Long-term results of screening with magnetic resonance imaging in women with BRCA mutations

Fertility Preservation in BRCA1/2 Germline Mutation Carriers: An Overview

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are responsible for a higher incidence of breast and ovarian cancer (from 55% up to 70% vs. 12% in the general population). If their functions have been widely investigated in the onset of these malignancies, still little is known about their role in fertility impairment. Cancer patients treated with antineoplastic drugs can be susceptible to their gonadotoxicity and, in women, some of them can induce apoptotic program in premature ovarian follicles, progressive depletion of ovarian reserve and, consequently, cancer treatment-related infertility (CTRI). BRCA variants seem to be associated with early infertility, thus accelerating treatment impairment of ovaries and making women face the concrete possibility of an early pregnancy. In this regard, fertility preservation (FP) procedures should be discussed in oncofertility counseling-from the first line of prevention with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) to the new experimental ovarian stem cells (OSCs) model as a new way to obtain in vitro-differentiated oocytes, several techniques may represent a valid option to BRCA-mutated patients. In this review, we revisit knowledge about BRCA involvement in lower fertility, pregnancy feasibility, and the fertility preservation (FP) options available.

MRI Surveillance and Breast Cancer Mortality in Women With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Sequence Variations

Importance

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance is offered to women with a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene who face a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. Surveillance with MRI is effective in downstaging breast cancers, but the association of MRI surveillance with mortality risk has not been well defined.

Objective

To compare breast cancer mortality rates in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation who entered an MRI surveillance program with those who did not.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation were identified from 59 participating centers in 11 countries. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire between 1995 and 2015 and a follow-up questionnaire every 2 years to document screening histories, incident cancers, and vital status. Women who had breast cancer, a screening MRI examination, or bilateral mastectomy prior to enrollment were excluded. Participants were followed up from age 30 years (or the date of the baseline questionnaire, whichever was later) until age 75 years, the last follow-up, or death from breast cancer. Data were analyzed from January 1 to July 31, 2023.

Exposures

Entrance into an MRI surveillance program.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for breast cancer mortality associated with MRI surveillance compared with no MRI surveillance using a time-dependent analysis.

Results

A total of 2488 women (mean [range] age at study entry 41.2 [30-69] years), with a sequence variation in the BRCA1 (n = 2004) or BRCA2 (n = 484) genes were included in the analysis. Of these participants, 1756 (70.6%) had at least 1 screening MRI examination and 732 women (29.4%) did not. After a mean follow-up of 9.2 years, 344 women (13.8%) developed breast cancer and 35 women (1.4%) died of breast cancer. The age-adjusted HRs for breast cancer mortality associated with entering an MRI surveillance program were 0.20 (95% CI, 0.10-0.43; P < .001) for women with BRCA1 sequence variations and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.10-17.25; P = .93) for women with BRCA2 sequence variations.

Conclusion and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that among women with a BRCA1 sequence variation, MRI surveillance was associated with a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality compared with no MRI surveillance. Further studies of women with BRCA2 sequence variations are needed to ascertain these women obtain the same benefits associated with MRI surveillance.

The Japanese breast cancer society clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 2022 edition

This article provides updates to readers based on the newly published Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, 2022 Edition. These guidelines incorporate the latest evaluation of evidence from studies of diagnostic accuracy. For each clinical question, outcomes for benefits and harms were established, and qualitative or quantitative systematic reviews were conducted. Recommendations were determined through voting by a multidisciplinary group, and guidelines were documented to facilitate shared decision-making among patients and medical professionals. The guidelines address screening, surveillance, and pre- and postoperative diagnosis of breast cancer. In an environment that demands an integrated approach, decisions are needed on how to utilize modalities, such as mammography, ultrasound, MRI, and PET/CT. Additionally, it is vital to understand the appropriate use of new technologies, such as tomosynthesis, elastography, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound, and to consider how best to adapt these methods for individual patients.

