Infertility, treatment of infertility, and the risk of breast cancer among women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: a case-control study

Outcomes and the effect of PGT-M in women with hormone-related hereditary tumor syndrome

Purpose

To review the outcome of PGT-M in hormone-related hereditary tumor syndrome and evaluate the effect of ovarian induction on tumor growth in those patients.

Methods

Medical records of PGT-M were retrospectively analyzed in patients with hormone-related heritage tumors in our reproductive center. A total of eleven women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) (including BRCA1/2 mutation carriers), and Lynch syndrome (including MMR gene mutation carriers) were included. Thirteen IVF/PGT-M cycles were performed. Eleven for PGT-M and two for fertility preservation. The ovulation protocol, numbers of oocytes retrieved and two pronuclei (2PN) zygotes, PGT-M results, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Tumor progression was also estimated by comparing transvaginal ultrasound (TVS), MR, CT, or colonoscopy according to the follow-up requirements of different tumors.

Results

Eleven IVF/PGT-M cycles were performed with an antagonist protocol; Two cycles were performed with a mild stimulation protocol. The total dose of gonadotropin (Gn) was 1827 IU per patient (range from 1200 to 2625 IU). The median number of oocytes retrieved was 13 (range from 4 to 30), and the median number of 2PN zygotes was 8 (range from 2 to 16). A total of 32 embryos underwent PGT-M, and 9 (28.1%) embryos were suitable for transfer. Six transfer cycles were performed, and 5 cycles got clinical pregnancy (83%) with five newborns (83%). The follow-up examinations conducted 10-18 months after PGT-M/delivery revealed no new lesions or tumor progression.

Conclusion

PGT-M results can provide important information for improving the consultation of hormone-related heritage tumor patients regarding their fertility preservation and reproductive options. Ovarian induction for women with hormone-related hereditary tumor syndrome is not associated with tumor progression.

Fertility drugs and cancer: a guideline

Methodological limitations in studying the association between the use of fertility drugs and cancer include the inherent increased risk of cancer in women who never conceive, the increased risk of cancer because of factors (endometriosis and unopposed estrogen) associated with infertility, the low incidence of most of these cancers, and that the diagnosis of cancer is typically several years after fertility drug use. On the basis of available data, there does not appear to be an association between fertility drugs and breast, colon, or cervical cancer. There is no conclusive evidence that fertility drugs increase the risk of uterine cancer, although women with infertility are at higher risk of uterine cancer. There are insufficient data to comment on the risk of melanoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma associated with fertility drug use. Women should be informed that there may be an increased risk of invasive and borderline ovarian cancers and thyroid cancer associated with fertility treatment. It is difficult to determine whether this risk is related to underlying endometriosis, female infertility, or nulliparity.

Is controlled ovarian stimulation safe in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

INTRODUCTION

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation is the method of choice for fertility preservation (FP) in young patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (eBC). Nevertheless, some challenges still question its role, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting, where concerns arise about potential delay in the onset of anticancer treatment, and in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) disease, as cancer cells may proliferate under the estrogenic peak associated with stimulation. Therefore, this review aims to examine the available evidence on the safety of COS in eBC patients eligible for neoadjuvant treatment (NAT), particularly in HR+ disease.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies evaluating the feasibility and safety of COS in eBC and including patients referred to NAT and/or with HR+ disease. Time to NAT and survival outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the three matched cohort studies assessing the impact of COS on time to start NAT, only one reported a significant small delay in the cohort undergoing COS compared with the control group, whereas the other studies found no difference. Regarding survival outcomes, overall, no increased risk of recurrence or death was found, either in patients undergoing COS in the neoadjuvant setting regardless of HR expression or in HR+ disease regardless of the timing of COS relative to surgery. However, there are no data on the safety of COS in the specific combined scenario of HR+ disease undergoing NAT.

CONCLUSION

Neither the indication to NAT nor the HR positivity constitutes per se an a priori contraindication to COS. Shared decision making between clinicians and patients is essential to carefully weigh the risks and benefits in each individual case. Prospective studies designed to specifically investigate this issue are warranted.

Preimplantation genetic testing for embryos predisposed to hereditary cancer: Possibilities and challenges

Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), which was developed as an alternative to prenatal genetic testing, allows couples to avoid pregnancies with abnormal chromosomes and the subsequent termination of the affected fetus. Originally used for early onset monogenic conditions, PGT is now used to prevent various types of inherited cancer conditions based on the development of PGT technology, assisted reproductive techniques (ARTs), and in vitro fertilization (IVF). This review provides insights into the potential benefits and challenges associated with the application of PGT for hereditary cancer and provides an overview of the existing literature on this test, with a particular focus on the current challenges related to laws, ethics, counseling, and technology. Additionally, this review predicts the future potential applications of this method. Although PGT may be utilized to predict and prevent hereditary cancer, each case should be comprehensively evaluated. The motives of couples must be assessed to prevent the misuse of this technique for eugenic purposes, and non-pathogenic phenotypes must be carefully evaluated. Pathological cases that require this technology should also be carefully considered based on legal and ethical reasoning. PGT may be the preferred treatment for hereditary cancer cases; however, such cases require careful case-by-case evaluations. Therefore, this study concludes that multidisciplinary counseling and support for patients and their families are essential to ensure that PGT is a viable option that meets all legal and ethical concerns.

Investigating the relationship between breast and gynecological cancers and infertility and its treatments: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

Due to the high prevalence of breast and gynecological cancers among women, it is crucial to identify the risk factors of these cancers. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the relationship between breast and gynecological cancers and infertility and its treatments in women suffering from these cancers.

METHODS

This case-control study was conducted with the participation of 400 people (200 women with breast and gynecological cancers and 200 healthy women without a history of cancer) in hospitals and health centers in Tabriz, Iran, in 2022. Data were collected using a four-part researcher-made questionnaire including sociodemographic characteristics, obstetric characteristics, information related to cancer, and information related to infertility and its treatments.

