High prevalence of preinvasive lesions adjacent to BRCA1/2-associated breast cancers

MRI phenotypes associated with breast cancer predisposing genetic variants, a multisite review

PURPOSE

Examine MRI phenotypes of breast cancers arising in patients with various pathogenic variants, to assess for imaging trends and associations.

METHOD

Multisite retrospective review evaluated 410 patients from 2001 to 2020 with breast cancer and a predisposing pathogenic variant who underwent breast MRI at time of cancer diagnosis. Dominant malignant lesion features were reported, including lesion type (mass versus non-mass enhancement), size, shape, margin, internal enhancement pattern, plus other features. Kruskal-Wallis test, Fisher's exact test, and pairwise comparisons performed comparing imaging manifestations for the most frequent genetic results.

RESULTS

BRCA1 (29.5 %) and BRCA2 (25.9 %) variants were most common, followed by CHEK2 (16.6 %), ATM (8.0 %), and PALB2 (6.3 %), with significant associated differences in race/ethnicity (p = 0.040), age at cancer diagnosis (p = 0.005), tumor shapes (p = 0.001), margins (p < 0.001), grade (p < 0.001), internal enhancement pattern (rim enhancement) (p < 0.001), kinetics (washout) (p < 0.001), and presence of necrosis (p < 0.001). CHEK2 and ATM tumors were often lower grade with spiculated margins (CHEK2: 47.1 %, ATM: 45.5 %), rarely exhibiting washout or tumor necrosis (p < 0.001), and were mostly comprised of luminal molecular subtypes (CHEK2: 88.2 %, ATM: 90.9 %). BRCA1 tumors had the highest proportions with round shape (31.4 %), circumscribed margins (24.0 %), rim enhancement (24.0 %), washout (58.7 %), and necrosis (19.8 %), with 47.9 % comprised of triple negative subtype. Bilateral mastectomy was performed in higher proportions of patients with BRCA1 (84.3 %) and BRCA2 (75.5 %) variants compared to others.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic and molecular profiles of breast cancers demonstrate reproducible MRI phenotypes.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) Diagnosed by MRI-Guided Biopsy among BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

Background

While BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic sequence variants (PSVs) clearly confer an increased risk for invasive breast cancer, the extent to which these mutant alleles increase DCIS risk is less clear.

Objective

To assess the rate of detection over a 5-year period, and MRI imaging features of pure noncalcified DCIS in a cohort of Israeli BRCA1/BRCA2 PSV carriers attending a high-risk clinic from 2015 to 2020.

Materials and Methods

All female BRCA1/BRCA2 PSV-carriers followed at the Meirav High-risk clinic from 2015 to 2020 were eligible if they underwent semiannual breast imaging (MRI/mammography) and MRI-guided biopsy-proven pure DCIS. Clinical data, pathology information, and imaging characteristics were retrieved from the computerized archiving system.

Results

18/121 (15.2%) participating BRCA1 PSV carriers and 8/81 (10.1%) BRCA2 PSV-carriers who underwent MRI-guided biopsy were diagnosed with DCIS. The median age of BRCA1 carriers and BRCA2 carriers was 49.8 years and 60.6 years, respectively (p = 0.55). Negative estrogen-receptor tumors were diagnosed in 13/18 (72%) BRCA1 and 2/8 (25%) BRCA2 PSV carriers (p < 0.05). Thirteen (13/18–72%) BRCA1 carriers had intermediate to high-grade or high-grade DCIS compared with 4/8 (50%) of BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.03). Over the 5-year study period, 29/1100 (2.6%) BRCA1/BRCA2 PSV carriers were diagnosed with DCIS seen on MRI only.

Conclusion

MRI-detected noncalcified DCIS is more frequent in BRCA1 PSV carriers compared with BRCA2 carriers, unlike the BRCA2 predominance in mammography-detected calcified DCIS. BRCA1-related DCIS is diagnosed earlier, more likely to be estrogen receptor-negative and of higher grade compared with BRCA2-related DCIS. Future prospective studies should validate these results and assess the actual impact they might have on clinical management of BRCA PSV carriers.