Specialty Care and Counselling about Hereditary Cancer Risk Improves Adherence to Cancer Screening and Prevention in Newfoundland and Labrador Patients with BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variants: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

Pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase the lifetime risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Guidelines recommend breast screening (magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammogram) or risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). We sought to (1) characterize the population of BRCA1/2 PV carriers in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), (2) evaluate risk-reducing interventions, and (3) identify factors influencing screening and prevention adherence. We conducted a retrospective study from a population-based provincial cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers. The eligibility criteria for risk-reducing interventions were defined for each case and patients were categorized based on their level of adherence with recommendations. Chi-squared and regression analyses were used to determine which factors influenced uptake and level of adherence. A total of 276 BRCA1/2 PV carriers were identified; 156 living NL biological females composed the study population. Unaffected females were younger at testing than those with a cancer diagnosis (44.4 years versus 51.7 years; p = 0.002). Categorized by eligibility, 61.0%, 61.6%, 39.0%, and 75.7% of patients underwent MRI, mammogram, RRM, and RRSO, respectively. Individuals with breast cancer were more likely to have RRM (64.7% versus 35.3%; p < 0.001), and those who attended a specialty hereditary cancer clinic were more likely to be adherent to recommendations (73.2% versus 13.4%; p < 0.001) and to undergo RRSO (84.1% versus 15.9%; p < 0.001). Nearly 40% of the female BRCA1/2 PV carriers were not receiving breast surveillance according to evidence-based recommendations. Cancer risk reduction and uptake of breast imaging and prophylactic surgeries are significantly higher in patients who receive dedicated specialty care. Organized hereditary cancer prevention programs will be a valuable component of Canadian healthcare systems and have the potential to reduce the burden of disease countrywide.

Current and new frontiers in hereditary cancer surveillance: Opportunities for liquid biopsy

At least 5% of cancer diagnoses are attributed to a causal pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline genetic variant (hereditary cancer syndrome-HCS). These individuals are burdened with lifelong surveillance monitoring organs for a wide spectrum of cancers. This is associated with substantial uncertainty and anxiety in the time between screening tests and while the individuals are awaiting results. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing has recently shown potential as a non-invasive strategy for monitoring cancer. There is an opportunity for high-yield cancer early detection in HCS. To assess clinical validity of cfDNA in individuals with HCS, representatives from eight genetics centers from across Canada founded the CHARM (cfDNA in Hereditary and High-Risk Malignancies) Consortium in 2017. In this perspective, we discuss operationalization of this consortium and early data emerging from the most common and well-characterized HCSs: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, Li-Fraumeni syndrome, and Neurofibromatosis type 1. We identify opportunities for the incorporation of cfDNA sequencing into surveillance protocols; these opportunities are backed by examples of earlier cancer detection efficacy in HCSs from the CHARM Consortium. We seek to establish a paradigm shift in early cancer surveillance in individuals with HCSs, away from highly centralized, regimented medical screening visits and toward more accessible, frequent, and proactive care for these high-risk individuals.

Personalized medicine with germline pathogenic variants: Importance of population- and region-wide evidence

Rare germline pathogenic variants in cancer-predisposing genes have a high impact and potential for clinical utility. In the last 30 years, based on evidence of cancer risk associated with germline pathogenic variants, several measures have been suggested for personalized medicine, including the development of novel treatments, treatment stratification, risk reduction by surgical measures, chemoprevention, removal of environmental factors, and surveillance for early detection among specific high-risk individuals. However, this evidence is mainly based on evaluations of European populations. Our large-scale analyses of more than 100,000 individuals, including 14 disease cases and non-cancer controls in the Japanese population, suggest some discrepancies in the associations between cancer-predisposing genes and diseases, expansion of the targeted diseases of BRCA1 and BRCA2, and a potential novel risk-reduction measure for gastric cancer. They are likely to be explained by population and region variations; therefore, more population-wide and region-wide research could provide improved personalized medicine as well as a better understanding of disease mechanisms. This review summarizes current personalized medicine and discusses the potential use of germline pathogenic variants.

Deep learning for predicting future lesion emergence in high-risk breast MRI screening: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

International societies have issued guidelines for high-risk breast cancer (BC) screening, recommending contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) of the breast as a supplemental diagnostic tool. In our study, we tested the applicability of deep learning-based anomaly detection to identify anomalous changes in negative breast CE-MRI screens associated with future lesion emergence.