RESULT

s Based on the multivariable logistic regression model and by controlling sociodemographic and obstetric characteristics as possible confounding variables, women with cancer had an infertility history almost four times more than women who did not have a history of cancer (OR = 3.56; 95% CI: 1.36-9.33; P = 0.010). Women with breast cancer had an infertility history five times more than women without a history of breast cancer (OR = 5.11; 95% CI: 1.68-15.50; P = 0.004). The infertility history of women with gynecological cancer was more than three times that of the control group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (OR = 3.36; 95% CI: 0.99-11.47; P = 0.053).

CONCLUSION

Infertility and its treatments may be involved in increasing the risk of breast and gynecological cancers.

Fertility Treatments and Breast Cancer: A Significant Risk for Our Patients?

Fertility medications have been postulated to increase the risk of breast cancer because of the transient but substantial elevation in hormones occurring with their use. Multiple studies exploring the relationship between fertility medications and risk of breast cancer are limited by the wide variety of fertility treatment regimens and confounded by infertility as an independent risk factor for breast cancer. The Practice Committee Guidelines of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine acknowledge that although this relationship is complex, no additional risk of breast cancer has been consistently linked to infertility medications. This article reviews the major studies both supporting and refuting this statement and makes recommendations regarding risk counseling and breast cancer screening in patients with a history of fertility treatments and infertility.

Should Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) Systematically Be Proposed to BRCA Pathogenic Variant Carriers?

Over the past years, BRCA genes pathogenic variants have been associated to reproductive issues. Indeed, evidence indicate that BRCA-mutated patients are not only at higher risk of developing malignancies, but may also present a reduction of the follicular stockpile. Given these characteristics, BRCA patients may be candidates to fertility preservation (FP) techniques or preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) to avoid the transmission of this inherited situation. Since the success rates of both procedures are highly related to the number of oocytes that could be recovered after ovarian stimulation, predicted by ovarian reserve tests, they are ideally performed before the diagnosis of cancer and its treatment. Despite the specific reproductive challenges related to BRCA status, no international guidelines for the application of PGT and FP in this subgroup of patients is currently available. The present article aims to review the available data regarding BRCA carriers' ovarian reserve and PGT success rates in oncologic and non-oncologic contexts, to determine the actual indication of PGT and further to improve patients' care pathway.

Controversies and Open Questions in Management of Cancer-Free Carriers of Germline Pathogenic Variants in BRCA1/BRCA2

Females harboring germline BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCA) P/LPV are offered a tight surveillance scheme from the age of 25−30 years, aimed at early detection of specific cancer types, in addition to risk-reducing strategies. Multiple national and international surveillance guidelines have been published and updated over the last two decades from geographically diverse countries. We searched for guidelines published between 1 January 2015 and 1 May 2022. Differences between guidelines on issues such as primary prevention, mammography screening in young (<30 years) carriers, MRI screening in carriers above age 65 years, breast imaging (if any) after risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, during pregnancy, and breastfeeding, and hormone-replacement therapy, are just a few notable examples. Beyond formal guidelines, BRCA carriers’ concerns also focus on the timing of risk-reducing surgeries, fertility preservation, management of menopausal symptoms in cancer survivors, and pancreatic cancer surveillance, issues that, for some, there are no data to support evidence-based recommendations. This review discusses these unsettled issues, emphasizing the importance of future studies to enable global guideline harmonization for optimal surveillance strategies. Moreover, it raises the unmet need for personalized risk stratification and surveillance in BRCA P/LPV carriers.

Carcinogenic Potential Of Ovulation Stimulation In BRCA1/2 Gene Mutation Carriers In Assisted Reproductive Technology Programs

Mutations of the BRCA1/2 genes constitute a fundamental and independent risk factor in the genesis of both breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The specifics of the infertility treatment effect on the risk of developing cancer in carriers of mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes remain unclear and require a comprehensive investigation. In this review, we analyzed published sources on the possible relationship between the infertility treatment and the risk of ovarian and breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

The significance of exogenous hormone manipulation as part of fertility treatment and its relationship to the development of breast cancer remains uncertain. Several historical reviews have been performed with conflicting results. This study is an updated meta-analysis to determine whether there is a causal relationship between different fertility treatments and breast cancer.

Methods

The study report is based on the guidelines of PRISMA and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. Studies published within the last 20 years were included to reflect up to date in vitro fertilization (IVF) practice. This study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO on 07/04/2021, registration identification CRD42021247706. The primary outcome of the study was to determine whether there is an increased incidence of breast cancer in women treated with hormonal fertility treatment. The secondary outcomes were to determine whether fertility treatments were individually associated with excess breast-cancer risk.

Results

Overall, 25 studies, including 617 479 participants, were eligible for inclusion. There was no significant breast-cancer risk association with fertility treatment (compared with general and subfertility reference groups). Summary odds ratio of all included studies was 0.97 (95 per cent c.i. 0.90 to 1.04). Women who received six or more IVF cycles did not have an increased risk of breast cancer. Similarly, there was no excess breast-cancer risk associated with clomiphene, human chorionic gonadotropin, gonadotropin analogues and progesterone when examined individually. Comparably, there was no significant association between fertility treatment and excess breast-cancer risk in patients with more than 10 years’ follow-up. Summary odds ratio was 0.97 (95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 1.12).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis did not find a significant association between fertility treatments and excess breast-cancer risk. Women considering IVF should be informed that it does not appear to increase breast-cancer risk.

Association between fertility treatments and breast cancer risk in women with a family history or BRCA mutations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Women with hereditary breast cancer factors are more likely to be infertile and tend to receive fertility treatments. The safety of fertility treatments that contain hormone-related medications for ovarian stimulation has gained wide attention; however, evidence of the safety of fertility treatments is limited. This study aims to assess the association between fertility treatments and the incidence rate of breast cancer in women with a family history of breast cancer or BRCA mutations. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Studies concerning the effect of fertility treatments on breast cancer risk in genetically susceptible women were included. The fixed and random effects models were used to estimate the summary effects. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions instrument was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. A total of 5,282 studies were screened. Five cohort studies and three case-control studies were included. Breast cancer risk was not significantly increased by fertility treatments in general genetically susceptible women [pooled odds ratio (OR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.45], women with a family history of breast cancer (pooled OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.97-1.89), or women with BRCA mutations (pooled OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.74-1.4). In subgroup analyses, there was no significant increase in breast cancer risk whether in BRCA1 mutation carriers (pooled OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.81-1.72), BRCA2 mutation carriers (pooled OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.09-3.34), or in the women treated with in vitro fertilization (pooled OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.51-1.1), clomiphene citrate (pooled OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78-1.45) or gonadotropins (pooled OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.8-2.18). This is the first meta-analysis concerning the impact of fertility treatments on breast cancer risk in genetically susceptible women. Despite the finding that fertility treatment did not significantly increase breast cancer risk in genetically susceptible women, large prospective cohorts with more detailed information are required. Further investigations are needed to explore subtypes of breast cancer, genetic background of hormone-related breast cancer, and the association between BRCA mutations and the incidence of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO(CRD42021281336).