Trabectedin (Yondelis®) as a Therapeutic Option in Gynecological Cancers: A Focus on its Mechanisms of Action, Clinical Activity and Genomic Predictors of Drug Response

The use of predictive biomarkers provides potential individualized cancer therapeutic options to prevent therapy failure as well as serious toxicities. Several recent studies showed that predictive and prognostic biomarkers are a notable personalized strategy to improve patients' care in several cancers. Trabectedin (Yondelis®) is a cytotoxic agent, derived from a marine organism, harbouring a significant antitumor activity against several cancers such as soft tissue sarcoma, ovarian, and breast cancers. Recently and with the advent of molecular genetic testing, BRCA mutational status was found as an important predictor of response to this anticancer drug, especially in gynecological cancers. The aim of this updated review is to discuss the mechanisms of action of trabectedin against the wellknown cancer hallmarks described until today. The current advances were also examined related to genomic biomarkers that can be used in the future to predict the efficacy of this potent anticancer natural molecule in various gynecological cancers.

The supplemental value of mammographic screening over breast MRI alone in BRCA2 mutation carriers

Purpose

BRCA2 mutation carriers are offered annual breast screening with MRI and mammography. The aim of this study was to investigate the supplemental value of mammographic screening over MRI screening alone.

Methods

In this multicenter study, proven BRCA2 mutation carriers, who developed breast cancer during screening using both digital mammography and state-of-art breast MRI, were identified. Clinical data were reviewed to classify cases in screen-detected and interval cancers. Imaging was reviewed to assess the diagnostic value of mammography and MRI, using the Breast Imaging and Data System (BI-RADS) classification allocated at the time of diagnosis.

Results

From January 2003 till March 2019, 62 invasive breast cancers and 23 ductal carcinomas in situ were diagnosed in 83 BRCA2 mutation carriers under surveillance. Overall screening sensitivity was 95.2% (81/85). Four interval cancers occurred (4.7% (4/85)). MRI detected 73 of 85 breast cancers (sensitivity 85.8%) and 42 mammography (sensitivity 49.9%) (p < 0.001).

Eight mammography-only lesions occurred. In 1 of 17 women younger than 40 years, a 6-mm grade 3 DCIS, retrospectively visible on MRI, was detected with mammography only in a 38-year-old woman. The other 7 mammography-only breast cancers were diagnosed in women aged 50 years and older, increasing sensitivity in this subgroup from 79.5% (35/44) to 95.5% (42/44) (p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

In BRCA2 mutation carriers younger than 40 years, the benefit of mammographic screening over MRI was very small. In carriers of 50 years and older, mammographic screening contributed significantly. Hence, we propose to postpone mammographic screening in BRCA2 mutation carriers to at least age 40.

Hyaline fibrous involution of breast lobules: a histologic finding associated with germline BRCA mutation

We describe the histology and the frequency of a histologic entity that we term "hyaline fibrous involution", which is characterized by symmetric and regular deposition of basal lamina-like periacinar hyaline material in association with atrophic epithelium, in breast samples from patients with either benign breast disease or germline BRCA mutation. Women with germline BRCA mutation (n = 93) who underwent prophylactic mastectomy (BRCA group) were compared to an age-matched sample of women who underwent biopsy for benign breast disease (n = 93). Median age was 45 years (range, 25-72 years). A single H&E section of each subject's benign breast tissue was reviewed. The total number of terminal duct lobular units and the number of terminal duct lobular units with hyaline fibrous involution were recorded for each case. The presence of any hyaline fibrous involution lobules and the within-sample proportion of hyaline fibrous involution lobules relative to total lobules were compared between groups. Presence of any hyaline fibrous involution was significantly more frequent in the BRCA group compared to the benign breast disease group, 47% vs. 15% (p < 0.0001, adjusted for total lobules). In women with any hyaline fibrous involution lobules, these unusual lobules were similarly rare in both groups, with median proportion of hyaline fibrous involution-positive lobules relative to all lobules of 0.03 in BRCA specimens (n = 44) and 0.03 in the benign breast disease group (n = 14). Within the BRCA group, frequency of any hyaline fibrous involution present was significantly higher in the perimenopausal age group (45-55 years: 63%) compared to other age groups (<45 years, 44%; >55 years, 15%; p = 0.05 and p = 0.02, respectively). Increased presence of hyaline fibrous involution in the setting of BRCA mutation suggests that it may represent a pathologic entity, possibly reflecting abnormal involution or an abnormal response to DNA damage.

BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in Japanese women with ductal carcinoma in situ

Background

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a component of the clinical spectrum of breast cancer even in those with BRCA1/2 mutation. The aim of this study was to report the feature of DCIS raised in Japanese women with BRCA1/2 mutations.

Methods

A total of 325 Japanese women with breast cancer (BC) (with or without invasive cancer) were referred for genetic counseling and underwent genetic testing for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in Showa University Hospital between December 2011 and August 2016. And 49 of them who were pathologically diagnosed as DCIS were included in this study. Logistic regression models were fit to determine the associations between potential predictive factors and BRCA status. A Cox proportional hazards model is used to predictive value of parameters for Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and contralateral breast tumor recurrence (CBTR).

Results

(a) Of 325 patients (with or without invasive cancer), 19.1% (62/325) tested positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. And 18.4% (9/49) was positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in DCIS, compared with 19.2% (53/276) in IDC (p = 1.000). Among BRCA mutations, 14.5% (9/62) had DCIS compared with nonmutations (15.2%, 40/263). Incidence of DCIS was 3.0% (1/33) of BRCA1 mutations and 27.5% (8/29) of BRCA2 mutation (p = 0.009). (b) Median age of diagnosis in BRCA mutation carriers was 39 years, compared with 46 years in noncarriers. Age, Family history (FH) of BC, FH of first or second BC and total number of relatives with BC diagnosis (DX) has significant difference between BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers in univariate analysis. In a multivariate logistic model, total relatives with BC DX ≥ 2 (odds ratio [OR], 5.128; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.266–20.763; p = 0.022), age at diagnosis ≤35 years (OR 0.149, 95% CI 0.023–0.954, p = 0.045) and ER+/HER2+ status (OR 5.034, 95% CI 1.092–23.210, p = 0.038) remained as independent significant predictors for BRCA mutation. Ki67 index (cut off by 14% or 30%) did not differ between BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers (p = 0.459 and p = 0.651). (c) There was a significant difference in ER‐positive tumors among BRCA2 carriers and noncarriers (p = 0.042). Subgroup analysis showed BRCA2 carriers tend to be of higher grade (Grade 2 and 3), more frequently ER+/PR+ (p = 0.041) and lower proliferation (Ki67 index) than noncarriers, whereas differences in nuclear grade and ki67 index were not found significantly in our study. (d) BRCA mutation was not associated with an increased risk of IBTR and CBTR.

Conclusion

DCIS is equally as prevalent in patients who were BRCA mutation carriers as in high familial‐risk women who were noncarriers, but occurs at earlier age. BRCA2 carriers have higher incidence in DCIS than that of BRCA1 carriers, and tend to be higher grade and more frequently ER positive and lower proliferation. Total relatives with BC DX ≥2, age at diagnosis ≤35 years and ER+/HER2+ might be independent predictors for BRCA mutation in Japanese women with DCIS and patients of these risk factors should be recommended to receive genetic counseling and BRCA testing.

Breast cancer detection and tumor characteristics in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

PURPOSE

To describe imaging findings, detection rates, and tumor characteristics of breast cancers in a large series of patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations to potentially streamline screening strategies.

METHODS

An IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective analysis of 496 BRCA mutation carriers diagnosed with breast carcinoma from 1999 to 2013 was performed. Institutional database and electronic medical records were reviewed for mammography and MRI imaging. Patient and tumor characteristics including age at diagnosis, tumor histology, grade, receptor, and nodal status were recorded.

