for women following preventative surgery who are experiencing early menopause is needed. HRT is usually advisable for women up to 51 years of age (average age of menopause for women in the UK) who are undergoing early menopause and have not had breast cancer, to minimise the health risks linked to early menopause. For women with a womb, HRT should include estrogen coupled with progestogen to protect against thickening of the lining of the womb (called endometrial hyperplasia). For women without a womb, only estrogen is given. Research suggests that, unlike in older women, HRT for women in early menopause does not increase breast cancer risk, including in those who are BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and have preventative surgery. For women with a history of receptor-negative breast cancer, the gynaecologist will liaise with an oncology doctor on a case-by-case basis to help to decide if HRT is safe to use. Women with a history of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are not normally offered HRT. A range of other therapies can be used if a woman is unable to take HRT. These include behavioural therapy and non-hormonal medicines. However, these are less effective than HRT. Regular exercise, healthy lifestyle and avoiding symptom triggers are also advised. Whether to undergo surgery to reduce risk or not and its timing can be a complex decision-making process. Women need to be carefully counselled on the pros and cons of both preventative surgery and HRT use so they can make informed decisions and choices.

Women's Intentions to Engage in Risk-Reducing Behaviours after Receiving Personal Ovarian Cancer Risk Information: An Experimental Survey Study

Simple Summary

Risk stratification using genetic testing to identify women at increased risk of ovarian cancer may increase the number of patients to whom risk-reducing surgery (e.g., salpingo-oophorectomy) may be offered. However, little is known about public acceptability of such approaches. Our online experimental survey aimed to explore whether women aged 45–75 in the general population are willing to undergo ovarian cancer risk assessment, including genetic testing, and whether women’s potential acceptance of risk-reducing surgery differs depending on their estimated risk. We looked at whether psychological and cognitive factors mediated women’s decision-making. The majority of participants would be interested in having genetic testing. In response to our hypothetical scenarios, a substantial proportion of participants were open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased from 2% to 5 or 10%.

Abstract

Risk stratification using genetic and/or other types of information could identify women at increased ovarian cancer risk. The aim of this study was to examine women’s potential reactions to ovarian cancer risk stratification. A total of 1017 women aged 45–75 years took part in an online experimental survey. Women were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions describing hypothetical personal results from ovarian cancer risk stratification, and asked to imagine they had received one of three results: (a) 5% lifetime risk due to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and lifestyle factors; (b) 10% lifetime risk due to SNPs and lifestyle factors; (c) 10% lifetime risk due to a single rare mutation in a gene. Results: 83% of women indicated interest in having ovarian cancer risk assessment. After receiving their hypothetical risk estimates, 29% of women stated they would have risk-reducing surgery. Choosing risk-reducing surgery over other behavioural responses was associated with having higher surgery self-efficacy and perceived response-efficacy, but not with perceptions of disease threat, i.e., perceived risk or severity, or with experimental condition. A substantial proportion of women age 45–75 years may be open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased to as little as 5 or 10%.

Rare Germline Genetic Variants and the Risks of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

A family history of ovarian or breast cancer is the strongest risk factor for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Germline deleterious variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer EOC risks by age 80, of 44% and 17% respectively. The mismatch repair genes, particularly MSH2 and MSH6, are also EOC susceptibility genes. Several other DNA repair genes, BRIP1, RAD51C, RAD51D, and PALB2, have been identified as moderate risk EOC genes. EOC has five main histotypes; high-grade serous (HGS), low-grade serous (LGS), clear cell (CCC), endometrioid (END), and mucinous (MUC). This review examines the current understanding of the contribution of rare genetic variants to EOC, focussing on providing frequency data for each histotype. We provide an overview of frequency and risk for pathogenic variants in the known susceptibility genes as well as other proposed genes. We also describe the progress to-date to understand the role of missense variants and the different breast and ovarian cancer risks for each gene. Identification of susceptibility genes have clinical impact by reducing disease-associated mortality through improving risk prediction, with the possibility of prevention strategies, and developing new targeted treatments and these clinical implications are also discussed.

Attitudes towards risk-reducing early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer prevention: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) acceptability and effect of surgical prevention on menopausal sequelae/satisfaction/regret in women at increased ovarian cancer (OC) risk.

DESIGN

Multicentre, cohort, questionnaire study (IRSCTN:12310993).

SETTING

United Kingdom (UK).

POPULATION

UK women without OC ≥18 years, at increased OC risk, with/without previous RRSO, ascertained through specialist familial cancer/genetic clinics and BRCA support groups.

METHODS

Participants completed a 39-item questionnaire. Baseline characteristics were described using descriptive statistics. Logistic/linear regression models analysed the impact of variables on RRESDO acceptability and health outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOMES

RRESDO acceptability, menopausal sequelae, satisfaction/regret.