Risk of breast cancer in women treated with ovarian stimulation drugs for infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evidence addressing the association between the use of ovarian stimulation drugs and the risk of breast cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Women without any previous history of breast cancer undergoing ovarian stimulation.

INTERVENTION(S)

Electronic databases were searched from 1990 until January 2020. All cohort studies reporting new incidences of breast cancer in infertile women using ovarian stimulating drugs were included. Treated (exposed) infertile women were compared with the unexposed general population with unexposed infertile women as controls.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

New diagnosis of breast cancer within an infertile and general population after exposure to ovarian stimulation drugs.

RESULT(S)

Overall, the quality of evidence was very low because of the serious risk of bias and indirectness (nonrandomized studies). There was no significant increase in the risk of breast cancer among women treated with any ovarian stimulation drug for infertility compared with that in unexposed controls from the general population and the infertile population (pooled odds ratio 1.03, 95% Confidence interval 0.86 to 1.23, 20 studies, I² = 88.41%, very low quality of evidence). Furthermore, no significant increase in the risk of breast cancer was found with the use of clomiphene citrate or gonadotropins, alone or in combination.

CONCLUSION(S)

The current study found that the use of clomiphene citrate and gonadotropins in infertile women was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

Reproductive Pattern of Parous Women and the Risk of Cancer in Later Life

We assessed the risk of any and site-specific cancers in a case-control study of parous women living in northeast Scotland in relation to: total number of pregnancies, cumulative time pregnant, age at first delivery and interpregnancy interval. We analysed 6430 women with cancer and 6430 age-matched controls. After adjustment for confounders, women with increasing number of pregnancies had similar odds of cancer diagnosis as women with only one pregnancy. The adjusted odds of cancer diagnosis were no higher in women with cumulative pregnancy time 50-150 weeks compared to those pregnant ≤ 50 weeks. Compared with women who had their first delivery at or before 20 years of age, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) among those aged 21-25 years was 0.81, 95% CI 0.74, 0.88; 26-30 years AOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69, 0.86; >30 years AOR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55, 0.73. After adjustment, the odds of having any cancer were higher in women who had an inter-pregnancy interval >3 years compared to those with no subsequent pregnancy (AOR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05, 1.30). Older age at first pregnancy was associated with increased risk of breast and gastrointestinal cancer, and reduced risk of invasive cervical, carcinoma in situ of the cervix and respiratory cancer.

Anti-müllerian hormone levels and antral follicle count in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline pathogenic variant: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Some studies suggested a decreased ovarian reserve among BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers, with conflicting results.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective single-center observational study of ovarian reserve and spontaneous fertility comparing BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers to controls (women who attended consultations to discuss fertility preservation before gonadotoxic treatment). Measures of associations between plasma AMH concentration, AFC and BRCA1/2 status were modelled by nonlinear generalized additive regression models and logistic regressions adjusted for age at plasma storage, oral contraceptive use, body mass index, cigarette smoking, and the AMH assay technique.

Results

The whole population comprised 119 BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers and 92 controls. A total of 110 women (42 carriers, among whom 30 were cancer-free, and 68 controls) underwent an ovarian reserve evaluation. Spontaneous fertility analysis included all women who previously attempted to become pregnant (134 women).

We observed a tendency towards a premature decrease in ovarian reserve in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers, but no difference in mean AMH or AFC levels was found between BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers and controls. An analysis of the extreme levels of AMH (≤5 pmol/l) and AFC (≤7 follicles) by logistic regression suggested a higher risk of low ovarian reserve among BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 3.57, 95% CI = 1.00–12.8, p = 0.05; and adjusted OR = 4.99, 95% CI = 1.10–22.62, p = 0.04, respectively).

Discussion

Attention should be paid to BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers’ ovarian reserve, considering this potential risk of premature alteration.

•

A tendency towards a premature decrease in the ovarian reserve in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers was found.

•

BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers presented a higher risk of a low ovarian reserve.

•

Information and education regarding reproduction is mandatory among BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers.

Management of patients with BRCA mutation from the point of view of a breast surgeon

Germ-line mutation in BRCA (BReast CAncer gene) 1 or BRCA2 are found in 3–4% of all women with breast cancer. These patients have a significant increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. They are often younger when diagnosed with the mutation, and the possible breast cancer they get is often aggressive with inferior outcome. There are risk reducing strategies, and the most powerful strategy is risk reducing surgery, both risk reducing bilateral mastectomy (RRM) and risk reducing bilateral salpino-oophorectomy (PBSO). This review is meant to address breast surgery in patients with germline BRCA mutation. The guidelines and techniques applied is under continuous change and it is important for the clinicians to be well informed to provide the patient with the information needed for them to make an informed decision on what risk strategy to choose.

•

Patients with germ-line mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 have a significant increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

•

There are different risk reducing strategies and the most powerful strategy is risk-reducing surgery, both risk reducing bilateral mastectomy and risk reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.

•

Guidelines and techniques for the risk reducing surgery of the breast are under continuous change and improvement.

•

Breast conserving therapy is not associated with worse survival and is a good option for a BRCA mutation carrier diagnosed with breast cancer. Risk-reducing mastectomy can be performed in a later setting.

•

The management of BRCA mutation carriers, both affected and unaffected, should be performed in a multidisciplinary team. Physicians need to be systematically educated and updated on the most recent literature.

