1
|
Prophylactic Radical Fimbriectomy with Delayed Oophorectomy in Women with a High Risk of Developing an Ovarian Carcinoma: Results of a Prospective National Pilot Study. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15041141. [PMID: 36831483 PMCID: PMC9954021 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15041141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Revised: 02/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is the gold standard for the prophylaxis of ovarian cancer in high-risk women. Due to significant adverse effects, 20-30% of women delay or refuse early oophorectomy. This prospective pilot study (NCT01608074) aimed to assess the efficacy of radical fimbriectomy followed by a delayed oophorectomy in preventing ovarian and pelvic invasive cancer (the primary endpoint) and to evaluate the safety of both procedures. The key eligibility criteria were pre-menopausal women ≥35 years with a high risk of ovarian cancer who refused a risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. All the surgical specimens were subjected to the SEE-FIM protocol. From January 2012 to October 2014, 121 patients underwent RF, with 51 in an ambulatory setting. Occult neoplasia was found in two cases, with one tubal high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Two patients experienced grade 1 intraoperative complications. No early or delayed grade ≥3 post-operative complications occurred. After 7.3 years of median follow-up, no cases of pelvic invasive cancer have been noted. Three of the fifty-two patients developed de novo breast cancer. One BRCA1-mutated woman delivered twins safely. Twenty-five patients underwent menopause, including fifteen who had received chemotherapy for breast cancer, and twenty-three underwent menopause before the delayed oophorectomy, while two did not undergo a delayed oophorectomy at all. Overall, 46 women underwent a delayed oophorectomy. No abnormalities were found in any delayed oophorectomy specimens. Radical fimbriectomy followed by delayed oophorectomy appears to be a safe and well-tolerated risk-reducing approach, which avoids early menopause for patients with a high risk of breast and ovarian cancer.
Collapse
|
2
|
C Pillay O, Manyonda I. The surgical menopause. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2022; 81:111-118. [PMID: 35568447 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2022.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2022] [Accepted: 03/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Surgical menopause (iatrogenic menopause) happens when both ovaries are removed before the natural "switching off" of ovarian function; it can cause premature ovarian insufficiency where the menopause occurs in women before the age of 40. Surgical menopause is associated with a sudden reduction of ovarian sex steroid production rather than a gradual one as is the case in natural menopause. In women who have undergone bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) before the natural age of menopause, strong consideration should be given to giving hormone replacement therapy (HRT) till the natural age of menopause at least. Sexual function and sexual desire are altered post-BSO, especially in younger women hence part of HRT prescription must include consideration of androgen too.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ouma C Pillay
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, St George´s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Isaac Manyonda
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St George's, University of London, London / St George´s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Assaf W, Andraous M, Lavie O, Segev Y. Attitudes of Israeli gynecologists towards risk reduction salpingo-oophorectomy at hysterectomy for benign conditions and the use of hormonal therapy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2022; 272:48-54. [PMID: 35279641 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2022] [Revised: 02/27/2022] [Accepted: 03/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the perspectives and attitudes of gynecologists towards risk reduction bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) in average-risk women at the time of hysterectomy procedure for benign indications divided by age groups, and whether they recommend the use of hormonal therapy post oophorectomy. METHODS A questionnaire was distributed during staff meetings either by a printed questionnaire or by a link to a total number of 360 gynecologists include seniors and practitioners. Three hundred and one gynecologists participated in a national survey. Participants completed a structured questionnaire including three different scenarios. The subject group included both attending (senior) and second-year and above resident gynecologists, from divergent subspecialties. The demographic information of the survey responders included sex, age, years of experience, working domain, and subspecialty. RESULTS There was a 95% consensus rate among Israeli gynecologists, in favor of the ovarian conservation approach among 45-year-old women, elected for hysterectomy due to benign indications. Whereas in 50-year-old perimenopause women, without any evident family history of ovarian cancer, 39% of gynecologists advocated BSO at the time of hysterectomy, for benign indications. As for 46-year-old women, with a first-degree relative diagnosed with ovarian cancer at the age of 65 years old, 70.4% voted for prophylactic BSO. For the second part of the questionnaire regarding the utilization of hormone therapy (HT) after BSO, 66.1% of our responders proclaimed they would always encourage the use of HT in 45-year-old-women, while 52.8% recommended HT in 46-year-old-women with a family history of ovarian cancer and 39.5% for 50-year-old perimenopause women. CONCLUSION Our national survey confirms the wide variability in attitudes among gynecologists towards performing RRBSO at hysterectomy for a benign indication in women aged 45-50, with family history being a major factor in the decision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wissam Assaf
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel; Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institution of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
| | - Marah Andraous
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institution of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Ofer Lavie
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel; Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institution of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Yakir Segev
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel; Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institution of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Touboul C, Legendre G, Agostini A, Akladios C, Bendifallah S, Bolze PA, Bouet PE, Chauvet P, Collinet P, Dabi Y, Delotte J, Deffieux X, Dion L, Gauthier T, Kerbage Y, Koskas M, Millet P, Narducci F, Ouldamer L, Ploteau S, Santulli P, Golfier F. [Guidelines for Clinical Practice of the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2021: Prophylactic procedures associated with gynecologic surgery]. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2021; 49:805-815. [PMID: 34520857 DOI: 10.1016/j.gofs.2021.09.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To draw up recommendations on the use of prophylactic gynecologic procedures during surgery for other indications. DESIGN A consensus panel of 19 experts was convened. A formal conflict of interest policy was established at the onset of the process and applied throughout. The entire study was performed independently without funding from pharmaceutical companies or medical device manufacturers. The panel applied the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system to evaluate the quality of evidence on which the recommendations were based. The authors were advised against making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence. Some recommendations were ungraded. METHODS The panel studied 22 key questions on seven prophylactic procedures: 1) salpingectomy, 2) fimbriectomy, 3) salpingo-oophorectomy, 4) ablation of peritoneal endometriosis, 5) adhesiolysis, 6) endometrial excision or ablation, and 7) cervical ablation. RESULTS The literature search and application of the GRADE system resulted in 34 recommendations. Six were supported by high-quality evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 28 by low-quality evidence (GRADE 2+/-). Recommendations on two questions were left ungraded due to a lack of evidence in the literature. CONCLUSIONS A high level of consensus was achieved among the experts regarding the use of prophylactic gynecologic procedures. The ensuing recommendations should result in improved current practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Touboul
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Tenon (AP-HP), Sorbonne Université, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France.
