Selection bias influences reported contralateral breast cancer incidence and survival in high risk non-BRCA1/2 patients

Increased risk of contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1/2 wild-type, high-risk Korean breast cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the contralateral breast cancer (CBC) recurrence rate in Korean breast cancer patients according to their BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, focusing particularly on the CBC recurrence risk in BRCA1/2 negative (BRCAx) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on 13,107 primary breast cancer patients. The patients were divided into high-risk and low-risk groups for hereditary breast cancer based on the Korean National Health Insurance Service's eligibility criteria for BRCA1/2 germline mutation testing. The high-risk group was further categorized into the BRCA mutation group, the BRCAx group, and the not tested group. We evaluated the overall survival and cumulative risk of developing CBC in these patients.

RESULTS

Among 4494 high-risk patients, 973 (21.7%) underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2 germline mutation, revealing mutations in 158 patients (16.2%). We observed significant overall survival differences across all four groups, with the high-risk, not-tested group demonstrating notably worse overall survival (p < 0.001). However, when adjusted for other prognostic factors, there was no significant differences in hazard ratio of death between the four groups. The cumulative risk of CBC also varied among the groups. Patients with BRCA1/2 mutations showed a 7.3-fold increased risk of CBC compared to the low-risk group (95% CI 4.11-13.0, p < 0.001). Interestingly, BRCAx patients also demonstrated a significantly higher risk of CBC (HR 2.77, 95% CI 1.76-4.35, p < 0.001). The prognostic importance of the BRCAx for CBC recurrence persisted after adjusting for the age and subtype, but became insignificant when the family history of breast cancer was adjusted.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer patients who are at high risk of hereditary breast cancer but with wild-type BRCA 1/2 genes (BRCAx) have increased risk of developing contralateral breast cancer when compared to the low-risk patients. More careful surveillance and follow-up can be offered to these patients especially when they have family history of breast cancer.

Estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer and adverse outcome in BRCA2 mutation carriers and young non-carrier patients

Estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer generally confers a more favorable prognosis than ER-negative cancer, however, a different picture is emerging for BRCA2 mutation carriers and young patients. We used nationwide data from population-based registries to study prognostic effects in those two groups. Of all 2817 eligible women diagnosed with breast cancer in Iceland during 1980-2004, 85% had been tested for the Icelandic 999del5 BRCA2 (c.771_775delTCAAA) founder pathogenic variant. We compared breast cancer-specific survival, effects of ER status, other clinical parameters, and treatment, between three mutually exclusive groups: BRCA2-carriers, non-carriers diagnosed 40 years or younger, and older non-carriers. Prevalence of the BRCA2 mutation among tested patients <=40 years of age was 21.0%, but it was 5.4% among women diagnosed >40 years of age. For ER+ cancer, breast cancer-specific 15-year survival was 49.7%, 55.2%, and 74.7%, among BRCA2-carriers, young and older non-carriers, respectively, whereas for ER-negative cancer, survival was similar (64.0-69.3%) for all three groups. Neither BRCA2 carriers nor young non-carriers did tumor grade 3 predict worse survival than did tumor grade 1. The adverse outcome for the young cases cannot be explained by BRCA2 mutations, as carriers were excluded from the group. Those two clinically important patient groups need special attention with respect to treatment choices, in particular, if diagnosed with ER+ tumors. It is thus advisable to have knowledge of BRCA2 status when treatment decisions are made. Finally, it is important to understand the biological basis for the specific nature of ER+ tumors in young women and BRCA2 carriers.

Risk factors for metachronous contralateral breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The risk of developing metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is a recurrent topic at the outpatient clinic. We aimed to provide CBC risk estimates of published patient, pathological, and primary breast cancer (PBC) treatment-related factors.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for publications on factors associated with CBC risk. Meta-analyses were performed with grouping of studies by mutation status (i.e., BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100delC), familial cohorts, and general population-based cohorts.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight papers satisfied our inclusion criteria. Strong associations with CBC were found for carrying a BRCA1 (RR = 3.7; 95%CI:2.8-4.9), BRCA2 (RR = 2.8; 95%CI:1.8-4.3) or CHEK2 c.1100delC (RR = 2.7; 95%CI:2.0-3.7) mutation. In population-based cohorts, PBC family history (RR = 1.8; 95%CI:1.2-2.6), body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m² (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.3-1.9), lobular PBC (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.8), estrogen receptor-negative PBC (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.0-2.3) and treatment with radiotherapy <40 years (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.7) was associated with increased CBC risk. Older age at PBC diagnosis (RR per decade = 0.93; 95%CI:0.88-0.98), and treatment with chemotherapy (RR = 0.7; 95%CI:0.6-0.8) or endocrine therapy (RR = 0.6; 95%CI:0.5-0.7) were associated with decreased CBC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Mutation status, family history, and PBC treatment are key factors for CBC risk. Age at PBC diagnosis, BMI, lobular histology and hormone receptor status have weaker associations and should be considered in combination with key factors to accurately predict CBC risk.