Fertility treatments and breast cancer risk in Jewish Israeli BRCA mutation carriers

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether fertility treatments impact the risk of breast cancer in Jewish Israeli BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SETTING

University-affiliated tertiary medical center.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,824 Jewish Israeli BRCA1/2 mutation carriers from a single center were stratified into 1,492 (81.8%) carriers who were not treated for infertility and 332 (18.2%) carriers who underwent fertility treatment with clomiphene citrate (n = 134), gonadotropin (n = 119), in vitro fertilization (n = 183), or a combination of treatments (n = 89).

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association of breast cancer with fertility treatment and other hormonal and reproductive variables.

RESULT(S)

Breast cancer was diagnosed in 687 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Multivariate analysis, either of the whole group or stratified by each gene, showed no association between fertility treatment and breast cancer risk, regardless of the type of treatment (clomiphene citrate: HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.19; gonadotropin: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28-1.01; in vitro fertilization: HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39-1.08; and combined treatments: HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.49-3.06). An increased breast cancer risk was associated with paternal origin of the mutation (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.17-1.75) and use of oral contraceptives for >5 years (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.27-2.06) in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Ovarian cancer risk was decreased with the use of any oral contraceptive (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.46-0.82).

CONCLUSION(S)

Fertility treatment for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is not associated with a discernible increase in breast cancer risk.

Fertility in BRCA mutation carriers: counseling BRCA-mutated patients on reproductive issues

Objectives Genetic testing rates for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have steadily increased during the past decades resulting in a growing population of young and healthy mutation carriers. Available data on fertility issues in BRCA mutation carriers is rising but the results remain to some extent still conflicting. We have performed a systematic literature review in order to get an overview concerning the current evidence on fertility issues in BRCA mutation carriers. Data were analyzed critically with the aim to deliver physicians a solid basis for (onco) fertility counseling in women with BRCA mutations. Content We present the latest data on cancer risks in women with HBOC and analyze the influence of cancer treatment and preventive surgery on the reproductive potential. Epidemiological studies on fertility issues in BRCA mutation carriers showed heterogeneous results. However, several authors showed a decreased ovarian reserve with lower Anti-Müllerien hormone (AMH) levels and poorer response to ovarian stimulation in BRCA positive women. The diagnosis of BRCA mutations influences reproductive decision-making. Additionally, the shortened reproductive window and the need to complete family planning early has a significant psychological impact. Summary and Outlook This article highlights the importance of fertility counseling in BRCA mutation carriers. Individual fertility counseling is mandatory. Fertility preservation strategies should be discussed.

Use of fertility treatments in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and risk for ovarian and breast cancer: a systematic review

Purpose

Mutations in the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 represent a significant risk factor for ovarian and breast cancer. With increasing number and success rates, fertility protection and treatment are gaining importance also for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. However, the effect on primary cancer risk and risk for recurrence remains unclear. This review analyses the published data on fertility treatment and risk of ovarian and breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Methods

In this review, we included all relevant articles published in English from 1995 to 2018. Literature was identified through a search on PubMed and Cochrane Library.

Results

We identified one retrospective cohort and one case–control study regarding the association of fertility treatments and ovarian cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers. The studies show no increase in ovarian cancer risk. Furthermore, one case–control study on the association between fertility treatment and breast cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers and one prospective cohort study on the long-term safety of medication used for fertility preservation in women with a history of breast cancer were identified. One of the studies shows a possible adverse effect for gonadotropin-containing medication.

Conclusion

Possible increases in cancer risk associated with fertility treatments in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers cannot be excluded at this time. Based on the existing studies, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers should not be generally excluded from fertility treatments. However, they have to be informed about limited data and possible increases in cancer risk.

Fertility preservation in BRCA mutation carriers-efficacy and safety issues: a review

BRCA mutation carriers face various situations that influence their fertility potential. There is still a lack of guideline or expert consensus on Fertility Preservation (FP) in BRCA mutation carriers and the necessity and safety of FP in BRCA mutation carriers is still in dispute. This review aims to focus on the population of BRCA mutation carriers by analyzing the existing FP strategies, comprehensively comparing the pros and cons of each strategy and its applicability.FP is a suggestion for BRCA mutation carriers with birth planning. Different FP strategies have different characteristics. Considering the particularity of BRCA mutation carriers, multiple factors need to be carefully considered. This review focuses on the applicability of each FP method for carriers under various circumstances. Available FP strategies including oocyte cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and egg/embryo donation are analyzed by comparing existing methods comprehensively. In the attempt to provide an up-to-date decision-making guidance. Conditions taking into consideration were the carrier's age, the risk of breast and ovarian metastasis, plans for oncotherapy, FP outcome, time available for FP intervention and accessibility.Overall, FP is necessary and safe for BRCA mutation carriers. Among all available FP methods, oocyte cryopreservation is the most reliable procedure; ovarian tissue cryopreservation is the only way for preserving both fertility and endocrine function, recommended for pre-pubertal carriers and when time is limited for oocyte stimulation. A clear framework provides frontline clinical practitioners a new thought and eventually benefit thousands of BRCA mutation carriers.

A Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Risk after 20 Years of Follow-Up of Women Treated with Fertility Drugs

BACKGROUND

Using a nationwide cohort of Danish women, we investigated the association between use of fertility drugs and risk of breast cancer.

METHODS

The study cohort included women ages 20 to 44 years and living in Denmark between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2011. Information on fertility status, use of fertility drugs, breast cancer, covariates, and vital status was obtained from the Danish Infertility Cohort and various Danish national registers. Cox proportional hazard regression models were applied to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 1,330,852 women included, 96,782 (7.3%) were infertile, and 20,567 (1.5%) were diagnosed with breast cancer during a median follow-up of 20.9 years. Compared with fertile women, infertile women who had used any fertility drugs did not have an increased hazard for breast cancer overall (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95-1.10), or for any of the histologic types (ductal, lobular, or mucinous) of breast cancer. Furthermore, no associations were observed between use of specific types of fertility drugs and breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

No convincing associations between use of fertility drugs and breast cancer were observed after two decades of follow-up.

IMPACT

Our results do not support a marked association between fertility drugs and breast cancer and are therefore reassuring for infertile women treated with fertility drugs.

Fertility preservation in women harboring deleterious BRCA mutations: ready for prime time?