RESULTS

Tumors in BRCA1 mutation carriers were associated exhibited significantly higher nuclear and histological grade compared to BRCA2 (p < 0.001). Triple-negative tumors were more frequent in BRCA1 mutation carriers, whereas hormone receptor-positive tumors were more frequent in BRCA2 mutation carriers (p < 0.001). BRCA2 mutation carriers more frequently presented with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) alone 14% (35/246) and cancers more frequently exhibiting calcifications (p < 0.001). Mammography detected fewer cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers compared to BRCA2 (p = 0.04): 81% (186/231) BRCA1 versus 89% (212/237) BRCA2. MRI detected 99% cancers in each group. Mammography detected cancer in two patients with false-negative MRI (1 invasive cancer, 1 DCIS). Detection rates on both mammography and MRI did not significantly differ for women over 40 years and women below 40 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers are associated with more aggressive tumor characteristics compared to BRCA2 and are less well seen on mammography. Mammography rarely identified cancers not visible on MRI. Thus, the omission of mammography in BRCA1 mutation carriers screened with MRI can be considered.

DCIS in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: prevalence, phenotype, and expression of oncodrivers C-MET and HER3

Background

Studies report conflicting evidence regarding the existence of a DCIS-associated premalignant pathway in BRCA mutation carriers. We aimed to examine the prevalence, phenotype, and expression of oncodrivers in pure DCIS (pDCIS) and invasive breast cancer with concurrent DCIS (IBC + DCIS) in mutation carriers.

Methods

A cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers >18 years old who underwent surgery for breast cancer at an academic hospital (1992–2011) and had pathology available for review were included for study. Invasive breast cancer (IBC) and DCIS were stained for ER, PR, HER1, HER2, and HER3, and C-MET. DCIS prevalence was evaluated. Correlation of IBC and DCIS phenotypes was evaluated in patients with IBC + DCIS. DCIS and IBC expression of tumor markers were examined by BRCA mutation.

Results

We identified 114 breast tumors. Of all BRCA1-associated tumors, 21.1 % were pDCIS and 63.4 % were IBC + DCIS. Of all BRCA2-associated tumors, 23.3 % were pDCIS and 60.5 % were IBC + DCIS. In BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with IBC + DCIS, there was a significant correlation in ER, PR, and HER3 expression between the DCIS and IBC components. Most BRCA1-associated DCIS did not express ER, PR or HER2, while most BRCA2-associated DCIS did express ER and PR. BRCA1− as well as BRCA2-associated DCIS had expression of HER3 and C-MET.

Conclusions

The majority of BRCA-associated tumors had DCIS present. Concordance of DCIS and IBC phenotypes was high, arguing for the existence of a DCIS-associated premalignant pathway. Oncodrivers HER3 and C-MET were expressed in the DCIS of mutation carriers, suggesting an opportunity for prevention strategies.

Histopathological Features of Non-Neoplastic Breast Parenchyma Do Not Predict BRCA Mutation Status of Patients with Invasive Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Several studies have evaluated histologic features of non-neoplastic breast parenchyma in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, but the results are conflicting. The limited data suggest a much higher prevalence of high-risk precursor lesions in BRCA carriers. Therefore, we designed this study to compare the clinicopathological characteristics of peritumoral benign breast tissue in patients with and without deleterious BRCA mutations.

METHODS

Women with breast cancer (BC) who were referred for genetic counseling and underwent BRCA genetic testing in 2010 and 2011 were included in the study.

RESULTS

Of the six benign histological features analyzed in this study, only stromal fibrosis grade 2/3 was found to be statistically different, with more BRCA noncarriers having stromal fibrosis grade 2/3 than BRCA1/2 carriers (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

There is no significant association between mutation risk and the presence of benign histologic features of peritumoral breast parenchyma.

Ductal carcinoma in situ: how should we treat it?

SUMMARY The observed incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased because of the increasing use of sensitive imaging modalities. While the clinical course of DCIS is quite variable, it is considered a precursor lesion to invasive breast cancer. The current focus of DCIS treatment is on the prevention of progression to invasive disease. However, at present, validated diagnostic tests to predict progression accurately are lacking. Additionally, important clinical questions arise during DCIS management. For example, optimal margins of excision or axillary lymph node sampling have not been addressed in randomized clinical trials. May whole-breast radiation after lumpectomy be omitted in selected patients? What is the role of adjuvant tamoxifen if it does not impact overall survival rates? This review aims to describe the natural history of DCIS and highlights the current therapeutic options and challenges in patient management.