Non-BRCA familial breast cancer: review of reported pathology and molecular findings

The majority of women evaluated for a clinical concern of possible hereditary breast cancer syndromes have no identified pathogenic variants in genes predisposing them to breast cancer. Non-BRCA1- or BRCA2-related familial breast cancer, also called 'BRCAX', thus comprises a sizeable proportion of familial breast cancer but it is poorly understood. In this study, we reviewed 14 studies on histopathology and molecular studies of BRCAX to determine if there were differences between 'sporadic' breast cancers and compared to cancers arising in women harbouring variants in known cancer predisposition genes. Across available literature, there was inconsistency on inclusion and exclusion criteria, reported parameters, and use of controls. Cohorts were small, and while several studies reported findings that appeared to distinguish the BRCAX cases from sporadic and/or gene-positive controls, no findings were reported in more than one study. To determine whether the BRCAX families might still contain important genetic subsets awaiting discovery will require prospective ascertainment of a large number of women with familial breast cancer who are screened for all currently established predisposition genes, whose tumours are assessed for multiple parameters in a uniform manner, and in which controls (BRCA1/2+ and non-familial 'sporadic' cases) are collected from the same population.

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.

Oestrogen receptor status, treatment and breast cancer prognosis in Icelandic BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND

The impact of an inherited BRCA2 mutation on the prognosis of women with breast cancer has not been well documented. We studied the effects of oestrogen receptor (ER) status, other prognostic factors and treatments on survival in a large cohort of BRCA2 mutation carriers.

METHODS

We identified 285 breast cancer patients with a 999del5 BRCA2 mutation and matched them with 570 non-carrier patients. Clinical information was abstracted from patient charts and pathology records and supplemented by evaluation of tumour grade and ER status using archived tissue specimens. Univariate and multivariate hazard ratios (HR) were estimated for breast cancer-specific survival using Cox regression. The effects of various therapies were studied in patients treated from 1980 to 2012.

RESULTS

Among mutation carriers, positive ER status was associated with higher risk of death than negative ER status (HR=1.94; 95% CI=1.22-3.07, P=0.005). The reverse association was seen for non-carriers (HR=0.71; 95% CI: 0.51-0.97; P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Among BRCA2 carriers, ER-positive status is an adverse prognostic factor. BRCA2 carrier status should be known at the time when treatment decisions are made.

Second primary breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: 10-year cumulative incidence in the Breast Cancer Family Registry

BReast CAncer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1 and BRCA2) mutation carriers diagnosed with breast cancer are at increased risk of developing a second primary breast cancer. Data from high-risk clinics may be subject to different biases which can cause both over and underestimation of this risk. Using data from a large multi-institutional family registry we estimated the 10-year cumulative risk of second primary breast cancer including more complete testing information on family members. We prospectively followed 800 women diagnosed with breast cancer from the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR) who were carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic mutation or a variant of unknown clinical significance. In order to limit survival and ascertainment bias, cases were limited to those diagnosed with a first primary breast cancer from 1994 to 2001 and enrolled in the BCFR within 3 years after their cancer diagnosis. We excluded women enrolled after being diagnosed with a second breast cancer. We calculated 10-year incidence of second primary breast cancers. The 10-year incidence of a second primary breast cancer was highest in BRCA1 mutation carriers (17 %; 95 % CI 11-25 %), with even higher estimates in those first diagnosed under the age of 40 (21 %; 95 % CI 13-34 %). Lower rates were found in BRCA2 mutation carriers (7 %; 95 % CI 3-15 %) and women with a variant of unknown clinical significance (6 %; 95 % CI 4-9 %). Whereas the cumulative 10-year incidence of second primary breast cancer is high in BRCA1 mutation carriers, the estimates in BRCA2 mutation carriers and women with variants of unknown clinical significance are similar to those reported in women with sporadic breast cancer.

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.