Fertility issues have become critical in the management and counseling of BRCA mutation carriers. In this setting four points deserve consideration. (1) Women in general lose their ability to conceive at a mean age of 41 years, thus the suggested policy of prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at age 40 for BRCA mutation carriers does not affect the chances of natural pregnancy. Conversely, if the procedure is chosen at 35 years old, oocyte cryopreservation prior to surgery should be considered. (2) Some evidence suggests that ovarian reserve may actually be partly reduced in BRCA mutations carriers and that the mutation may affect ovarian responsiveness to stimulation. However, these findings are still controversial. (3) Breast cancer is not rare before the age of 40 and fertility preservation after diagnosis can be requested in a significant proportion of BRCA mutation carriers. Thus, a policy of oocyte cryopreservation in young healthy carriers deserves consideration. The procedure could be considered at a young age and in an elective setting, when ovarian stimulation may yield more oocytes of better quality. (4) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) could be considered in BRCA mutations carriers, particularly when good quality oocytes have been stored at a young age. Based on the current knowledge, a univocal approach cannot be recommended; in depth patient counseling is warranted.

Do the Fertility Drugs Increase the Risk of Cancer? A Review Study

Aim: All over the world, many couples cannot conceive a child and have problems with pregnancy. Ovulation-inducing drugs are among the most important drugs used for the treatment of infertility. In recent years, there have been many debates about the relationship between fertility medication and cancer. Due to the lack of comprehensive study of this matter, and as understanding the relationship between the use of fertility drugs and cancer is of importance, the present study was conducted to investigate the relationship between infertility drugs and cancer in women. Materials and Methods: To determine the relationship between infertility treatment and cancer, a comprehensive search was carried out in databases such as; Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus using keywords words; "infertility," "ovulation induction," "cancer," "infertility treatment," "ART," "tumor," "controlled ovarian stimulation," "fertility agents," and "neoplasms." Full-text, English language, and original articles were included in this study. Results: In total, 81 articles were entered into the study. The relationship between fertility medications and breast, ovary, endometrial, uterus, colon, thyroid, skin, cervical, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma cancers were studied. Although the relationship between fertility medications and cancer is theoretically justifiable, most studies have shown that risk of cancer will not increase after fertility treatment. Conclusion: The results of this study did not show that fertility medications increase the risk of cancer among users. In summary, the relationship between infertility treatment and cancer incidence remains an open question.

BRCA mutations and reproduction

Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have long been recognized as independent risk factors, mostly for breast and ovarian cancer. Numerous studies have evaluated the molecular processes involving these genes, the pathophysiology of BRCAness, follow up options and modes of prophylaxis. The fertility of BRCA carriers, however, has not been widely investigated. The aim of the present work is to review the literature pertaining to this issue.

Ovarian stimulation for IVF and risk of primary breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND

The effect of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is rarely examined. As carriers may increasingly undergo IVF as part of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), we examined the impact of ovarian stimulation for IVF on breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 1550 BRCA1 and 964 BRCA2 mutation carriers, derived from the nationwide HEBON study and the nationwide PGD registry. Questionnaires, clinical records and linkages with the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to collect data on IVF exposure, risk-reducing surgeries and cancer diagnosis, respectively. Time-dependent Cox regression analyses were conducted, stratified for birth cohort and adjusted for subfertility.

RESULTS

Of the 2514 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, 3% (n = 76) were exposed to ovarian stimulation for IVF. In total, 938 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (37.3%) were diagnosed with breast cancer. IVF exposure was not associated with risk of breast cancer (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.46-1.36). Similar results were found for the subgroups of subfertile women (n = 232; HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.39-1.37) and BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.60-2.09). In addition, age at and recency of first IVF treatment were not associated with breast cancer risk.

CONCLUSION

No evidence was found for an association between ovarian stimulation for IVF and breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Breast Cancer and Ovulation Induction Treatments

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to determine whether the use of ovulation induction drugs in treatment of infertility have a significant effect on the risk of breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This case control study (928 cases, 928 controls), was performed in the gynecology and oncology clinics of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences between 2011 and 2013. Data were collected via in-person interviews using a questionnaire, which included demographic and gynecologic information. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistics software version 20 (IBM Corp).

RESULTS

The use of ovulation induction drugs was not significantly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-1.855) among women with infertility (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.8-1.95).

CONCLUSION

We observed no statistically significant relationship between infertility and ovulation induction drugs with the risk of breast cancer, except for significant increases in the risk of breast cancer among patients who had used fertility drugs for >6 months.

State of the evidence 2017: an update on the connection between breast cancer and the environment

BACKGROUND

In this review, we examine the continually expanding and increasingly compelling data linking radiation and various chemicals in our environment to the current high incidence of breast cancer. Singly and in combination, these toxicants may have contributed significantly to the increasing rates of breast cancer observed over the past several decades. Exposures early in development from gestation through adolescence and early adulthood are particularly of concern as they re-shape the program of genetic, epigenetic and physiological processes in the developing mammary system, leading to an increased risk for developing breast cancer. In the 8 years since we last published a comprehensive review of the relevant literature, hundreds of new papers have appeared supporting this link, and in this update, the evidence on this topic is more extensive and of better quality than that previously available.

CONCLUSION

Increasing evidence from epidemiological studies, as well as a better understanding of mechanisms linking toxicants with development of breast cancer, all reinforce the conclusion that exposures to these substances - many of which are found in common, everyday products and byproducts - may lead to increased risk of developing breast cancer. Moving forward, attention to methodological limitations, especially in relevant epidemiological and animal models, will need to be addressed to allow clearer and more direct connections to be evaluated.

[Does fertility treatment increase the risk of breast cancer? Current knowledge and meta-analysis]

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to assess the level of risk of breast cancer for women exposed to ovulation-inducing therapy (OIT).

METHODS

The 25 selected studies were extracted from the PUBMED database from January 2000 until March 2016 with the following key-words: "fertility agents", "infertility treatments", "clomiphene citrate", "buserelin", "ovarian stimulation", "assisted reproductive technology" and "breast cancer". Our meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software, Cochrane Collaboration, 2014. The results were calculated by type of OIT, as well as globally.