| | - G Legendre
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU Anger, 4, rue Larrey, 49933 Angers cedex 9, France
| | - A Agostini
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital de la Conception (AP-HM), Marseille, France
| | - C Akladios
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction des hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
| | - S Bendifallah
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Tenon (AP-HP), Sorbonne Université, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France
| | - P A Bolze
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'hôpital Lyon Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - P E Bouet
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU Anger, 4, rue Larrey, 49933 Angers cedex 9, France
| | - P Chauvet
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU Estaing, 1, place Lucie-Aubrac, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - P Collinet
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Jeanne-de-Flandre, avenue Eugène-Avinée, 59000 Lille, France
| | - Y Dabi
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Tenon (AP-HP), Sorbonne Université, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France
| | - J Delotte
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital de l'Archet 2, 151, route de Saint-Antoine, 06200 Nice, France
| | - X Deffieux
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'hôpital A.-Béclêre (AP-HP), 157, rue de la Porte-de-Trivaux, 92140 Clamart, France
| | - L Dion
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, 16, boulevard de Bulgarie, 35200 Rennes, France
| | - T Gauthier
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU de Limoges, 8, avenue Dominique-Larrey, 87000 Limoges, France
| | - Y Kerbage
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Jeanne-de-Flandre, avenue Eugène-Avinée, 59000 Lille, France
| | - M Koskas
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de de l'hôpital Bichat (AP-HP), 46, rue Henri-Huchard, 75018 Paris, France
| | - P Millet
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital de l'Archet 2, 151, route de Saint-Antoine, 06200 Nice, France
| | - F Narducci
- Département de Cancérologie Gynécologique, Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer Oscar-Lambret, Lille, France
| | - L Ouldamer
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU de Tours, 2, boulevard Tonnellé, 37000 Tours, France
| | - S Ploteau
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction du CHU de Nantes, 38 bd Jean-Monnet, 44093 Nantes cedex 1, France
| | - P Santulli
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'Hôpital Cochin (AP-HP), 27, rue du Faubourg-Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France
| | - F Golfier
- Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Médecine de la Reproduction de l'hôpital Lyon Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Anggraeni TD, Al Fattah AN, Surya R. Prophylactic salpingectomy and ovarian cancer: An evidence-based analysis. South Asian J Cancer 2020; 7:42-45. [PMID: 29600234 PMCID: PMC5865096 DOI: 10.4103/sajc.sajc_187_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction One of the ovarian carcinogenesis theories was the presence of premalignant cells in the epithelium of the fallopian tube. Therefore, the prophylactic salpingectomy during benign gynecological surgery is now expected as the attempt to reduce the ovarian cancer incidence. We studied the effect of prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy (PBS) in reducing the ovarian cancer incidence. Methods This evidence-based report resulted from critical appraisal of 5 articles. It is aimed to answer our clinical question, can bilateral prophylactic salpingectomy reduce the incidence of ovarian cancer among women underwent hysterectomy for benign condition or permanent contraception surgery? The search was conducted on the Cochrane Library®, PubMed®, and Embase® using keywords of "prophylactic salpingectomy," and "ovarian cancer incidence." Reference lists of relevant articles were searched for other possibly relevant articles. Results Five studies were included in our appraisal. The incidence of ovarian cancer among women underwent prophylactic salpingectomy is lower compared to women who were not underwent any intervention (2.2% to 13% and 4.75% to 24.4%). The salpingectomy may reduce 29.2% to 64% of ovarian cancer incidence. No significant effect of PBS to ovarian function, quality of life, sexuality, surgery duration, and its cost-effective profile were also found throughout our literature study. Conclusion PBS is suggested to be performed for women during benign gynecological surgery as a primary preventive strategy of ovarian cancer. PBS is a cost-effective procedure, risk-reducing for ovarian cancer and has no significant effect to the ovarian function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tricia Dewi Anggraeni
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
| | - Adly Nanda Al Fattah
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
| | - Raymond Surya
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kim O, Park EY, Kwon SY, Shin S, Emerson RE, Shin YH, DeMayo FJ, Lydon JP, Coffey DM, Hawkins SM, Quilliam LA, Cheon DJ, Fernández FM, Nephew KP, Karpf AR, Widschwendter M, Sood AK, Bast RC, Godwin AK, Miller KD, Cho CH, Kim J. Targeting progesterone signaling prevents metastatic ovarian cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2020; 117:31993-32004. [PMID: 33262282 PMCID: PMC7749341 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2013595117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Effective cancer prevention requires the discovery and intervention of a factor critical to cancer development. Here we show that ovarian progesterone is a crucial endogenous factor inducing the development of primary tumors progressing to metastatic ovarian cancer in a mouse model of high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), the most common and deadliest ovarian cancer type. Blocking progesterone signaling by the pharmacologic inhibitor mifepristone or by genetic deletion of the progesterone receptor (PR) effectively suppressed HGSC development and its peritoneal metastases. Strikingly, mifepristone treatment profoundly improved mouse survival (∼18 human years). Hence, targeting progesterone/PR signaling could offer an effective chemopreventive strategy, particularly in high-risk populations of women carrying a deleterious mutation in the BRCA gene.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adult
- Animals
- BRCA1 Protein/genetics
- Breast/pathology
- Breast Neoplasms/genetics
- Breast Neoplasms/pathology
- Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/chemistry
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/genetics
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/pathology
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/prevention & control
- Disease Models, Animal
- Estradiol/administration & dosage
- Female
- Humans
- Mice
- Middle Aged
- Mifepristone/pharmacology
- Mifepristone/therapeutic use
- Mutation
- Neoplasms, Experimental/chemically induced
- Neoplasms, Experimental/genetics
- Neoplasms, Experimental/pathology
- Neoplasms, Experimental/prevention & control
- Ovarian Neoplasms/chemically induced
- Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics
- Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology
- Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control
- Ovary/pathology
- Ovary/surgery
- Progesterone/administration & dosage
- Progesterone/antagonists & inhibitors
- Progesterone/metabolism
- Receptors, Progesterone/genetics
- Receptors, Progesterone/metabolism
- Salpingo-oophorectomy
- Signal Transduction/drug effects
- Signal Transduction/genetics
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olga Kim
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Eun Young Park
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Sun Young Kwon
- Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Keimyung University, 41931 Daegu, Republic of Korea
| | - Sojin Shin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Keimyung University, 41931 Daegu, Republic of Korea
| | - Robert E Emerson
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Yong-Hyun Shin
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Francesco J DeMayo
- Reproductive and Developmental Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
| | - John P Lydon
- Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Donna M Coffey
- Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine, Houston Methodist and Weill Cornell Medical College, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Shannon M Hawkins
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Lawrence A Quilliam
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Dong-Joo Cheon
- Department of Regenerative and Cancer Cell Biology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY 12208
| | - Facundo M Fernández
- School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332
| | - Kenneth P Nephew
- Medical Sciences Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Bloomington, IN 47405
| | - Adam R Karpf
- Eppley Institute for Cancer Research, Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198
| | - Martin Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, WC1E 6AU London, United Kingdom
- Research Institute for Biomedical Aging Research, Universität Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria
- European Translational Oncology Prevention and Screening (EUTOPS) Institute, Universität Innsbruck, 6060 Hall in Tirol, Austria
| | - Anil K Sood
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Robert C Bast
- Department of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Andrew K Godwin
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160
| | - Kathy D Miller
- Department of Medicine, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Chi-Heum Cho
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Keimyung University, 41931 Daegu, Republic of Korea;
| | - Jaeyeon Kim
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202;
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Elsherif SB, Faria SC, Lall C, Iyer R, Bhosale PR. Ovarian Cancer Genetics and Implications for Imaging and Therapy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2019; 43:835-845. [DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000932] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
|
8
|
Girardi F, Barnes DR, Barrowdale D, Frost D, Brady AF, Miller C, Henderson A, Donaldson A, Murray A, Brewer C, Pottinger C, Evans DG, Eccles D, Lalloo F, Gregory H, Cook J, Eason J, Adlard J, Barwell J, Ong KR, Walker L, Izatt L, Side LE, Kennedy MJ, Tischkowitz M, Rogers MT, Porteous ME, Morrison PJ, Eeles R, Davidson R, Snape K, Easton DF, Antoniou AC. Risks of breast or ovarian cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 predictive test negatives: findings from the EMBRACE study. Genet Med 2018; 20:1575-1582. [PMID: 29565421 PMCID: PMC6033314 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2018.44] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2017] [Accepted: 01/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives are proven noncarriers of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation that is carried by their relatives. The risk of developing breast cancer (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in these women is uncertain. The study aimed to estimate risks of invasive BC and EOC in a large cohort of BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives. METHODS We used cohort analysis to estimate incidences, cumulative risks, and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). RESULTS A total of 1,895 unaffected women were eligible for inclusion in the BC risk analysis and 1,736 in the EOC risk analysis. There were 23 incident invasive BCs and 2 EOCs. The cumulative risk of invasive BC was 9.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-15%) by age 85 years and the corresponding risk of EOC was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.6%). The SIR for invasive BC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.62-1.40) in the overall cohort, 0.85 (95% CI 0.48-1.50) in noncarriers from BRCA1 families, and 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.87) in noncarriers from BRCA2 families. The SIR for EOC was 0.79 (95% CI 0.20-3.17) in the overall cohort. CONCLUSION Our results did not provide evidence for elevated risks of invasive BC or EOC in BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio Girardi
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Daniel R Barnes
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Daniel Barrowdale
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Debra Frost
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Angela F Brady
- North West Thames Regional Genetics Service, Northwick Park Hospital, London North West Healthcare NHS Trust, Harrow, UK
| | - Claire Miller
- Cheshire and Merseyside Clinical Genetics Service, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Alex Henderson
- Institute of Genetic Medicine, Centre for Life, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Alan Donaldson
- Clinical Genetics Department, St Michael's Hospital, Bristol, UK
| | - Alex Murray
- All Wales Medical Genetics Services, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - Carole Brewer
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK
| | | | - D Gareth Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Science, Manchester University, Manchester Universities NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Diana Eccles
- University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Fiona Lalloo
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Manchester Universities NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Helen Gregory
- North of Scotland Regional Genetics Service, NHS Grampian & University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Jackie Cook
- Sheffield Clinical Genetics Service, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jacqueline Eason
- Nottingham Clinical Genetics Service, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Julian Adlard
- Yorkshire Regional Genetics Service, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Julian Barwell
- Leicestershire Clinical Genetics Service, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
| | - Kai Ren Ong
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Service, Birmingham Women's Hospital Healthcare NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Lisa Walker
- Oxford Regional Genetics Service, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Louise Izatt
- Clinical Genetics, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Lucy E Side
- North East Thames Regional Genetics Service, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - M John Kennedy
- Academic Unit of Clinical and Molecular Oncology, Trinity College Dublin and St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mark T Rogers
- All Wales Medical Genetics Services, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
| | - Mary E Porteous
- South East of Scotland Regional Genetics Service, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Patrick J Morrison
- Centre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queens University of Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Ros Eeles
- Oncogenetics Team, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Rosemarie Davidson
- Department of Clinical Genetics, South Glasgow University Hospitals, Glasgow, UK
| | - Katie Snape
- Medical Genetics Unit, St George's, University of London, London, UK
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kim J, Park EY, Kim O, Schilder JM, Coffey DM, Cho CH, Bast RC. Cell Origins of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:cancers10110433. [PMID: 30424539 PMCID: PMC6267333 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10110433] [Citation(s) in RCA: 161] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2018] [Revised: 11/03/2018] [Accepted: 11/07/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
High-grade serous ovarian cancer, also known as high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), is the most common and deadliest type of ovarian cancer. HGSC appears to arise from the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum. As most HGSC cases present with widespread peritoneal metastases, it is often not clear where HGSC truly originates. Traditionally, the ovarian surface epithelium (OSE) was long believed to be the origin of HGSC. Since the late 1990s, the fallopian tube epithelium has emerged as a potential primary origin of HGSC. Particularly, serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a noninvasive tumor lesion formed preferentially in the distal fallopian tube epithelium, was proposed as a precursor for HGSC. It was hypothesized that STIC lesions would progress, over time, to malignant and metastatic HGSC, arising from the fallopian tube or after implanting on the ovary or peritoneum. Many clinical studies and several mouse models support the fallopian tube STIC origin of HGSC. Current evidence indicates that STIC may serve as a precursor for HGSC in high-risk women carrying germline BRCA1 or 2 mutations. Yet not all STIC lesions appear to progress to clinical HGSCs, nor would all HGSCs arise from STIC lesions, even in high-risk women. Moreover, the clinical importance of STIC remains less clear in women in the general population, in which 85–90% of all HGSCs arise. Recently, increasing attention has been brought to the possibility that many potential precursor or premalignant lesions, though composed of microscopically—and genetically—cancerous cells, do not advance to malignant tumors or lethal malignancies. Hence, rigorous causal evidence would be crucial to establish that STIC is a bona fide premalignant lesion for metastatic HGSC. While not all STICs may transform into malignant tumors, these lesions are clearly associated with increased risk for HGSC. Identification of the molecular characteristics of STICs that predict their malignant potential and clinical behavior would bolster the clinical importance of STIC. Also, as STIC lesions alone cannot account for all HGSCs, other potential cellular origins of HGSC need to be investigated. The fallopian tube stroma in mice, for instance, has been shown to be capable of giving rise to metastatic HGSC, which faithfully recapitulates the clinical behavior and molecular aspect of human HGSC. Elucidating the precise cell(s) of origin of HGSC will be critical for improving the early detection and prevention of ovarian cancer, ultimately reducing ovarian cancer mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaeyeon Kim
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
- Indiana University Melvin & Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
| | - Eun Young Park
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
| | - Olga Kim
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
| | - Jeanne M Schilder
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
- Indiana University Melvin & Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
| | - Donna M Coffey
- Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine, Houston Methodist and Weill Cornell Medical College, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Chi-Heum Cho
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Keimyung University, Daegu 41931, Korea.