METHODS

In this prospective study, we trained a generative adversarial network on dynamic CE-MRI of 33 high-risk women who participated in a screening program but did not develop BC. We defined an anomaly score as the deviation of an observed CE-MRI scan from the model of normal breast tissue variability. We evaluated the anomaly score's association with future lesion emergence on the level of local image patches (104,531 normal patches, 455 patches of future lesion location) and entire CE-MRI exams (21 normal, 20 with future lesion). Associations were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves on the patch level and logistic regression on the examination level.

RESULTS

The local anomaly score on image patches was a good predictor for future lesion emergence (area under the ROC curve 0.804). An exam-level summary score was significantly associated with the emergence of lesions at any location at a later time point (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer lesions are associated with anomalous appearance changes in breast CE-MRI occurring before the lesion emerges in high-risk women. These early image signatures are detectable and may be a basis for adjusting individual BC risk and personalized screening.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Anomalies in screening MRI preceding lesion emergence in women at high-risk of breast cancer may inform individualized screening and intervention strategies.

KEY POINTS

• Breast lesions are associated with preceding anomalies in CE-MRI of high-risk women. • Deep learning-based anomaly detection can help to adjust risk assessment for future lesions. • An appearance anomaly score may be used for adjusting screening interval times.

Low-Risk Women with Suspicious Microcalcifications in Mammography-Can an Additional Breast MRI Reduce the Biopsy Rate?

BACKGROUND

In the German Mammography Screening Program, 62% of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 38% of invasive breast cancers are associated with microcalcifications (MCs). Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsies are necessary to distinguish precancerous lesions from benign calcifications because mammographic discrimination is not possible. The aim of this study was to investigate if breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRM) could assist the evaluation of MCs and thus help reduce biopsy rates.

METHODS

In this IRB-approved study, 58 women (mean age 58 +/- 24 years) with 59 suspicious MC clusters in the MG were eligible for this prospective single-center trial. Additional breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was conducted before biopsy.

RESULTS

The breast MRI showed a sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 84%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 75% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 91% for the differentiation between benign and malignant in these 59 MCs found with MG. Breast MRI in addition to MG could increase the PPV from 36% to 75% compared to MG alone. The MRI examination led to nine additional suspicious classified lesions in the study cohort. A total of 55% (5/9) of them turned out to be malignant. A total of 32 of 59 (54 %) women with suspicious MCs and benign histology were classified as non-suspicious by MRI.

CONCLUSION

An additionally performed breast MRI could have increased the diagnostic reliability in the assessment of MCs. Further, in our small cohort, a considerable number of malignant lesions without mammographically visible MCs were revealed.

Challenges and Changes of the Breast Cancer Screening Paradigm

Since four decades mammography is used for early breast cancer detection in asymptomatic women and still remains the gold standard imaging modality. However, population screening programs can be personalized and women can be divided into different groups based on risk factors and personal preferences. The availability of new and evolving imaging modalities, for example, digital breast tomosynthesis, dynamic-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), abbreviated MRI protocols, diffusion-weighted MRI, and contrast-enhanced mammography leads to new challenges and perspectives regarding the feasibility and potential harms of breast cancer screening. The aim of this review is to discuss the current guidelines for different risk groups, to analyze the recent published studies about the diagnostic performance of the imaging modalities and to discuss new developments and future perspectives. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

Testing for Inherited Susceptibility to Breast Cancer

When BRCA1 and BRCA2 were first identified, the initial models for delivering testing were shaped by concepts of genetic exceptionalism and a lack of data regarding therapeutic implications and the effectiveness of risk reduction. Since then, interventions have been effective, and treatment implications have become clear. The sensitivity of guideline-based testing is incomplete, leading to calls for universal testing. Completely universal testing, however, is not necessary to identify the great majority of BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants. Broader testing (both in terms of eligibility and genes tested) will identify more variants, particularly in moderate penetrance genes, but the clinical implications remain less clear for these variants.