RESULTS

The analysis of these published epidemiological studies confirms that exposition to OIT is not a breast cancer risk factor, but the results are contradictory. Two studies have shown a significantly increased risk of breast cancer in a population of infertile women, while two others have found a significant decrease of this risk. The twenty others did not show any impact of IOT over this risk. Our meta-analysis of 20 selected studies has not identified a significant association between exposition to OIT and breast cancer risk (relative risk=0,96; IC 95: (0,81-1,14) for cohort studies and odds ratio=0,94; IC 95% (0,81-1,10) for case-control studies).

CONCLUSION

Exposition to OIT is not an identified risk factor for breast cancer. A message reassuring about a possible risk of OIT-related breast cancer should be given to these women. Exposition to OIT is therefore not an indication of increased breast surveillance.

Fertility drugs and cancer: a guideline

Methodological limitations in studying the association between the use of fertility drugs and cancer include the inherent increased risk of cancer in women who never conceive, the low incidence of most of these cancers, and that the age of diagnosis of cancer typically is many years after fertility drug use. Based on available data, there does not appear to be a meaningful increased risk of invasive ovarian cancer, breast cancer, or endometrial cancer following the use of fertility drugs. Several studies have shown a small increased risk of borderline ovarian tumors; however, there is insufficient consistent evidence that a particular fertility drug increases the risk of borderline ovarian tumors, and any absolute risk is small. Given the available literature, patients should be counseled that infertile women may be at an increased risk of invasive ovarian, endometrial, and breast cancer; however, use of fertility drugs does not appear to increase this risk.

[Fertility preservation in women of the childbearing age: Indications and strategies]

Advances on cryopreservation techniques now allow considering oocyte, embryo or ovarian tissue freezing for female fertility preservation. Originally developed for patients suffering from cancer, fertility preservation has rapidly invaded others medical fields, and represents now the standard of care for all young patient diagnosed with a disease that could impair fertility or having to receive possibly gonadotoxic treatment. As a result, autoimmune diseases, some genetic pathologies or iterative pelvic surgeries, at risk of premature ovarian failure, have become common indications of fertility preservation. In addition, the social egg freezing aiming at preventing the age-related fertility decline is still debated in France, although authorized in numerous countries. This review will discuss the different strategies of fertility preservation in young girls and women of reproductive age, regarding different medical or non-medical indications.

[Infertility and breast cancer: Is there a link? Updated review of the literature and meta-analysis]

The objective of this review was to assess the level of risk of breast cancer of patients consulting for infertility.

METHODS

Studies of cohorts and case-control were extracted from the Pubmed database from January 2000 until May 2015 through the following keywords: "infertility"; "endometriosis"; "polycystic ovary syndrome"; "breast cancer", "cancer risk". Eleven publications were finally selected after exclusion of publications dealing with infertility after breast cancer. Our meta-analysis, involving 10 of these publications, was performed using Review Manager software, Cochrane Collaboration, 2014. The results were calculated by etiology of infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and endometriosis, as well as globally.

RESULTS

The analysis of these published epidemiological studies confirms that infertility is not a breast cancer risk factor, but the results are contradictory. Three studies have shown a significantly increased risk of breast cancer in a population of infertile women, while 7 others have not found this risk. These contradictions are due to the heterogeneity of the studies, the included populations, the follow-up periods and confounding factors. Our meta-analysis of the selected studies has not identified a significant association between infertility and breast cancer risk (1.05; 95% CI [0.96-1.16]). A subgroup analysis on endometriosis and PCOS showed no significant association either, with an OR of 1.02 (95% CI [0.87-1.19]) and 1.19 (95% CI [0.93-1.51]), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Infertility is not an identified risk factor for breast cancer. A message reassuring about a possible risk of infertility-related breast cancer should be given to these patients. Infertility is therefore not an indication of increased breast surveillance.

Treatment of infertility does not increase the risk of ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between use of fertility medication (i.e., selective estrogen receptor [ER] modulator, gonadotropin, or other) or infertility treatment (i.e., IVF or IUI) and the risk of ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

DESIGN

A matched case-control study of 941 pairs of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with and without a diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

SETTING

Genetic clinics.

PATIENT(S)

Detailed information regarding treatment of infertility was collected from a routinely administered questionnaire.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals associated with fertility treatment.

RESULT(S)

There was no significant relationship between the use of any fertility medication or IVF treatment (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval 0.18-2.33) and the subsequent risk of ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSION(S)

Our findings suggest that treatment for infertility does not significantly increase the risk of ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA mutation.

[Should a systematic fertility preservation be proposed to healthy women carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation?]

Should all women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes mutations be considered at risk of prematurely impaired fertility, and thus should a fertility preservation systematically be proposed? Women carrying mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at high risk for breast and tubo-ovarian cancer. The treatment of a breast cancer at a young age, unrare in this population, is associated with a risk of infertility, due to the ovarian toxicity of chemotherapy, to the recommended duration of hormonotherapy when indicated, and to the time advised before starting a pregnancy. Furthermore, some data in the literature suggest a higher risk of premature ovarian failure among women with BRCA1/2 mutation: advance of the age at menopause and poorer response to ovarian stimulation have been observed. Several pathophysiological hypotheses support this finding, as the involvement of the BRCA genes in maintaining telomere length, the DNA repair anomalies promoting oocyte apoptosis, differences in FMR1 genotype. Current fertility preservation techniques have limitations, some of them being specific to BRCA1/2 women: absence of oncological risk due to stimulation in BRCA1/2 women not clearly demonstrated, oocyte vitrification techniques limited rentability, graft of ovarian cortex not suitable in these women at high risk. Thus, data on the increased risk of premature ovarian failure remaining weak, such a systematic proposal seems questionable.

Genetics of the ovarian reserve

Primordial follicles or non-growing follicles (NGFs) are the functional unit of reproduction, each comprising a single germ cell surrounded by supporting somatic cells. NGFs constitute the ovarian reserve (OR), prerequisite for germ cell ovulation and the continuation of the species. The dynamics of the reserve is determined by the number of NGFs formed and their complex subsequent fates. During the reproductive lifespan, the OR progressively diminishes due to follicle atresia as well as recruitment, maturation, and ovulation. The depletion of the OR is the major determining driver of menopause, which ensues when the number of primordial follicles falls below a threshold of ∼1,000. Therefore, genes and processes involved in follicle dynamics are particularly important to understand the process of menopause, both in the typical reproductive lifespan and in conditions like primary ovarian insufficiency, defined as menopause before age 40. Genes and their variants that affect the timing of menopause thereby provide candidates for diagnosis of and intervention in problems of reproductive lifespan. We review the current knowledge of processes and genes involved in the development of the OR and in the dynamics of ovarian follicles.