Synchronous and metachronous breast malignancies: a cross-sectional retrospective study and review of the literature

Objective. There is increasing interest in patients with metachronous (MBC) and synchronous breast cancer (SBC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the occurrence and outcome of MBCs and SBCs. Methods. A retrospective study on women operated in our department for breast cancer between 2002 and 2005 was carried out. Patients were divided into three groups: women with MBC, SBC, and unilateral breast cancer (UBC). Moreover, we performed a meta-analysis of the English literature about multiple breast cancers between 2000 and 2011 taking into consideration their prevalence and overall survival (OS). Results. We identified 584 breast cancer patients: 16 women (3%) presented SBC and 40 MBC (7%, second cancer after 72-month follow-up IQR 40–145). Although the meta-analysis showed significant OS differences between MBC or SBC and UBC, we did not observe any significant OS difference among the three groups of our population. Anyway, we found a significant worse disease-free survival in MBC than UBC and a significant higher prevalence of radical surgery in MBC and SBC than UBC. Conclusions. Despite the low prevalence of MBC and SBC, the presence of a long time risk of MBC confirms the crucial role of ipsi- and contralateral mammographies in the postoperative follow-up.

Impact of rapid genetic counselling and testing on the decision to undergo immediate or delayed prophylactic mastectomy in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: findings from a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Female breast cancer patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation have an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer. We investigated the effect of rapid genetic counselling and testing (RGCT) on choice of surgery.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with at least a 10% risk of a BRCA1/2 mutation were randomised to an intervention group (offer of RGCT) or a control group (usual care; ratio 2 : 1). Primary study outcomes were uptake of direct bilateral mastectomy (BLM) and delayed contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2010, we recruited 265 women. On the basis of intention-to-treat analyses, no significant group differences were observed in percentage of patients opting for a direct BLM (14.6% for the RGCT group vs 9.2% for the control group; odds ratio (OR) 2.31; confidence interval (CI) 0.92-5.81; P=0.08) or for a delayed CPM (4.5% for the RGCT group vs 5.7% for the control group; OR 0.89; CI 0.27-2.90; P=0.84). Per-protocol analysis indicated that patients who received DNA test results before surgery (59 out of 178 women in the RGCT group) opted for direct BLM significantly more often than patients who received usual care (22% vs 9.2%; OR 3.09, CI 1.15-8.31, P=0.03).

INTERPRETATION

Although the large majority of patients in the intervention group underwent rapid genetic counselling, only a minority received DNA test results before surgery. This may explain why offering RGCT yielded only marginally significant differences in uptake of BLM. As patients who received DNA test results before surgery were more likely to undergo BLM, we hypothesise that when DNA test results are made routinely available pre-surgery, they will have a more significant role in surgical treatment decisions.

Contralateral mastectomy improves survival in women with BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast cancer are at high risk of contralateral disease. Such women often elect to have contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) to reduce the likelihood of recurrence. This study considers whether CRRM improves overall survival. 105 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with unilateral breast cancer who underwent CRRM were compared to controls (593 mutation carriers and 105 specifically matched) not undergoing CRRM and diagnosed between 1985 and 2010. Survival was assessed by proportional hazards models, and extended to a matched analysis using stratification by risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO), gene, grade and stage. Median time to CRRM was 1.1 years after the primary diagnosis (range 0.0-13.3). Median follow-up was 9.7 years in the CRRM group and 8.6 in the non-CRRM group. The 10-year overall survival was 89 % in women electing for CRRM (n = 105) compared to 71 % in the non-CRRM group (n = 593); p < 0.001. The survival advantage remained after matching for oophorectomy, gene, grade and stage: HR 0.37 (0.17-0.80, p = 0.008)-CRRM appeared to act independently of RRBSO. CRRM appears to confer a survival advantage. If this finding is confirmed in a larger series it should form part of the counselling procedure at diagnosis of the primary tumour. The indication for CRRM in women who have had RRBSO also requires further research.

The risk of contralateral breast cancer in patients from BRCA1/2 negative high risk families as compared to patients from BRCA1 or BRCA2 positive families: a retrospective cohort study

Introduction

While it has been reported that the risk of contralateral breast cancer in patients from BRCA1 or BRCA2 positive families is elevated, little is known about contralateral breast cancer risk in patients from high risk families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations.

Methods

A retrospective, multicenter cohort study was performed from 1996 to 2011 and comprised 6,235 women with unilateral breast cancer from 6,230 high risk families that had tested positive for BRCA1 (n = 1,154) or BRCA2 (n = 575) mutations or tested negative (n = 4,501). Cumulative contralateral breast cancer risks were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and were compared between groups using the log-rank test. Cox regression analysis was applied to assess the impact of the age at first breast cancer and the familial history stratified by mutation status.