| | - Robert C Bast
- Department of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lee EG, Kang HJ, Lim MC, Park B, Park SJ, Jung SY, Lee S, Kang HS, Park SY, Park B, Joo J, Han JH, Kong SY, Lee ES. Different Patterns of Risk Reducing Decisions in Affected or Unaffected BRCA Pathogenic Variant Carriers. Cancer Res Treat 2018; 51:280-288. [PMID: 29747489 PMCID: PMC6333981 DOI: 10.4143/crt.2018.079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2018] [Accepted: 05/02/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate decision patterns to reduce the risks of BRCArelated breast and gynecologic cancers in carriers of BRCA pathogenic variants. We found a change in risk-reducing (RR) management patterns after December 2012, when the National Health Insurance System (NHIS) of Korea began to pay for BRCA testing and riskreducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in pathogenic-variant carriers. Materials and Methods The study group consisted of 992 patients, including 705 with breast cancer (BC), 23 with ovarian cancer (OC), 10 with both, and 254 relatives of high-risk patients who underwent BRCA testing at the National Cancer Center of Korea from January 2008 to December 2016.We analyzed patterns of and factors in RR management. Results Of the 992 patients, 220 (22.2%) were carriers of BRCA pathogenic variants. About 92.3% (203/220) had a family history of BC and/or OC,which significantly differed between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (p < 0.001). All 41 male carriers chose surveillance. Of the 179 female carriers, 59 of the 83 carriers (71.1%) with BC and the 39 of 79 unaffected carriers (49.4%) underwent RR management. None of the carriers affected with OC underwent RR management. Of the management types, RRSO had the highest rate (42.5%) of patient choice. The rate of RR surgery was significantly higher after 2013 than before 2013 (46.3% [74/160] vs. 31.6% [6/19], p < 0.001). Conclusion RRSO was the preferred management for carriers of BRCA pathogenic variants. The most important factors in treatment choice were NHIS reimbursement and/or the severity of illness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun-Gyeong Lee
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Hyok Jo Kang
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Myong Cheol Lim
- Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.,Center for Uterine Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.,Cancer Healthcare Research Branch, Research Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Boyoung Park
- Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Soo Jin Park
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - So-Youn Jung
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Seeyoun Lee
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Han-Sung Kang
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Sang-Yoon Park
- Center for Uterine Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.,Common Cancer Branch, Research Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Boram Park
- Biometrics Research Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Management, Research Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jungnam Joo
- Biometrics Research Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Management, Research Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jai Hong Han
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Sun-Young Kong
- Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.,Department of Laboratory Medicine & Genetic Counselling Clinics, Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Eun Sook Lee
- Center for Breast Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.,Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lewis KE, Lu KH, Klimczak AM, Mok SC. Recommendations and Choices for BRCA Mutation Carriers at Risk for Ovarian Cancer: A Complicated Decision. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:cancers10020057. [PMID: 29466291 PMCID: PMC5836089 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10020057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2017] [Revised: 02/14/2018] [Accepted: 02/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Current ovarian cancer screening guidelines in high-risk women vary according to different organizations. Risk reducing surgery remains the gold standard for definitive treatment in BRCA mutation carriers, but research advancements have created more short-term options for patients to consider. The decisions involved in how a woman manages her BRCA mutation status can cause a great deal of stress and worry due to the imperfect therapy options. The goal of this review was to critically analyze the screening recommendations and alternative options for high-risk ovarian cancer patients and evaluate how these discrepancies and choices affect a woman’s management decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelsey E Lewis
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, TX 77555, USA.
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Karen H Lu
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
- The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Amber M Klimczak
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, TX 77555, USA.
| | - Samuel C Mok
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
- The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Harmsen MG, Steenbeek MP, Hoogerbrugge N, van Doorn HC, Gaarenstroom KN, Vos MC, Massuger LFAG, de Hullu JA, Hermens RPMG. A patient decision aid for risk-reducing surgery in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: Development process and pilot testing. Health Expect 2017; 21:659-667. [PMID: 29281161 PMCID: PMC5980589 DOI: 10.1111/hex.12661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/01/2017] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background BRCA1/2 mutation carriers’ choice between risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy (RRSO) and salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy is very complex. Aim was to develop a patient decision aid that combines evidence with patient preferences to facilitate decision making. Design Systematic development of a patient decision aid in an iterative process of prototype development, alpha testing by patients and clinicians and revisions using International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) quality criteria. Information was based on the available literature and current guidelines. A multidisciplinary steering group supervised the process. Setting and participants Pre‐menopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers choosing between RRSO and salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy in Family Cancer Clinics in the Netherlands. Main outcome measures IPDAS quality criteria, relevance, usability, clarity. Results The patient decision aid underwent four rounds of alpha testing and revisions. Finally, two paper decision aids were developed: one for BRCA1 and one for BRCA2. They both contained a general introduction, three chapters and a step‐by‐step plan containing a personal value clarification worksheet. During alpha testing, risk communication and information about premature menopause and hormone therapy were the most revised items. The patient decision aids fulfil 37 of 43 (86%) IPDAS criteria for content and development process. Discussion and conclusions Both BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and professionals are willing to use or offer the developed patient decision aids for risk‐reducing surgery. The patient decision aids have been found clear, balanced and comprehensible. Future testing among patients facing the decision should point out its effectiveness in improving decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marline G Harmsen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Miranda P Steenbeek
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Nicoline Hoogerbrugge
- Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Helena C van Doorn
- Department of Gynaecology, Erasmus MC Cancer Clinic, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katja N Gaarenstroom
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M Caroline Vos
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Leon F A G Massuger
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Joanne A de Hullu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Rosella P M G Hermens
- Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
Ovarian carcinoma is the most lethal malignancy of the female genital tract. Population-based trials in the general population have not demonstrated that screening improves early detection or survival. Therefore, application of prevention strategies is vital to improving outcomes from this disease. Surgical prevention reduces risk and prophylactic risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is the most effective means to prevent ovarian carcinoma in the high-risk patient although the risks do not outweigh the benefits in average risk patients. Other surgical and medical options have unknown or limited efficacy in the high-risk patient. In this review, we define the patient at high risk for ovarian cancer, discuss how to identify these women and weigh their available ovarian cancer prevention strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah M. Temkin
- Virginia Commonwealth University, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Jennifer Bergstrom
- Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Goli Samimi
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Lori Minasian
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Piszczek C, Ma J, Gould CH, Tseng P. Cancer Risk-Reducing Opportunities in Gynecologic Surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017; 25:1179-1193. [PMID: 29097232 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.10.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2017] [Revised: 10/20/2017] [Accepted: 10/21/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
This review article discusses cancer risk-reducing opportunities in gynecologic surgery. We cover strategies to reduce ovarian and uterine cancer risk by presenting general practice guidelines and expanding on the literature behind clinical decision points. We address populations of women at increased hereditary risk and those at population risk. We specifically discuss risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, prophylactic salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy, concomitant hysterectomy, opportunistic salpingectomy, bilateral tubal ligation, and hysterectomy. For clinical scenarios in which data are limited or conflicting, we detail the studies on which clinicians' decisions hinge to allow the reader to weigh the available evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn Piszczek
- Division of Women's Services, Legacy Health System, Portland, Oregon.