RESULTS

In all, 346 of 683 participants underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Of premenopausal women who had not undergone RRSO, 69.1% (181/262) found it acceptable to participate in a research study offering RRESDO. Premenopausal women concerned about sexual dysfunction were more likely to find RRESDO acceptable (odds ratio [OR] = 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-7.7, P = 0.025). Women experiencing sexual dysfunction after premenopausal RRSO were more likely to find RRESDO acceptable in retrospect (OR = 5.3, 95% CI 1.2-27.5, P < 0.031). In all, 88.8% (143/161) premenopausal and 95.2% (80/84) postmenopausal women who underwent RRSO, respectively, were satisfied with their decision, whereas 9.4% (15/160) premenopausal and 1.2% (1/81) postmenopausal women who underwent RRSO regretted their decision. HRT uptake in premenopausal individuals without breast cancer (BC) was 74.1% (80/108). HRT use did not significantly affect satisfaction/regret levels but did reduce symptoms of vaginal dryness (OR = 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, P = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Data show high RRESDO acceptability, particularly in women concerned about sexual dysfunction. Although RRSO satisfaction remains high, regret rates are much higher for premenopausal women than for postmenopausal women. HRT use following premenopausal RRSO does not increase satisfaction but does reduce vaginal dryness.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

RRESDO has high acceptability among premenopausal women at increased ovarian cancer risk, particularly those concerned about sexual dysfunction.

Population Study of Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction for Targeted Screening and Prevention

Unselected population-based personalised ovarian cancer (OC) risk assessment combining genetic/epidemiology/hormonal data has not previously been undertaken. We aimed to perform a feasibility study of OC risk stratification of general population women using a personalised OC risk tool followed by risk management. Volunteers were recruited through London primary care networks.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

women ≥18 years.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

prior ovarian/tubal/peritoneal cancer, previous genetic testing for OC genes. Participants accessed an online/web-based decision aid along with optional telephone helpline use. Consenting individuals completed risk assessment and underwent genetic testing (BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1, OC susceptibility single-nucleotide polymorphisms). A validated OC risk prediction algorithm provided a personalised OC risk estimate using genetic/lifestyle/hormonal OC risk factors. Population genetic testing (PGT)/OC risk stratification uptake/acceptability, satisfaction, decision aid/telephone helpline use, psychological health and quality of life were assessed using validated/customised questionnaires over six months. Linear-mixed models/contrast tests analysed impact on study outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOMES

feasibility/acceptability, uptake, decision aid/telephone helpline use, satisfaction/regret, and impact on psychological health/quality of life. In total, 123 volunteers (mean age = 48.5 (SD = 15.4) years) used the decision aid, 105 (85%) consented. None fulfilled NHS genetic testing clinical criteria. OC risk stratification revealed 1/103 at ≥10% (high), 0/103 at ≥5%-<10% (intermediate), and 100/103 at <5% (low) lifetime OC risk. Decision aid satisfaction was 92.2%. The telephone helpline use rate was 13% and the questionnaire response rate at six months was 75%. Contrast tests indicated that overall depression (p = 0.30), anxiety (p = 0.10), quality-of-life (p = 0.99), and distress (p = 0.25) levels did not jointly change, while OC worry (p = 0.021) and general cancer risk perception (p = 0.015) decreased over six months. In total, 85.5-98.7% were satisfied with their decision. Findings suggest population-based personalised OC risk stratification is feasible and acceptable, has high satisfaction, reduces cancer worry/risk perception, and does not negatively impact psychological health/quality of life.

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for ovarian cancer risk prediction in a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Genome-wide association studies have identified >30 common SNPs associated with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We evaluated the combined effects of EOC susceptibility SNPs on predicting EOC risk in an independent prospective cohort study.

METHODS

We genotyped ovarian cancer susceptibility single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in a nested case-control study (750 cases and 1428 controls) from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening trial. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) were constructed and their associations with EOC risk were evaluated using logistic regression. The absolute risk of developing ovarian cancer by PRS percentiles was calculated.

RESULTS

The association between serous PRS and serous EOC (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.58, p=1.3×10-11) was stronger than the association between overall PRS and overall EOC risk (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.45, p=5.4×10-10). Women in the top fifth percentile of the PRS had a 3.4-fold increased EOC risk compared with women in the bottom 5% of the PRS, with the absolute EOC risk by age 80 being 2.9% and 0.9%, respectively, for the two groups of women in the population.

CONCLUSION

PRSs can be used to predict future risk of developing ovarian cancer for women in the general population. Incorporation of PRSs into risk prediction models for EOC could inform clinical decision-making and health management.