Results

The cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer 25 years after first breast cancer was 44.1% (95%CI, 37.6% to 50.6%) for patients from BRCA1 positive families, 33.5% (95%CI, 22.4% to 44.7%) for patients from BRCA2 positive families and 17.2% (95%CI, 14.5% to 19.9%) for patients from families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations. Younger age at first breast cancer was associated with a higher risk of contralateral breast cancer. For women who had their first breast cancer before the age of 40 years, the cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer after 25 years was 55.1% for BRCA1, 38.4% for BRCA2, and 28.4% for patients from BRCA1/2 negative families. If the first breast cancer was diagnosed at the age of 50 or later, 25-year cumulative risks were 21.6% for BRCA1, 15.5% for BRCA2, and 12.9% for BRCA1/2 negative families.

Conclusions

Contralateral breast cancer risk in patients from high risk families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations is similar to the risk in patients with sporadic breast cancer. Thus, the mutation status should guide decision making for contralateral mastectomy.

Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

PURPOSE

To estimate the risk for contralateral breast cancer in members of BRCA1- and BRCA2-positive families and to determine predictive risk factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter, cohort study was performed from 1996 until 2008 and comprised 2,020 women with unilateral breast cancer (index patients, n = 978; relatives, n = 1.42) from 978 families who had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Cox regression analysis was applied to assess the association of age at first breast cancer with time from first to contralateral breast cancer, stratified by the affected BRCA gene.

RESULTS

The cumulative risk for contralateral breast cancer 25 years after first breast cancer was 47.4% (95% CI, 38.8% to 56.0%) for patients from families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Members of families with BRCA1 mutations had a 1.6-fold (95% CI, 1.2-fold to 2.3-fold) higher risk of contralateral breast cancer than members of families with BRCA2 mutations. Younger age at first breast cancer was associated with a significantly higher risk of contralateral breast cancer in patients with BRCA1 mutation, and a trend was observed in patients with BRCA2 mutation. After 25 years, 62.9% (95% CI, 50.4% to 75.4%) of patients with BRCA1 mutation who were younger than 40 years of age at first breast cancer developed contralateral breast cancer, compared with only 19.6% (95% CI, 5.3% to 33.9%) of those who were older than 50 years of age at first breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

Contralateral breast cancer risk depends on age at first breast cancer and on the affected BRCA gene, and this risk should be considered in treatment planning.

The value of surveillance mammography of the contralateral breast in patients with a history of breast cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the contribution of surveillance mammography to the early detection of metachronous contralateral breast cancer (MCBC) and to assess its impact on the survival of breast cancer patients with relation to compliance.

METHOD

Breast cancer patients (5589) were identified using files from the regional cancer registry of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre North Netherlands (CCCN Groningen, The Netherlands). The programme sensitivity and the impact on prognosis of follow-up mammography with relation to compliance were evaluated in 114 patients who developed MCBC during hospital follow-up.

RESULTS

The cumulative MCBC incidence rate at year 10 was 3.4% (95% CI: 2.8-4.0%). The programme sensitivity of surveillance mammography was 59.6% (95% CI: 50.6-68.7). In patients who complied with annual mammography, sensitivity was increased to 70.8% (95% CI: 61.7-80.0). Patients with MCBCs detected by routine mammography have better survival rates than patients with MCBCs detected by other means (HR: 3.18; 95% CI: 1.59-6.34). Though there was a trend towards improved survival in patients being compliant with regular clinical follow-up (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 0.72-3.96), this was not the case for patients being compliant with annual mammography (HR:1.02; 95% CI:0.50-2.09).

CONCLUSION

Mammography is a valuable tool for the early detection of MCBC during hospital follow-up of breast cancer patients and is probably beneficial to survival. The utilisation of follow-up surveillance in breast cancer patients and its potential impact on survival deserve further investigation.

Prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at risk of hereditary breast cancer: long-term experiences at the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic

BACKGROUND

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women from a hereditary breast(/ovarian) cancer family have a highly increased risk of developing breast cancer (BC). Prophylactic mastectomy (PM) results in the greatest BC risk reduction. Long-term data on the efficacy and sequels of PM are scarce.

METHODS

From 358 high-risk women (including 236 BRCA1/2 carriers) undergoing PM between 1994 and 2004, relevant data on the occurrence of BC in relation to PM, complications in relation to breast reconstruction (BR), mutation status, age at PM and preoperative imaging examination results were extracted from the medical records, and analyzed separately for women without (unaffected, n = 177) and with a BC history (affected, n = 181).