| | - Jun Ma
- Divisions of Gynecologic Oncology, Legacy Medical Group, Portland, Oregon
| | - Claire H Gould
- Advanced Gynecology, Legacy Medical Group, Portland, Oregon
| | - Paul Tseng
- Divisions of Gynecologic Oncology, Legacy Medical Group, Portland, Oregon
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Opportunistic Salpingectomy as an Ovarian Cancer Primary Prevention Strategy. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2017; 67:243-246. [PMID: 28706361 DOI: 10.1007/s13224-017-0998-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2017] [Accepted: 04/17/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Ovarian cancer is the most lethal form of all gynecologic malignancies. The presenting clinical symptoms of ovarian cancer are very vague and often appear late in the course of disease. Hence, most patients are diagnosed at later stages. At present, there is no effective screening of ovarian cancer. Primary prevention could be considered a strategy to decrease the mortality from ovarian cancer, not only in women at high risk but also in those at low risk. Most "ovarian cancers," and more specifically the high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) subtype of ovarian cancer, actually could originate in the fallopian tube. Women who have known BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutations should be counseled regarding bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, immediately after completion of childbearing, as the best strategy for reducing their risk of developing ovarian cancer. If the patient is reluctant, they should be counseled regarding risk-reducing salpingectomy when childbearing is complete followed by oophorectomy in the future. For women at average risk of ovarian cancer, risk-reducing salpingectomy should also be discussed and considered with patients at the time of any abdominal or pelvic surgery, hysterectomy or tubal ligation.
Collapse
|
16
|
Challenging Salpingectomy as a Risk-Reducing Measure for Ovarian Cancer: Histopathological Analysis of the Tubo-Ovarian Interface in Women Undergoing Risk-Reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2017; 27:703-707. [DOI: 10.1097/igc.0000000000000954] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
ObjectiveOpportunistic bilateral salpingectomy is now promoted for women at the time of hysterectomy for a benign disease, consequent to the fimbrial end of the fallopian tube emerging as the primary site for carcinogenesis in high-grade serous carcinomas. In high-risk women with an identified germ line mutation, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy offers the greatest risk reduction for ovarian cancer. Currently, no prospective evidence exists with respect to the effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy alone in preventing ovarian cancer. Although it is thought that there is no direct connection between the ovary and its adjacent fallopian tube, we often find remnants of the fimbria adherent to the ovary at the time of surgery. If this tubo-ovarian interface is not separate, then practices such as salpingectomy and radical fimbriectomy may be incomplete, and the effectiveness of this technique as a prophylactic strategy may need reconsideration. We aimed to establish whether there might exist a direct attachment of the fimbria to the ovary by examining this interface in surgically removed specimens.MethodsThe tubes and ovaries of 20 women undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy were examined using the Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbriated End of the Tubes protocol and p53 immunohistochemistry for lesions suspicious of serous intraepithelial tubal carcinoma.ResultsThree specimens showed fimbria adherent to the ovary at the histopathological analysis. One p53 signature was identified, but there were no occult cancers or serous intraepithelial tubal carcinomas.ConclusionsAlthough only a small study, the findings show that microscopic fimbriae are adherent to the ovary. This relationship challenges the recommendation for bilateral salpingectomy alone for risk-reducing surgery because the primary site of carcinogenesis may be left on the ovary to later develop into a high-grade serous carcinoma. A larger study is needed to assess our findings related to the tubo-ovarian interface and its implications for long-term ovarian cancer development. Until then, caution on using this technique alone in the high-risk patient should be adopted.
Collapse
|
17
|
Tschernichovsky R, Goodman A. Risk-Reducing Strategies for Ovarian Cancer in BRCA Mutation Carriers: A Balancing Act. Oncologist 2017; 22:450-459. [PMID: 28314837 PMCID: PMC5388383 DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2016] [Accepted: 12/22/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to review the role of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA mutation (mBRCA) carriers and alternative interventions in risk reduction of ovarian cancer (OC). MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library was conducted to identify studies of different strategies to prevent OC in mBRCA carriers, including bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, prophylactic salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy, intensive surveillance, and chemoprevention. RESULTS Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is an effective intervention, but its associated morbidity is substantial and seems to curtail uptake rates among the target population. Although there is much interest and a strong theoretical basis for salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy, data on its clinical application are scarce with regard to screening, the use of an algorithmic protocol has recently shown favorable albeit indefinite results in average-risk postmenopausal women. Its incorporation into studies focused on high-risk women might help solidify a future role for screening as a bridge to surgery. The use of oral contraceptives for chemoprevention is well supported by epidemiologic studies. However, there is a lack of evidence for advocating any of the other agents proposed for this purpose, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, vitamin D, and retinoids. CONCLUSION Further studies are needed before salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy or intensive surveillance can be offered as acceptable, less morbid alternatives to upfront oophorectomy for mBRCA carriers. The Oncologist 2017;22:450-459 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is currently the most effective method for reducing the risk of ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation (mBRCA) carriers. Unfortunately, it is associated with significant short- and long-term morbidity, stemming from reduced circulating estrogen. In recent years, much research has been devoted to evaluating less morbid alternatives, especially multimodal cancer screening and prophylactic salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy. This review describes the present state of the art, with the aim of informing the counseling provided to mBRCA carriers on this complicated issue and encouraging additional research to facilitate the incorporation of such alternatives into routine practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Annekathryn Goodman
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Sherman ME, Drapkin RI, Horowitz NS, Crum CP, Friedman S, Kwon JS, Levine DA, Shih IM, Shoupe D, Swisher EM, Walker J, Trabert B, Greene MH, Samimi G, Temkin SM, Minasian LM. Rationale for Developing a Specimen Bank to Study the Pathogenesis of High-Grade Serous Carcinoma: A Review of the Evidence. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2016; 9:713-20. [PMID: 27221539 PMCID: PMC5010984 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-15-0384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2015] [Accepted: 05/08/2016] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
Women with clinically detected high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) generally present with advanced-stage disease, which portends a poor prognosis, despite extensive surgery and intensive chemotherapy. Historically, HGSCs were presumed to arise from the ovarian surface epithelium (OSE), but the inability to identify early-stage HGSCs and their putative precursors in the ovary dimmed prospects for advancing our knowledge of the pathogenesis of these tumors and translating these findings into effective prevention strategies. Over the last decade, increased BRCA1/2 mutation testing coupled with performance of risk-reducing surgeries has enabled studies that have provided strong evidence that many, but probably not all, HGSCs among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers appear to arise from the fallopian tubes, rather than from the ovaries. This shift in our understanding of the pathogenesis of HGSCs provides an important opportunity to achieve practice changing advances; however, the scarcity of clinically annotated tissues containing early lesions, particularly among women at average risk, poses challenges to progress. Accordingly, we review studies that have kindled our evolving understanding of the pathogenesis of HGSC and present the rationale for developing an epidemiologically annotated national specimen resource to support this research. Cancer Prev Res; 9(9); 713-20. ©2016 AACR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark E Sherman
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, Maryland.