Fertility treatments and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk in Jewish Israeli BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether BRCA mutation carriers who undergo fertility treatments are at increased risk of developing invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (IEOC).

DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary university-affiliated medical center and the National Cancer Registry.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,073 Jewish Israeli BRCA mutation carriers diagnosed in a single institution between 1995 and 2013, including 164 carriers (15.2%) who had fertility treatments that included clomiphene citrate (n = 82), gonadotropin (n = 69), in vitro fertilization (IVF) (n = 66), or a combination (n = 50), and 909 carriers not treated for infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for IEOC association with fertility treatments and other hormone and reproductive variables.

RESULT(S)

In 175 (16.3%) mutation carriers, IEOC was diagnosed; 139 women carried BRCA1, 33 carried BRCA2, and 3 had unknown mutations. Fertility treatments were not associated with IEOC risk (age-adjusted OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.38-1.05) regardless of treatment type (with clomiphene citrate, OR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.46-1.63; with gonadotropin, OR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.26-1.31; with IVF, OR 1.08, 95% CI, 0.57-2.06). Multivariate analysis indicated an increased risk of IEOC with hormone-replacement therapy (OR 2.22; 95% CI, 1.33-3.69) and a reduced risk with oral contraceptives (OR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.28) in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Parity was a risk factor for IEOC by univariate but not multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION(S)

According to our results, treatments for infertile BRCA mutation carriers should not be contraindicated or viewed as risk modifiers for IEOC. Parity as a risk factor in BRCA mutation carriers warrants further investigation.

Fertility preservation and breast cancer: a review

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women, and its incidence increases with age, with the majority of patients diagnosed after menopause. However, in 15–25% of cases, patients are premenopausal at the time of diagnosis, and about 7% of them are below the age of 40. Therefore, a considerable amount of young women are diagnosed with breast cancer during their reproductive life. Within this group, most cancer cases require cytotoxic chemotherapy and/or hormone therapy, which are responsible for a decrease in the patients’ reproductive function, along with their age. The efficacy of such treatments, among other factors, has led to a high five-year-survival rate, which results in an increasing number of young women who survive breast cancer before having fulfilled their reproductive wishes, especially considering the current trend to delay pregnancy until the late 30s or early 40s in developed countries. The combination of these factors justifies the importance of fertility preservation and reproductive counselling at the time of breast cancer diagnosis in young women.

A wide range of fertility preservation techniques has been developed, such as ovarian suppression, oocyte and embryo cryopreservation, immature oocyte retrieval and in vitro maturation, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation.

Early counselling and referral of these patients to fertility specialists are fundamental factors in order to maximise their chances of pregnancy. This review aims to update the knowledge about the influence of breast cancer in fertility, the influence of pregnancy and fertility preservation techniques in breast cancer patients and assessment of ovarian reserve for a better treatment choice. A special section dedicated to BRCA-mutation carriers has been included because of their specific features.

A comprehensive literature search has been conducted, including publications from the last five years.

Clinical use of fertility agents and risk of breast cancer: a recent update for an old problem

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Female infertility is today a very common, expanding problem and therefore restoring fertility strategies are increasing in the last few years. An association between ovarian stimulation and breast cancer risk has been hypothesized, but the question has not yet been clarified.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 2 years, many important studies have been published on this topic. A lot of new combinations of drugs are in experimentation and other recent drugs are already in current use, such as aromatase inhibitors. Furthermore, the data from older studies were investigated by two recent meta-analyses.

SUMMARY

Infertility affects many couples in western countries and the use of fertility stimulation techniques is widespread in the last few years, determining personal anxiety, social costs, and organizing difficulties. It is well known that one of the most important causative agents for the development of breast cancer is the proliferative activity of endogenous and exogenous female hormones. Therefore, it seems appropriate to investigate the risk of breast cancer derived from the use of hormonal therapies in infertile women. The final clarification of this question is very important so that all women can realize their dream of having children, with the certainty of not being exposed to an increased risk of breast cancer.

BRCA mutation carriers do not have compromised ovarian reserve

Controversy exists about the impact of BRCA1/2 mutations on female fertility. Previous studies are small or based on indirect parameters (eg, self-reported infertility), which depend on additional factors unrelated to true fertility potential. Most of the previous studies did not use strict fertility markers.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the relation between carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and fertility using the level of anti-müllerian hormone (AMH), which has been previously shown to be an accurate marker of ovarian reserve and fertility potential.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-one healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, aged 26 to 40 years, attending a multidisciplinary breast and ovarian cancer surveillance clinic, were tested for AMH levels using a 2-site ELISA. Levels were compared with those of our general population and with well-established normograms of the general population.

RESULTS

The mean age of carriers was 33.2 years (26-39 years; SD, 3.99 years). The mean parity of carriers was 1.97 (0-7; SD, 1.49). All women carried at least 1 Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation. The AMH levels for most carriers were in the reference range, 2.71 ± 0.59 ng/mL (approximately 50th percentile of normograms). These levels were similar to those in the control group, in which the AMH levels were 2.02 ± 0.12 ng/mL (P = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The AMH levels of healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are similar to those of noncarrier women matched for age; therefore, their ovarian reserve is comparable. This is the only study, to the best of our knowledge, that directly examines ovarian reserve in a relatively large group of carriers with an accurate marker. The results of this study may possibly give reassurance to female carriers concerning fertility potential.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis using combined strategies on a breast cancer patient with a novel genomic deletion in BRCA2

PURPOSE

To perform Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) on a paternal Brca2 unknown mutation carrier with early-onset breast cancer, whose paternal grandmother and mother had breast cancer at 60s.