HIF-1α overexpression in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Recent studies have revealed that BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation-related breast cancers show frequent overexpression of hypoxia inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α), the key regulator of the hypoxia response. However, the question remained whether hypoxia is a late stage bystander or a true carcinogenetic event in patients with hereditary predisposition. We therefore studied HIF-1α overexpression in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), an established precursor of invasive breast cancer.

We used immunohistochemistry to examine the expression of the hypoxia markers HIF-1α, CAIX and Glut-1 in DCIS and available invasive carcinoma lesions of 32 BRCA1, 16 BRCA2 and 77 non-BRCA mutation-related cases. HIF-1α expression was detected in 63% of BRCA1 and 62% of BRCA2 as compared to 34% of non-BRCA mutation-related DCIS cases (p = 0.005). CAIX overexpression was present in 56% of BRCA1 and 44% of BRCA2 as compared to 6% of non-BRCA mutation-related DCIS cases (p = 0.000). Glut-1 overexpression was observed in 59% of BRCA1, 75% of BRCA2 and 67% of non-BRCA mutation-related DCIS cases (p = 0.527). Overall, HIF-1α, CAIX and Glut-1 expression in BRCA mutation-related DCIS matched the expression in the accompanying invasive cancers in 60% or more of cases. In non-BRCA mutation-related cases the expression of the hypoxia markers in DCIS matched the expression in the invasive part in 46% or more of the cases.

Although BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation-related invasive breast cancers are different in many ways, the hypoxia-related proteins HIF-1α, CAIX and Glut-1 are expressed in both DCIS and invasive lesions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. This suggests that hypoxia may already play a role in the DCIS stage of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation related breast carcinogenesis, and may also drive cancer progression. Hypoxia-related proteins are therefore putative targets for therapy and molecular imaging for early detection and monitoring therapy response in BRCA mutation patients.

Ductal carcinoma in situ: challenges, opportunities, and uncharted waters

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a heterogeneous group of diseases that differ in biology and clinical behavior. Until 1980, DCIS represented less than 1% of all breast cancer cases. With the increased utilization of mammography, DCIS now accounts for 15% to 25% of newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in the United States. Although our ability to detect DCIS has radically improved, our understanding of the pathophysiology and factors involved in its progression to invasive carcinoma is still poorly defined. In many patients, DCIS will never progress to invasive breast cancer and these women are overtreated. In contrast, some DCIS cases are clinically aggressive and the women may be undertreated. We are able to define some of the predictors of aggressive DCIS compared with DCIS of low malignant potential. However, our ability to risk-stratify DCIS is still in its infancy. Clinical risk factors that predict aggressive disease and increased risk of local recurrence include young age at diagnosis, large lesion size, high nuclear grade, comedo necrosis, and involved margins. Treatment factors such as wider surgical margins and radiation therapy reduce the risk of local recurrence. DCIS represents a key intermediate in the stepwise progression to malignancy, but not all aggressive breast cancers appear to have a DCIS intermediate, notably within triple-negative breast cancer. Ongoing studies of the genetic and epigenetic alterations in precancerous breast lesions (atypia and DCIS) as well as the breast microenvironment are important for developing effective early detection and individualized targeted prevention.

Predictive factors for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in women with ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), like their counterparts with invasive breast cancer, warrant genetic risk assessment and testing on the basis of high-risk variables. The authors of this report identified predictive factors for mutations in the breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 in women who were diagnosed with DCIS.

METHODS

One hundred eighteen women with DCIS who were referred for genetic counseling and underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations between 2003 and 2010 were included in the study. Logistic regression models were fit to determine the associations between potential predictive factors and BRCA status.