| | - Ronny I Drapkin
- The Penn Ovarian Cancer Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Neil S Horowitz
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Harvard Medical School and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Christopher P Crum
- Division of Women's and Perinatal Pathology, Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sue Friedman
- Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered (FORCE), Tampa, Florida
| | - Janice S Kwon
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of British Columbia and BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Douglas A Levine
- Gynecologic Oncology, Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Ie-Ming Shih
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Donna Shoupe
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elizabeth M Swisher
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Joan Walker
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Peggy and Charles Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Britton Trabert
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mark H Greene
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Goli Samimi
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sarah M Temkin
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, Maryland. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lori M Minasian
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Lee YJ, Lee SW, Kim KR, Jung KH, Lee JW, Kim YM. Pathologic findings at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in germline BRCA mutation carriers with breast cancer: significance of bilateral RRSO at the optimal age in germline BRCA mutation carriers. J Gynecol Oncol 2016; 28:e3. [PMID: 27670257 PMCID: PMC5165071 DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2016] [Revised: 07/26/2016] [Accepted: 07/26/2016] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Most BRCA1/2 carriers do not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) by the recommended age. This study aimed to find the incidence of precursor lesions and cancer after RRSO. Methods We retrospectively reviewed breast cancer patients identified as BRCA mutation carriers who underwent RRSO at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, from 2010 to 2014. From 2013, all cases were examined according to the Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbria (SEE/FIM) protocol and underwent immunohistochemically staining. RRSO was performed in 63 patients, 27 in 2010 to 2012 and 36 in 2013 to 2014. Results The median age at RRSO was 46.5 years (range, 32 to 73 years). Occult invasive cancer was detected in eight patients, of ovarian origin in five and of tubal origin in three. All occult invasive cancer cases with metastasis were detected in patients older than 40 years. Of the 36 patients from the 2013 to 2014 cohort, seven showed p53 overexpression, one showed Ki-67 overexpression, two showed serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma, and three showed occult cancer. The detection rate of precursor lesions or cancer was 36.1% (13/36). In the analysis according to age, precursor lesions were more common in BRCA1 mutation carriers younger than 40 years old (66.7% vs. 20.0%). In BRCA2 mutation carriers, precursor lesions were only detected in those older than 40 years of age, indicating the possible faster occurrence of precursor lesions in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Conclusion Many patients still tend to delay RRSO until after they are 40 years old. Our findings support the significance of RRSO before the age of 40 in germline BRCA mutation carriers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Young Jae Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Shin Wha Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
| | - Kyu Rae Kim
- Department of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyung Hae Jung
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Won Lee
- Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yong Man Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Weitzel JN. The Genetics of Breast Cancer: What the Surgical Oncologist Needs to Know. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2016; 24:705-32. [PMID: 26363538 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2015.06.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
This article summarizes the impact of germline predisposition to breast cancer on the surgical management of breast cancer and breast cancer risk. Surgical implications of germline predisposition to breast cancer are now more nuanced due to the application of increasingly more complicated next-generation sequencing-based tests. The rapid pace of change will continue to challenge paradigms for genetic cancer risk assessment, which can influence the medical and surgical management of breast cancer risk as well as strategies for screening and for risk reduction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey N Weitzel
- Division of Clinical Cancer Genetics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA 91010, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
|
22
|
Menkiszak J, Chudecka-Głaz A, Gronwald J, Cymbaluk-Płoska A, Celewicz A, Świniarska M, Wężowska M, Bedner R, Zielińska D, Tarnowska P, Jakubowicz J, Kojs Z. Prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 mutation carriers and postoperative incidence of peritoneal and breast cancers. J Ovarian Res 2016; 9:11. [PMID: 26928677 PMCID: PMC4772302 DOI: 10.1186/s13048-016-0220-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2015] [Accepted: 02/19/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background There are no effective methods of diagnosis of early-stage ovarian cancer. Conservative care over patients at high risk of ovarian and breast cancers is ineffective. Prophylactic surgery is considered the best prophylaxis among BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers. Methods One hundred ninety-five patients, carriers of one of three most common mutations of the BRCA1 gene (Am J Hum Genet: 66: (6)1963-1968, 2000) in the Polish population (5382insC, 4153delA and C61G), who undergone prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy. The study group consisted of consecutive mutation carriers living in Poland, in the West Pomeranian province. Histopathological examination of the surgical material failed to reveal presence of malignancy. Results During follow-up we diagnosed two peritoneal cancers and 14 breast cancers. Diagnosis of breast cancer before prophylactic surgery increased the risk of peritoneal cancer almost three times. Time from diagnosis of breast cancer to prophylactic surgery increased the risk of peritoneal cancer after prophylactic surgery. This was strongly expressed (HR = 5.0; p = 0.030) in cases of over five-year-long delay in prophylactic surgery. Diagnosis of breast cancer before prophylactic surgery correlated with the risk of death (p = 0.00010). Presence of 5382insC mutation decreased and C61G mutation increased the risk of peritoneal cancer (p = 0.049 vs. p = 0.013). Conclusions Occurrence of primary peritoneal cancer after prophylactic surgery is similar to that reported in international literature. Primary breast cancer occurred less often than in international literature. We suspect that the risk of development of breast cancer among BRCA1 carriers undergoing prophylactic surgery can differ in a population. The next goal should be to study the molecular basis for the risk of development of malignancies in any population. Carriers of BRCA1 gene diagnosed with breast cancer should undergo prophylactic surgery within five years from the diagnosis of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janusz Menkiszak
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Anita Chudecka-Głaz
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Jacek Gronwald
- Department of Genetics and Pathology; International Hereditary Cancer Center, Pomeranian Medical University, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Aneta Cymbaluk-Płoska
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Aleksander Celewicz
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Maria Świniarska
- Department of the Clinical Oncology the West Pomeranian Centre of the Oncology in Szczecin, ul. Strzałowska 22, 71-730, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Małgorzata Wężowska
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Ryszard Bedner
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Dorota Zielińska
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Paulina Tarnowska
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, SPSK-2, 70-111 Szczecin Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, Szczecin, Poland.
| | - Jerzy Jakubowicz
- Radiation Oncology Department, Centre of Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Institute Cracow Branch, Garncarska 11, 31-115, Kraków, Poland.
| | - Zbigniew Kojs
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Centre of Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Institute, Cracow Branch, Garncarska 11, 31-115, Kraków, Poland.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Yoon SH, Kim SN, Shim SH, Kang SB, Lee SJ. Bilateral salpingectomy can reduce the risk of ovarian cancer in the general population: A meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer 2016; 55:38-46. [PMID: 26773418 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2015] [Revised: 12/02/2015] [Accepted: 12/06/2015] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The results of recent studies have suggested that high-grade serous ovarian cancer predominantly arises within the fallopian tubes. The reduction of ovarian cancer (OC) risk in women with a history of bilateral salpingectomy (BS) has been reported. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the impact of BS in preventing OC in the general population. METHODS We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases and CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library for all English-language articles published up to January 2015, using the key words 'ovarian cancer' and 'bilateral salpingectomy.' Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated by standard meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS Of the 77 studies retrieved, three were included in this meta-analysis, including one cohort study and two population-based case-control studies with 3509 patients who underwent BS and 5,655,702 controls who did not undergo salpingectomy. Over the combined study period, 29 of the 3509 BS patients developed OC compared with 44,006 of the 5,655,702 without salpingectomy. The meta-analysis results based on the fixed effects model revealed a significant decrease in the risk of OC occurrence in the patients who underwent BS relative to the controls (OR=0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.75, I(2)=0%). This pattern was also observed in subgroup analysis for the study type. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that removal of the fallopian tubes is an effective measure to reduce OC risk in the general population. Therefore, prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy should be considered for women who require hysterectomy with benign indications or sterilisation procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang-Hee Yoon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Soo-Nyung Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Research Institute of Medical Science, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Seung-Hyuk Shim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Research Institute of Medical Science, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Soon-Beum Kang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Research Institute of Medical Science, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sun-Joo Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Research Institute of Medical Science, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
In addition to the common symptoms that occur after natural menopause, special considerations apply to women who have had their ovaries removed, particularly when oophorectomy occurs before age 45 years. Women with premenopausal oophorectomy have more severe and prolonged menopausal symptoms. Their risks of adverse mood, heart disease, excessive bone resorption, sexual dysfunction, and cognitive disorders are increased compared with the general population. Retention of the ovaries carries a survival benefit for women at low risk of ovarian malignancy. Women facing oophorectomy should understand the balance of risks and benefits in order to make an informed decision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Rodriguez
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Boulevard, Suite 2622 South Tower, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA
| | - Donna Shoupe
- Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Affiliation(s)
- J Brian Szender
- Fellow in gynecologic oncology at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York
| | - Shashikant B Lele