METHOD

Elucidating the linkage via single sperm haplotyping on patient's carrier brother, and identifying the genomic deletion via BLAST followed by PCR screening. PGD was subsequently conducted.

RESULT

The mutant allele was found by using 4 microsatellite and 2 intragenic SNP markers. Recombination was detected in 8% of sperms. BLAST was utilized to locate putative hairpin structure(s), followed by PCR screening with seven sets of primers. A novel 2,596 bp deletion containing exon 15 ~ 16 was identified. Due to the severity of phenotype and the integrity of exon 11 encoding RAD51 binding domain, and the fact that the patient's mother also had breast cancer at her 60s, we speculate a possible coexistence of maternal breast cancer risk allele(s). Embryo biopsy was performed on day 3. Unaffected morula and blastocyst were replaced on day 5, resulting in a singleton livebirth. A breast lump appeared in the patient after delivery without the presence of malignant cells.

CONCLUSION

Concerning the assisted reproductive option for breast cancer patients, the possibility of coexistence of multiple familial risk alleles and the significance of each mutation to the phenotype should be evaluated. To eliminate misdiagnosis resulting from recombination and/or allelic drop-out, both direct mutation detection and linkage analysis approaches may be necessary. BLAST is a very useful and cost-effective tool for identifying large genomic deletion.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis using combined strategies on a breast cancer patient with a novel genomic deletion in BRCA2

PURPOSE

To perform Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) on a paternal Brca2 unknown mutation carrier with early-onset breast cancer, whose paternal grandmother and mother had breast cancer at 60s.

METHOD

Elucidating the linkage via single sperm haplotyping on patient's carrier brother, and identifying the genomic deletion via BLAST followed by PCR screening. PGD was subsequently conducted.

RESULT

The mutant allele was found by using 4 microsatellite and 2 intragenic SNP markers. Recombination was detected in 8% of sperms. BLAST was utilized to locate putative hairpin structure(s), followed by PCR screening with seven sets of primers. A novel 2,596 bp deletion containing exon 15 ~ 16 was identified. Due to the severity of phenotype and the integrity of exon 11 encoding RAD51 binding domain, and the fact that the patient's mother also had breast cancer at her 60s, we speculate a possible coexistence of maternal breast cancer risk allele(s). Embryo biopsy was performed on day 3. Unaffected morula and blastocyst were replaced on day 5, resulting in a singleton livebirth. A breast lump appeared in the patient after delivery without the presence of malignant cells.

CONCLUSION

Concerning the assisted reproductive option for breast cancer patients, the possibility of coexistence of multiple familial risk alleles and the significance of each mutation to the phenotype should be evaluated. To eliminate misdiagnosis resulting from recombination and/or allelic drop-out, both direct mutation detection and linkage analysis approaches may be necessary. BLAST is a very useful and cost-effective tool for identifying large genomic deletion.

Clinicopathologic characteristics of breast cancer in BRCA-carriers and non-carriers in women 35 years of age or less

PURPOSE

Breast cancer diagnosed in women 35 years of age or less accounts for <2% of all breast cancer cases. Clinical and pathologic characteristics of early onset breast cancer are not well defined in BRCA mutation carriers and non-carriers.

METHODS

194 women diagnosed with breast cancer at 35 years of age or less who had BRCA1/2 mutation testing were included in the study. Logistic regression models were fit to determine the associations between clinical variables and BRCA status.

RESULTS

Thirty-two (17%) and 12 (6%) patients had BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. BRCA1-carriers had a higher likelihood of a positive family history (FH) of breast and/or ovarian cancer (P = 0.001), or first-degree relatives diagnosed with breast cancer at <50 years old (P = 0.001) compared to non-carriers. BRCA2-carriers were more likely to have a FH of male breast cancer compared to noncarriers (P = 0.02). Among BRCA2-carriers, the age at first full-term pregnancy was younger in ER-negative cases compared with ERpositive cases (19.5 vs. 28.5 years old; P = 0.01). BRCA1-carriers with a later age at menarche were more likely to have a later stage at diagnosis (P = 0.04). Non-carriers with a lower BMI were more likely to have lymph node involvement (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Several associations were identified between reproductive risk factors or BMI and disease characteristics. Further characterization may result in a better understanding of the trends in young onset breast cancer in BRCA-carriers and non-carriers.

Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is substantial variability in cancer risk in women who have inherited a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation. Numerous factors have been hypothesized to modify these risks, but studies are of variable quality, and it remains unclear which of these may be of value in clinical risk assessment.

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published through September 2013. Fixed effects meta-analysis was done using the hazard ratios and/or odds ratios to estimate the pooled effect estimates (ES) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify factors that are associated with cancer risk modification in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

RESULTS

We identified 44 nonoverlapping studies that met predefined quality criteria. Sufficient evidence is available to make clinically relevant inferences about a number of cancer risk modifiers. The only variable examined that produced a probable association was late age at first live birth, a meta-analysis showed a decrease in the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers with women aged 30 years or older vs. women younger than 30 years (ES = 0.65; 95% CI =0.42 to 0.99). The same was shown for women aged 25 to 29 years versus those aged less than 25 years (ES = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.99). Breastfeeding and tubal ligation were associated with reduced ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers; oral contraceptives were associated with reduced risk among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Smoking was associated with increased breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers only.

CONCLUSIONS

Data assessing many potential risk modifiers are inadequate, and many have not been externally validated. Although additional studies are required to confirm some associations, sufficient information is available for some risk factors to be used in risk counseling or lifestyle modification to minimize cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

Breast cancer risk after exposure to fertility drugs

In recent years, there has been an increase in the diagnosis of infertility. In industrialized countries, approximately 15% of couples experience this problem today, with a negative impact on quality of life. For this reason, assisted reproductive technologies and other treatments, finalized to overcome infertility, have become very common in clinical practice. For a long time, different ovulation-inducing drugs have been used for ovarian follicle stimulation, either as independent therapies or treatments used during in vitro fertilization cycles. Despite this long-term use, the medical care for infertility gave rise to a lively debate about the potential risk of developing breast cancer that has never been settled. Many studies have been conducted to address this question; but their results have been, and still are, contradictory. The aim of this review is to determine the potential link between the use of fertility drugs and the risk of developing breast cancer in women treated for infertility.