RESULTS

Of 118 high-risk women with DCIS, 27% (n = 32) tested positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. Of those, 10% (n = 12) and 17% (n = 20) had BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Age, race, and tumor characteristics did not differ between BRCA noncarriers and carriers. In a multivariate logistic model, ≥2 relatives with ovarian cancer (OC) (odds ratio [OR], 8.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-56.29; P = .034), and a score ≥10% according to the BRCAPRO mathematical model for calculating the probability that a particular family member carries a germline BRCA mutation (OR, 6.37; 95% CI, 2.23-18.22; P = .0005) remained as independent significant predictors for a BRCA mutation. Fifty-seven percent of mutation carriers but only 25% of noncarriers underwent prophylactic mastectomy(P = .0037). This difference remained significant for patients aged ≤40 years (P = .025).

CONCLUSIONS

Women who had DCIS and a family history of OC or who had BRCAPRO scores ≥10% had a high rate of BRCA positivity regardless of age at diagnosis. These findings suggest that high-risk patients with DCIS are appropriate candidates for genetic testing for BRCA mutations in the presence of predictive factors even if they do not have invasive breast cancer.

The contribution of breast cancer pathology to statistical models to predict mutation risk in BRCA carriers

BRCA1 and BRCA2 associated breast cancer comprises a small but important group of hereditary breast cancer. Testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 has significant clinical and personal implications for the patients in terms of therapy and follow-up of individual family members. The sequencing of the genes is expensive and since the information derived may have a profound effect on the individual and family members, it is important that testing is done only when the risk of carrying a mutation is thought to be high. Over the last decade, researchers have developed a number of statistical models for predicting risk for harboring mutations in these genes and the risk of subsequently developing breast and ovarian cancer. These models usually take into account the type of tumor and age at occurrence as well as family history. Data from pathological analysis show that although breast tumours are heterogeneous, there are histological characteristics that are seen more frequently in carriers of BRCA1 germ line mutations compared to BRCA2 and sporadic breast cancers. A number of authors have suggested that the addition of pathological data to risk algorithms may improve the predictive power of these models and provide a more accurate way of identifying individuals who may benefit from testing. Here we review the pathology of familial breast cancer and assess the evidence to justify the use of pathology in refining risk assessment models.

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.

What is the malignant nature of human ductal carcinoma in situ?

Invasive, genetically abnormal carcinoma progenitor cells have been propagated from human and mouse breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions, providing new insights into breast cancer progression. The survival of DCIS cells in the hypoxic, nutrient-deprived intraductal niche could promote genetic instability and the derepression of the invasive phenotype. Understanding potential survival mechanisms, such as autophagy, that might be functioning in DCIS lesions provides strategies for arresting invasion at the pre-malignant stage. A new, open trial of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with DCIS constitutes a model for testing investigational agents that target malignant progenitor cells in the intraductal niche.

Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in women with breast carcinoma In Situ and referred for genetic testing

Ductal and lobular carcinoma in situ (CIS) accounted for 62,280 (24.5%) of all new breast cancer diagnoses in 2009. BRCA1/2 mutations confer an extremely high risk of breast cancer, and management guidelines for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers advise close follow-up, intensive screening, and consideration of prophylactic surgery to lower this risk. The limited relevant previous data are not definitive in establishing the prevalence of BRCA1/2 mutations in breast CIS patients, creating uncertainty as to whether referral for cancer risk assessment and genetic testing is appropriate for this group. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the Myriad Genetics BRCA1/2 database to determine the prevalence of these mutations in breast CIS patients. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and confidence intervals (CI) are reported at the 95% level (α = 0.05). The source population was 64,717 consecutive women who were not Ashkenazi Jewish, underwent BRCA1/2 testing, and provided a personal and family history of invasive breast and ovarian cancer; 7,295 (11.3%) reported a diagnosis of CIS (ductal or lobular) and had an overall 5.9% prevalence of mutated BRCA1/2 (mBRCA). Subgrouped by history (personal or family) of invasive breast and/or ovarian cancer, these CIS patients had the following prevalences of mBRCA: (1) no personal or family history, 2.3%; (2) personal history, 5.2%; (3) family history, 5%; and (4) personal and family history, 10.3%. mBRCA risk was significantly higher in women with early-onset (<50 years old) CIS than with late-onset (≥ 50 years old) CIS [odds ratio (OR) = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1-2.1). Disease onset at less than 40 years age was associated with an even higher mBRCA risk (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.3-2.3). By far the largest analysis of BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence in non-Ashkenazi Jewish breast CIS patients, this study shows that early-onset CIS is associated with mBRCA1/2 in patients referred for genetic testing. When a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer are also present, testing women with early-onset CIS may increase both the likelihood of detecting BRCA1/2 mutations and opportunities for carriers to consider additional cancer prevention strategies.