- Clinical chief of gynecologic oncology and clinical chair of the Division of Surgical Subspecialties at Roswell Park Cancer Institute and a clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Buffalo School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences in New York
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Harmsen MG, Arts-de Jong M, Hoogerbrugge N, Maas AHEM, Prins JB, Bulten J, Teerenstra S, Adang EMM, Piek JMJ, van Doorn HC, van Beurden M, Mourits MJE, Zweemer RP, Gaarenstroom KN, Slangen BFM, Vos MC, van Lonkhuijzen LRCW, Massuger LFAG, Hermens RPMG, de Hullu JA. Early salpingectomy (TUbectomy) with delayed oophorectomy to improve quality of life as alternative for risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (TUBA study): a prospective non-randomised multicentre study. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:593. [PMID: 26286255 PMCID: PMC4541725 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1597-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2015] [Accepted: 08/11/2015] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) around the age of 40 is currently recommended to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. This procedure decreases the elevated ovarian cancer risk by 80–96 % but it initiates premature menopause as well. The latter is associated with short-term and long-term morbidity, potentially affecting quality of life (QoL). Based on recent insights into the Fallopian tube as possible site of origin of serous ovarian carcinomas, an alternative preventive strategy has been put forward: early risk-reducing salpingectomy (RRS) and delayed oophorectomy (RRO). However, efficacy and safety of this alternative strategy have to be investigated. Methods A multicentre non-randomised trial in 11 Dutch centres for hereditary cancer will be conducted. Eligible patients are premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers after completing childbearing without (a history of) ovarian carcinoma. Participants choose between standard RRSO at age 35–40 (BRCA1) or 40–45 (BRCA2) and the alternative strategy (RRS upon completion of childbearing and RRO at age 40–45 (BRCA1) or 45–50 (BRCA2)). Women who opt for RRS but do not want to postpone RRO beyond the currently recommended age are included as well. Primary outcome measure is menopause-related QoL. Secondary outcome measures are ovarian/breast cancer incidence, surgery-related morbidity, histopathology, cardiovascular risk factors and diseases, and cost-effectiveness. Mixed model data analysis will be performed. Discussion The exact role of the Fallopian tube in ovarian carcinogenesis is still unclear. It is not expected that further fundamental research will elucidate this role in the near future. Therefore, this clinical trial is essential to investigate RRS with delayed RRO as alternative risk-reducing strategy in order to improve QoL. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02321228)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marline G Harmsen
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Marieke Arts-de Jong
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Nicoline Hoogerbrugge
- Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Angela H E M Maas
- Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Judith B Prins
- Department of Medical Psychology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Johan Bulten
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Steven Teerenstra
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Eddy M M Adang
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Jurgen M J Piek
- Gynaecologic Oncologic Center South location Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Dr. Deelenlaan 5, 5042 AD, Tilburg, The Netherlands. .,Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Helena C van Doorn
- Department of Gynaecology, Erasmus MC Cancer Clinic, 's-Gravendijkwal 230, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marc van Beurden
- Center for Gynaecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marian J E Mourits
- Department of Gynaecology, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Ronald P Zweemer
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Katja N Gaarenstroom
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - Brigitte F M Slangen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - M Caroline Vos
- Gynaecologic Oncologic Center South, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Hilvarenbeekseweg 60, 5022 GC, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
| | - Luc R C W van Lonkhuijzen
- Center for Gynaecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), AMC, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Leon F A G Massuger
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Rosella P M G Hermens
- Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Joanne A de Hullu
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, , 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Chandrasekaran D, Menon U, Evans G, Crawford R, Saridogan E, Jacobs C, Tischkowitz M, Brockbank E, Kalsi J, Jurkovic D, Manchanda R. Risk reducing salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy in high risk women: views of cancer geneticists, genetic counsellors and gynaecological oncologists in the UK. Fam Cancer 2015; 14:521-30. [DOI: 10.1007/s10689-015-9823-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
|
28
|
Walker JL, Powell CB, Chen LM, Carter J, Bae Jump VL, Parker LP, Borowsky ME, Gibb RK. Society of Gynecologic Oncology recommendations for the prevention of ovarian cancer. Cancer 2015; 121:2108-20. [PMID: 25820366 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 180] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2014] [Revised: 12/22/2014] [Accepted: 01/20/2015] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Mortality from ovarian cancer may be dramatically reduced with the implementation of attainable prevention strategies. The new understanding of the cells of origin and the molecular etiology of ovarian cancer warrants a strong recommendation to the public and health care providers. This document discusses potential prevention strategies, which include 1) oral contraceptive use, 2) tubal sterilization, 3) risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women at high hereditary risk of breast and ovarian cancer, 4) genetic counseling and testing for women with ovarian cancer and other high-risk families, and 5) salpingectomy after childbearing is complete (at the time of elective pelvic surgeries, at the time of hysterectomy, and as an alternative to tubal ligation). The Society of Gynecologic Oncology has determined that recent scientific breakthroughs warrant a new summary of the progress toward the prevention of ovarian cancer. This review is intended to emphasize the importance of the fallopian tubes as a potential source of high-grade serous cancer in women with and without known genetic mutations in addition to the use of oral contraceptive pills to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - C Bethan Powell
- Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program, Kaiser Permanente San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Lee-May Chen
- Gynecology/Oncology Division, University of California San Francisco/Mt. Zion Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Jeanne Carter
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Victoria L Bae Jump
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | - Mark E Borowsky
- Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, Delaware
| | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Greene MH, Mai PL. The fallopian tube: from back stage to center stage. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2015; 8:339-41. [PMID: 25802341 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-15-0072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2015] [Accepted: 03/11/2015] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
The recognition that a significant fraction of what historically has been classified as ovarian cancer is, in fact, a malignancy that arises in the fallopian tube mucosa comprises a paradigm shift in our understanding of these neoplasms. New etiologic and management opportunities have been created by this insight, both for women at increased genetic risk of ovarian cancer by virtue of being BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and, perhaps, for women in the general population as well.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark H Greene
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
| | - Phuong L Mai
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Chene G, Lamblin G, Le Bail-Carval K, Chabert P, Golfier F, Dauplat J, Deligdisch L, Penault-Llorca F, Mellier G. [Prophylactic salpingectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy as an ovarian cancer prevention?]. Presse Med 2015; 44:317-23. [PMID: 25578546 DOI: 10.1016/j.lpm.2014.07.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2013] [Revised: 06/06/2014] [Accepted: 07/03/2014] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
A recent hypothesis has stated that many ovarian cancers (especially high-grade serous histotype) could arise from the distal part of the fallopian tube. On one hand we know that risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is the most effective prevention for ovarian cancer among BRCA mutation carriers. On the other, oophorectomy increases the relative risk for cardiovascular, osteoporotic psychosexual and cognitive dysfunctions in premenopausal women. This raises the question whether bilateral salpingectomy could be an effective strategy in the prevention of ovarian cancer in case of hereditary predisposition and in the general population. Here we discuss origin of ovarian cancer in the light of the latest molecular studies and the relative risks and benefits of a strategy of exclusive salpingectomy in comparison with the classical adnexectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gautier Chene
- CHU Lyon Est, hôpital femme mère enfant, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 69000 Lyon, France.
| | - Gery Lamblin
- CHU Lyon Est, hôpital femme mère enfant, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 69000 Lyon, France
| | - Karine Le Bail-Carval
- CHU Lyon Est, hôpital femme mère enfant, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 69000 Lyon, France
| | - Philippe Chabert
- CHU Lyon Est, hôpital femme mère enfant, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 69000 Lyon, France
| | - François Golfier
- Université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, centre hospitalier Lyon Sud, 69000 Lyon, France
| | - Jacques Dauplat
- Centre Jean-Perrin, département de chirurgie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Liane Deligdisch
- Mount Sinai School of Medicine, département de pathologie, 10029 New York, États-Unis
| | - Frédérique Penault-Llorca
- Centre Jean-Perrin, département d'anatomie et cytologie pathologiques, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Georges Mellier
- CHU Lyon Est, hôpital femme mère enfant, département de gynécologie-obstétrique, université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 69000 Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Bodelon C, Pfeiffer RM, Buys SS, Black A, Sherman ME. Analysis of serial ovarian volume measurements and incidence of ovarian cancer: implications for pathogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; 106:dju262. [PMID: 25217774 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Accumulating evidence suggests that many ovarian cancers represent metastases from occult fallopian tube carcinomas or tumors arising within ovarian endometriosis. We hypothesized that small ovarian volumes, as reflected in nonvisualization by transvaginal ultrasound (TVU), would be a marker of lower ovarian cancer risk, whereas enlargement on serial examinations would indicate higher risk. METHODS To address these hypotheses, we analyzed serial ovarian volume measurements determined by TVU for 29321 women (102787 scans) performed in the ovarian cancer screening arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial. Cox models were used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as measures of association between TVU results and ovarian cancer. We assessed whether increasing ovarian volume preceded diagnosis of ovarian cancer in a nested case-control analysis comparing case patients and control patients matched on age, center, and screening year (1:4 ratio). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Visualization of normal-appearing ovaries at the last TVU scan was associated with marginally higher ovarian cancer risk compared with nonvisualization of the ovaries (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.00 to 2.01). Ovarian volume increased statistically significantly in ovarian cancer case patients one to two years before diagnosis (P < .001), but not in matched control patients. CONCLUSION Our analysis of TVU data suggests that increasing ovarian volume is associated with greater ovarian cancer risk, but it is only detectable one to two years before diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clara Bodelon
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (CB, RMP, AB, MES) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT (SSB).