RESULTS

No primary BCs occurred after PM (median follow-up 4.5 years). In one previously unaffected woman, metastatic BC was detected almost 4 years after PM (primary BC not found). Median age at PM was younger in unaffected women (P < .001), affected women more frequently were 50% risk carriers (P < .001). Unexpected (pre)malignant changes at PM were found in 3% of the patients (in 5 affected, and 5 unaffected women, respectively). In 49.6% of the women opting for BR one or more complications were registered, totaling 215 complications, leading to 153 surgical interventions (71%). Complications were mainly related to cosmetic outcome (36%) and capsular formation (24%).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of developing a primary BC after PM remains low after longer follow-up. Preoperative imaging and careful histological examination is warranted because of potential unexpected (pre)malignant findings. The high complication rate after breast reconstruction mainly concerns cosmetic issues.

Tumour characteristics, survival and prognostic factors of hereditary breast cancer from BRCA2-, BRCA1- and non-BRCA1/2 families as compared to sporadic breast cancer cases

AIM OF THE STUDY

Results on tumour characteristics and survival of hereditary breast cancer (BC), especially on BRCA2-associated BC, are inconclusive. The prognostic impact of the classical tumour and treatment factors in hereditary BC is insufficiently known.

METHODS

We selected 103 BRCA2-, 223 BRCA1- and 311 non-BRCA1/2 BC patients (diagnosis 1980-2004) from the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. To correct for longevity bias, analyses were also performed while excluding index patients undergoing DNA testing 2 years after BC diagnosis. As a comparison group, 759 sporadic BC patients of comparable age at and year of diagnosis were selected. We compared tumour characteristics, the occurrence of ipsilateral recurrence (LRR) and contralateral BC (CBC) as well as distant disease-free (DDFS), BC-specific (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) between these groups. By multivariate modelling, the prognostic impact of tumour and treatment factors was investigated separately in hereditary BC.

RESULTS

We confirmed the presence of the particular BRCA1-phenotype. In contrast, tumour characteristics of BRCA2-associated BC were similar to those of non-BRCA1/2 and sporadic BC, with the exception of a high risk of CBC (3.1% per year) and oestrogen-receptor (ER)-positivity (83%). No significant differences between BRCA2-associated BC and other BC subgroups were found with respect to LRR, DDFS, BCSS and OS. Independent prognostic factors for BC-specific survival in hereditary BC (combining the three subgroups) were tumour stage, adjuvant chemotherapy, histologic grade, ER status and a prophylactic (salpingo-)oophorectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Apart from the frequent occurrence of contralateral BC and a positive ER-status, BRCA2-associated BC did not markedly differ from other hereditary or sporadic BC. Our observation that tumour size and nodal status are prognostic factors also in hereditary BC implies that the strategy to use these factors as a proxy for ultimate mortality appears to be valid also in this specific group of patients.

Contralateral recurrence and prognostic factors in familial non-BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer

BACKGROUND

A higher incidence of contralateral breast cancer and ipsilateral recurrence has been reported in familial breast cancer than in sporadic cancer. This study investigated the influence of contralateral cancer and tumour stage on survival in patients with familial non-BRCA1/BRCA2-associated breast cancer.

METHODS

The incidences of contralateral breast cancer, ipsilateral recurrence, distant disease-free and overall survival were assessed in 327 patients from families with three or more breast and/or ovarian cancers, but no BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation (familial non-BRCA1/2), and in 327 control subjects with sporadic breast cancer, matched for year and age at detection.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 7.3 years for patients with familial-non-BRCA1/2 cancers and 6.5 years for patients with sporadic breast cancer. Tumours were stage T1 or lower in 62.1 per cent of familial non-BRCA1/2 cancers versus 49.9 per cent in sporadic breast cancers (P = 0.003), and node negative in 55.8 versus 52.1 per cent, respectively (P = 0.477). After 10 years the incidence of metachronous contralateral breast cancer was 6.4 per cent for familial non-BRCA1/2 tumours versus 5.4 per cent for sporadic cancers. The rate of ipsilateral recurrence was not significantly increased (17.0 versus 14.2 per cent, respectively, at 10 years; P = 0.132). Tumour size (hazard ratio (HR) 1.02 per mm increase, P = 0.016) and node status (HR 2.6 for three or more involved nodes versus node negative, P = 0.017) were independent predictors of overall survival in the familial non-BRCA1/2 group, and in the whole group, whereas contralateral breast cancer (HR 0.7, P = 0.503) and risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy (HR 0.4, P = 0.163) were not.

CONCLUSION

Stage at detection was a key determinant of prognosis in familial non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer, whereas contralateral cancer was not. Risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy did not significantly improve survival, but early detection can. Decisions on breast-conserving treatment can be made on the same grounds in patients with familial and sporadic breast cancer.