Risk-reducing strategies for women carrying BRCA1/2 mutations with a focus on prophylactic surgery

Background

Women who have inherited mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have substantially elevated risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Mutation carriers have various options, including extensive and regular surveillance, chemoprevention and risk-reducing surgery. The aim of this review is to provide an up-to-date analysis and to subsequently summarise the available literature in relation to risk-reducing strategies, with a keen focus on prophylactic surgery.

Methods

The literature review is facilitated by Medline and PubMed databases. The cross-referencing of the obtained articles was used to identify other relevant studies.

Results

Prophylactic surgery (bilateral mastectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy or a combination of both procedures) has proved to be the most effective risk-reducing strategy. There are no randomised controlled trials able to demonstrate the potential benefits or harms of prophylactic surgery; therefore, the evidence has been derived from retrospective and short follow-up prospective studies, in addition to hypothetical mathematical models.

Based on the current knowledge, it is reasonable to recommend prophylactic oophorectomy for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers when childbearing is completed in order to reduce the risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. In addition, women should be offered the options of rigorous breast surveillance, chemoprevention with anti-oestrogens--especially for carriers of BRCA2--or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy.

Conclusion

The selection of the most appropriate risk-reducing strategy is not a straightforward task. The impact of risk-reducing strategies on cancer risk, survival, and overall quality of life are the key criteria considered for decision-making. Notably, various other factors should be taken into consideration when evaluating individual mutation carriers' individual circumstances, namely woman's age, morbidity, type of mutation, and individual preferences and expectations.

Although prospective randomised controlled trials concerned with examining the various interventions in relation to the woman's age and type of mutation are needed, randomisation is extremely difficult and rather deemed unethical given the current available evidence from retrospective studies.

Molecular profile of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation carriers

Aims:

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is an established late precursor of sporadic invasive breast cancer and to a large extent parallels its invasive counterpart with respect to molecular changes and immunophenotype. Invasive breast cancers in germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have a distinct “basal” and “luminal” immunophenotype, respectively, but the immunophenotype of their precursor lesions has hardly been studied, and this was the aim of this study.

Methods:

DCIS lesions of 25 proven BRCA1 and 9 proven BRCA2 germline mutation carriers and their 22 and 6, respectively, accompanying invasive lesions were stained by immunohistochemistry for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2/neu, cytokeratin (CK)5/6, CK14, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and Ki67.

Results:

DCIS lesions in BRCA1 mutation carriers were mostly of the basal molecular type with low ER/PR/HER2 expression, while they frequently expressed CK5/6, CK14 and EGFR, and were mostly grade 3 and highly proliferative. DCIS lesions in BRCA2 mutation carriers were mostly of luminal molecular type with frequent expression of ER/PR, and infrequent expression of CK5/6, CK14 and EGFR, and they were mostly grade 3 and showed low proliferation. In BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers there was a high concordance between DCIS lesions and their concomitant invasive counterpart with regard to expression of individual markers as well as “molecular” subtype.

Conclusions:

Although the number of cases studied was low, DCIS lesions in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations carriers are usually of the basal and luminal molecular type, respectively, similar to their accompanying invasive cancers, thereby providing evidence that DCIS is a direct precursor lesion in these hereditary predisposed patients. This also suggests that crucial carcinogenetic events leading to these phenotypes in hereditary predisposed patients occur before the stage of invasion.