| | - Ruth M Pfeiffer
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (CB, RMP, AB, MES) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT (SSB)
| | - Saundra S Buys
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (CB, RMP, AB, MES) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT (SSB)
| | - Amanda Black
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (CB, RMP, AB, MES) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT (SSB)
| | - Mark E Sherman
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (CB, RMP, AB, MES) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT (SSB)
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Sherman ME, Piedmonte M, Mai PL, Ioffe OB, Ronnett BM, Van Le L, Ivanov I, Bell MC, Blank SV, DiSilvestro P, Hamilton CA, Tewari KS, Wakeley K, Kauff ND, Yamada SD, Rodriguez G, Skates SJ, Alberts DS, Walker JL, Minasian L, Lu K, Greene MH. Pathologic findings at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: primary results from Gynecologic Oncology Group Trial GOG-0199. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32:3275-83. [PMID: 25199754 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2013.54.1987] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) lowers mortality from ovarian/tubal and breast cancers among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Uncertainties persist regarding potential benefits of RRSO among high-risk noncarriers, optimal surgical age, and anatomic origin of clinically occult cancers detected at surgery. To address these topics, we analyzed surgical treatment arm results from Gynecologic Oncology Group Protocol-0199 (GOG-0199), the National Ovarian Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Study. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS This analysis included asymptomatic high-risk women age ≥ 30 years who elected RRSO at enrollment. Women provided risk factor data and underwent preoperative cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) serum testing and transvaginal ultrasound (TVU). RRSO specimens were processed according to a standardized tissue processing protocol and underwent central pathology panel review. Research-based BRCA1/2 mutation testing was performed when a participant's mutation status was unknown at enrollment. Relationships between participant characteristics and diagnostic findings were assessed using univariable statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS Invasive or intraepithelial ovarian/tubal/peritoneal neoplasms were detected in 25 (2.6%) of 966 RRSOs (BRCA1 mutation carriers, 4.6%; BRCA2 carriers, 3.5%; and noncarriers, 0.5%; P < .001). In multivariable models, positive BRCA1/2 mutation status (P = .0056), postmenopausal status (P = .0023), and abnormal CA-125 levels and/or TVU examinations (P < .001) were associated with detection of clinically occult neoplasms at RRSO. For 387 women with negative BRCA1/2 mutation testing and normal CA-125 levels, findings at RRSO were benign. CONCLUSION Clinically occult cancer was detected among 2.6% of high-risk women undergoing RRSO. BRCA1/2 mutation, postmenopausal status, and abnormal preoperative CA-125 and/or TVU were associated with cancer detection at RRSO. These data can inform management decisions among women at high risk of ovarian/tubal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark E Sherman
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Marion Piedmonte
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Phuong L Mai
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Olga B Ioffe
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Brigitte M Ronnett
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Linda Van Le
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Iouri Ivanov
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Maria C Bell
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Stephanie V Blank
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Paul DiSilvestro
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Chad A Hamilton
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Krishnansu S Tewari
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Katie Wakeley
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Noah D Kauff
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - S Diane Yamada
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Gustavo Rodriguez
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Steven J Skates
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - David S Alberts
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Joan L Walker
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Lori Minasian
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Karen Lu
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Mark H Greene
- Mark E. Sherman, Phuong L. Mai, Lori Minasian, and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Rockville; Olga B. Ioffe, University of Maryland Medical Center; Brigitte M. Ronnett, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore; Chad A. Hamilton, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Marion Piedmonte, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Stephanie V. Blank, New York University School of Medicine; Noah D. Kauff, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; New York, NY; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Iouri Ivanov, Columbus Cancer Council, Columbus, OH; Maria C. Bell, Sanford University of South Dakota Medical Center, Sioux Falls, SD; Paul DiSilvestro, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI; Krishnansu S. Tewari, University of California Medical Center Irvine, Orange, CA; Katie Wakeley, Tufts University; Steven J. Skates, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; S. Diane Yamada, University of Chicago, Chicago; Gustavo Rodriguez, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL; David S. Alberts, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Joan L. Walker, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; and Karen Lu, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Cass I, Walts AE, Barbuto D, Lester J, Karlan B. A cautious view of putative precursors of serous carcinomas in the fallopian tubes of BRCA mutation carriers. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 134:492-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.07.084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2014] [Revised: 07/01/2014] [Accepted: 07/08/2014] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|
34
|
McCann GA, Eisenhauer EL. Hereditary cancer syndromes with high risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer: surgical options for personalized care. J Surg Oncol 2014; 111:118-24. [PMID: 25139656 DOI: 10.1002/jso.23743] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2014] [Accepted: 07/11/2014] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Cancer genomics has increased our recognition of specific hereditary cancer mutations. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome and Lynch syndrome are two such entities in which women carrying specific mutations may be at high risk for developing breast, ovarian, and/or endometrial cancers. Risk reducing surgery such as prophylactic mastectomy, oophorectomy, and/or hysterectomy may allow women to decrease these risks after completing childbearing. Background, indications, and consequences of these procedures are reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgia A McCann
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Hoskins LM, Werner-Lin A, Greene MH. In their own words: treating very young BRCA1/2 mutation-positive women with care and caution. PLoS One 2014; 9:e87696. [PMID: 24586286 PMCID: PMC3938837 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2013] [Accepted: 01/03/2014] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Young women who have been identified as carrying a deleterious mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 face a unique set of challenges related to managing cancer risk during a demographically-dense stage of life. They may struggle with decision-making in the absence of clear age-specific guidelines for medical management and because they have not yet fully developed the capacity to make life-altering decisions confidently. This study sought a patient-centered perspective on the dilemmas faced by 18-24 year olds who completed BRCA1/2 gene mutation testing prior to their 25(th) birthdays. PATIENTS AND METHOD This study integrated qualitative data from three independent investigations of BRCA1/2-positive women recruited through cancer risk clinics, hospital-based research centers, and online organizations. All 32 participants were women aged 21-25 who tested positive for a BRCA1/2 gene mutation between 2 and 60 months prior to data collection. Investigators used techniques of grounded theory and interpretive description to conduct both within and cross-study analysis. RESULTS Participants expressed needs for (1) greater clarity in recommendations for screening and prevention before age 25, especially with consideration of early and regular exposure to radiation associated with mammography or to hormones used in birth control, and (2) ongoing contact with providers to discuss risk management protocols as they become available. CONCLUSIONS Health care needs during the young adult years evolve with the cognitive capacity to address abrupt and pressing change. Specific needs of women in this population include a desire to balance autonomous decision-making with supportive guidance, a need for clear, accurate and consistent medical recommendations. Optimally, these women are best cared for by a team of genetically-oriented providers as part of a sustained program of ongoing support, rather than seen in an episodic, crisis-driven fashion. A discussion of insurance issues and provider-patient cultural differences is presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsey M. Hoskins
- Clinical Genetics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
| | - Allison Werner-Lin
- Social Policy and Practice, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Mark H. Greene
- Clinical Genetics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Revisiting the pathogenesis of ovarian cancer: the central role of the fallopian tube. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013; 289:241-6. [DOI: 10.1007/s00404-013-3041-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2013] [Accepted: 09/19/2013] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
37
|
Carter J, Stabile C, Gunn A, Sonoda Y. The physical consequences of gynecologic cancer surgery and their impact on sexual, emotional, and quality of life issues. J Sex Med 2013; 10 Suppl 1:21-34. [PMID: 23387909 DOI: 10.1111/jsm.12002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Surgical management of gynecologic cancer can cause short- and long-term effects on sexuality, reproductive function, and overall quality of life (QOL) (e.g., sexual dysfunction, infertility, lymphedema). However, innovative approaches developed over the past several decades have improved oncologic outcomes and reduced treatment sequelae. AIM To provide an overview of the standards of care and major advancements in gynecologic cancer surgery, with a focus on their direct physical impact, as well as emotional, sexual, and QOL issues. This overview will aid researchers and clinicians in the conceptualization of future clinical care strategies and interventions to improve sexual/vaginal/reproductive health and QOL in gynecologic cancer patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Comprehensive overview of the literature on gynecologic oncology surgery. METHODS Conceptual framework for this overview follows the current standards of care and recent surgical approaches to treat gynecologic cancer, with a brief overview describing primary management objectives and the physical, sexual, and emotional impact on patients. Extensive literature support is provided. RESULTS The type and radicality of surgical treatment for gynecologic cancer can influence sexual function and play a significant role in QOL. Psychological, sexual, and QOL outcomes improve as surgical procedures continue to evolve. Procedures for fertility preservation, laparoscopy, sentinel lymph node mapping, and robotic and risk-reducing surgery have advanced the field while reducing treatment sequelae. Nevertheless, interventions that address sexual and vaginal health issues are limited. CONCLUSIONS It is imperative to consider QOL and sexuality during the treatment decision-making process. New advances in detection and treatment exist; however, psycho-educational interventions and greater patient-physician communication to address sexual and vaginal health concerns are warranted. Large, prospective clinical trials including patient-reported outcomes are needed in gynecologic oncology populations to identify subgroups at risk. Future study designs need clearly defined samples to gain insight about sexual morbidity and foster the development of targeted interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeanne Carter
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Guldberg R, Wehberg S, Skovlund CW, Mogensen O, Lidegaard Ø. Salpingectomy as standard at hysterectomy? A Danish cohort study, 1977-2010. BMJ Open 2013; 3:bmjopen-2013-002845. [PMID: 23794553 PMCID: PMC3686168 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002845] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess if the risk of first-time salpingectomy was affected by prior hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes and by prior sterilisation. DESIGN A historical cohort study. SETTING Denmark. PARTICIPANTS 170 000 randomly selected women born 1947-1963 (10 000/year) were followed from 1977 until the end of 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Effect of hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes or sterilisation on the risk of salpingectomy. Both were modelled in a Cox proportional hazards model as time-dependent covariates, analysing time to first salpingectomy. End of follow-up period was 31 December 2010. RESULTS Of 9591 hysterectomies, 6456 (67.3%) had both fallopian tubes retained. HRs for salpingectomy after hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes and sterilisation were 2.13 (95% 1.88 to 2.42) and 2.42 (2.21 to 2.64), as compared with those for non-hysterectomised and non-sterilised women. CONCLUSIONS Women undergoing hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes or sterilisation have at least a doubled risk of subsequent salpingectomy. Removal of the fallopian tubes at hysterectomy should therefore be recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rikke Guldberg
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Center for Clinical Epidemiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Sonja Wehberg
- Center for Clinical Epidemiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Ole Mogensen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Øjvind Lidegaard
- Gynecological Clinic 4232, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Herzog TJ, Dinkelspiel HE. Fallopian tube removal: "stic-ing" it to ovarian cancer: what is the utility of prophylactic tubal removal? ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2013; 20:148-51. [PMID: 23737682 DOI: 10.3747/co.20.1548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Ovarian cancer and associated fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancers fall under a continuum of malignancies arising from the mullerian tract.[...]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T J Herzog
- Columbia University, NY Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, U.S.A
| | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Sandoval C, Fung-Kee-Fung M, Gilks B, Murphy KJ, Rahal R, Bryant H. Examining the use of salpingectomy with hysterectomy in Canada. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2013; 20:173-5. [PMID: 23737686 DOI: 10.3747/co.20.1560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer death among women in Canada, with an estimated 1750 deaths and 2600 new cases occurring in 20121.[...]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Sandoval
- Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Long term follow up of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with unsuspected neoplasia identified at risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 129:364-71. [PMID: 23391663 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.01.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2012] [Revised: 01/11/2013] [Accepted: 01/29/2013] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The reported incidence of neoplasia identified at the time of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in germline BRCA1/2 mutation carriers ranges from 4 to 12% but long-term outcomes have not been described. We evaluated recurrence and survival outcomes of mutation carriers with neoplastic lesions identified at RRSO. METHODS We identified BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with neoplasia at RRSO at three institutions. Data was collected on clinical variables, adjuvant treatment and follow-up. RESULTS We identified 32 mutation carriers with invasive carcinomas (n=15) or high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (n=17) that were not suspected prior to surgery. 26 occurred in BRCA1 and 6 in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Median and mean age for carcinomas were 50 years and 49.3 respectively, significantly younger than for intraepithelial neoplasm, median 53 years, and mean 55 years (p=0.04). For the 15 invasive carcinomas, median follow up was 88 months (range 45-172 months), 7 recurred (47%), median time to recurrence was 32.5 months and 3 have died of disease; 1 additional patient died of breast cancer. Overall survival was 73%, disease specific overall survival was 80% and disease free survival was 66%. For the 17 high-grade intraepithelial neoplasms, median follow up was 80 months (range 40-150), 4 were treated with chemotherapy. One recurred at 43 months and is currently not on therapy with a normal CA125, 16 months later. All patients with noninvasive neoplasia are alive. CONCLUSIONS BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with unsuspected invasive carcinoma at RRSO have a relatively high rate of recurrence despite predominantly early stage, small volume disease. High-grade intraepithelial neoplasms rarely recur as carcinoma and may not require adjuvant chemotherapy.
Collapse
|
42
|
Finch A, Evans G, Narod SA. BRCA carriers, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and menopause: clinical management considerations and recommendations. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2012; 8:543-55. [PMID: 22934728 DOI: 10.2217/whe.12.41] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Women who inherit a mutation in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene have greatly elevated lifetime risks of ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer and breast cancer. Preventive surgical removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes (salpingo-oophorectomy) is recommended to these women, often prior to natural menopause, to prevent cancer. The ensuing hormone deprivation may impact on health and quality of life. Most of these women experience menopausal symptoms shortly after surgery; however, there may also be longer term consequences that are less well understood. In this review, we highlight recent studies that examine the implications of salpingo-oophorectomy on health and quality of life in BRCA-positive women and we discuss the care of women following prophylactic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Finch
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Mingels MJ, Roelofsen T, van der Laak JA, de Hullu JA, van Ham MA, Massuger LF, Bulten J, Bol M. Tubal epithelial lesions in salpingo-oophorectomy specimens of BRCA-mutation carriers and controls. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 127:88-93. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.06.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2012] [Revised: 06/04/2012] [Accepted: 06/08/2012] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
44
|
Maxwell KN, Domchek SM. Prophylactic Mastectomy and Risk-Reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2012. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-012-0086-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
45
|
Abstract
Primary human fallopian tube secretory epithelial cell (FTSEC) cultures are useful for studying normal fallopian tube epithelial biology, as well as for developing models of fallopian tube disease, such as cancer. Because of the limited ability of primary human FTSECs to proliferate in vitro, it is necessary to immortalize them in order to establish a cell line that is suitable for long-term culture and large-scale in vitro experimentation. This protocol describes the isolation of FTSECs from human fallopian tube tissue, conditions for primary FTSEC culture and techniques for establishing immortal FTSEC lines. The entire process, from primary cell isolation to establishment of an immortal cell line, may take up to 2 months. Once established, immortal FTSECs can typically be maintained for at least 30 passages.
Collapse
|
46
|
|
47
|
Collins IM, Domchek SM, Huntsman DG, Mitchell G. The tubal hypothesis of ovarian cancer: caution needed. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12:1089-91. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70222-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
|
48
|
Karst AM, Drapkin R. The new face of ovarian cancer modeling: better prospects for detection and treatment. F1000 MEDICINE REPORTS 2011; 3:22. [PMID: 22076125 PMCID: PMC3206707 DOI: 10.3410/m3-22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Ovarian cancer has a disproportionately high mortality rate because patients typically present with late-stage metastatic disease. The vast majority of these deaths are from high-grade serous carcinoma. Recent studies indicate that many of these tumors arise from the fallopian tube and subsequently metastasize to the ovary. This may explain why such tumors have not been detected at early stage as detection efforts have been focused purely on the ovary. In keeping with this leap in understanding other advances such as the development of ex-vivo models and immortalization of human fallopian tube epithelial cells, and the use of integrated genomic analyses to identify hundreds of novel candidate oncogenes and tumor suppressors potentially involved in tumorigenesis now engender hope that we can begin to truly define the differences in pathogenesis between fallopian tube and ovarian-derived tumors. In doing so, we can hopefully improve early detection, treatment, and outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison M Karst
- Department of Medical Oncology, Center for Molecular Oncologic Pathology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Dietl J, Wischhusen J, Häusler SFM. The post-reproductive Fallopian tube: better removed? Hum Reprod 2011; 26:2918-24. [PMID: 21849300 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der274] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Recently, the distal Fallopian tube has attracted considerable attention not only as site of origin for serous cancer in women with BRCA mutations, but also as the anatomical location where the majority of serous ovarian cancers apparently develop. Consequently, the Fallopian tube may be the unique location where early 'ovarian' cancers can be found--which would contradict the long-standing impression that the ovaries and the Fallopian tubes are always simultaneously involved. Based on the dismal prognosis associated with ovarian cancer and our inability to screen for early-stage disease, we discuss the rationale for introducing salpinges-hysterectomy as new clinical standard for women in need of hysterectomy and further weigh the arguments for and against bilateral salpingectomy as a sterilization method. There is no known physiological benefit of retaining the post-reproductive Fallopian tube during hysterectomy or sterilization, especially as this does not affect ovarian hormone production. On the other hand, the consequences associated with a surgical menopause provide a rationale for preserving the ovaries in premenopausal women. Prophylactic removal of the Fallopian tubes during hysterectomy or sterilization would rule out any subsequent tubal pathology, such as hydrosalpinx, which is observed in up to 30% of women after hysterectomy. Moreover, this intervention is likely to offer considerable protection against later tumour development, even if the ovaries are retained. Thus, we recommend that any hysterectomy should be combined with salpingectomy. In addition, women over 35 years of age could also be offered bilateral salpingectomy as means of sterilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Dietl
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Würzburg, School of Medicine, Josef-Schneider-Strasse 4, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Clinical Considerations of BRCA1- and BRCA2-Mutation Carriers: A Review. Int J Surg Oncol 2011; 2011:374012. [PMID: 22312502 PMCID: PMC3263675 DOI: 10.1155/2011/374012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2011] [Accepted: 06/16/2011] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Individuals who carry an inherited mutation in the breast cancer 1 (BRCA1) and BRCA2 genes have a significant risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer over the course of their lifetime. As a result, there are important considerations for the clinician in the counseling, followup and management of mutation carriers. This review outlines salient aspects in the approach to patients at high risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer, including criteria for genetic testing, screening guidelines, surgical prophylaxis, and chemoprevention.
Collapse
|