Cancer prevention in cancer predisposition syndromes: A protocol for testing the feasibility of building a hereditary cancer research registry and nurse navigator follow up model

Monogenic, high penetrance syndromes, conferring an increased risk of malignancies in multiple organs, are important contributors to the hereditary burden of cancer. Early detection and risk reduction strategies in patients with a cancer predisposition syndrome can save their lives. However, despite evidence supporting the benefits of early detection and risk reduction strategies, most Canadian jurisdictions have not implemented programmatic follow up of these patients. In our study site in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada, there is no centralized, provincial registry of high-risk individuals. There is no continuity or coordination of care providing cancer genetics expertise and no process to ensure that patients are referred to the appropriate specialists or risk management interventions. This paper describes a study protocol to test the feasibility of obtaining and analyzing patient risk management data, specifically patients affected by hereditary breast ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC; BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes) and Lynch syndrome (LS; MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 genes). Through a retrospective cohort study, we will describe these patients' adherence to risk management guidelines and test its relationship to health outcomes, including cancer incidence and stage. Through a qualitative interviews, we will determine the priorities and preferences of patients with any inherited cancer mutation for a follow up navigation model of risk management. Study data will inform a subsequent funding application focused on creating and evaluating a research registry and follow up nurse navigation model. It is not currently known what proportion of cancer mutation carriers are receiving care according to guidelines. Data collected in this study will provide clinical uptake and health outcome information so gaps in care can be identified. Data will also provide patient preference information to inform ongoing and planned research with cancer mutation carriers.

High Risk Breast Cancer Screening is a Double Edged Sword: A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives on the Ontario High Risk Breast Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND

MRI-based breast cancer screening for high-risk women has been associated with false positives. This study explored the benefits and drawbacks of MRI-based screening using in-depth patient interviews.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study of interviews with women participating in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program. Women enrolled at two centers who had completed at least one round of screening were invited to participate. Recruitment was suspended when thematic saturation was reached. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Emergent themes were identified and a coding framework established.

RESULTS

21 women (median age 41 years) participated in telephone interviews. Women had been in the program a median of 4 years (IQR 1-5), and 71% had experienced at least one abnormal screen. Eight participants (38%) had undergone biopsies. Six women (29%) were BRCA mutation carriers. MRIs were described as intimidating, uncomfortable, and claustrophobic. Participants were concerned about long-term exposure to gadolinium contrast. Compared to MRI, mammography alone was viewed as painful, less sensitive, and a "useless…waste of time." MRI provided a "psychological safety net" that outweighed the distress associated with abnormal screens. Many women accepted this trade-off as a "two-edged sword" that was "worth it" and provided a sense of control. Suggestions for improvement included more information regarding the risks of MRI, and access to counselling.

CONCLUSIONS

Women participating in MRI-based screening strongly value reassurance from a highly sensitive screening test. This outweighed the distress of abnormal screens. There are areas for improvement around patient communication and psychosocial support.

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

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

Prevalent versus incident breast cancers: benefits of clinical and radiological monitoring in women with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants

Women with pathogenic germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants have a higher risk of breast cancer than in the general population. International guidelines recommend specific clinical and radiological breast follow-up. This specific breast screening program has already been shown to be of clinical benefit, but no information is available concerning the use of prognostic factors or specific survival to guide follow-up decisions. We evaluated "high-risk" screening in a retrospective single-center study of 520 women carrying pathogenic germline variants of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene treated for breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2016. We compared two groups of women: the incidental breast cancer group (IBCG) were followed before breast cancer diagnosis (N = 103), whereas the prevalent breast cancer group (PBCG) (N = 417) had no specific follow-up for high risk before breast cancer diagnosis. Breast cancers were diagnosed at an earlier stage in the IBCG than in the PBCG: T0 in 64% versus 19% of tumors, (p < 0.00001), and N0 in 90% vs. 75% (p < 0.00001), respectively. Treatment differed significantly between the 2 groups: less neoadjuvant chemotherapy (7.1% vs. 28.5%, p < 0.00001), adjuvant chemotherapy (47.7% vs. 61.9%, p = 0.004) and more mastectomies (60% vs. 42% p < 0.0001) in the IBCG vs PBCG groups respectively. Overall and breast cancer-specific mortality were similar between the two groups. However, the patients in the IBCG had a significantly longer metastasis-free survival than those in the PBCG, at three years (96.9% [95% CI 93.5-100] vs. 92.30% [95% CI 89.8-94.9]; p = 0.02), suggesting a possible long-term survival advantage.

Genetic anticipation of breast cancer among BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To study the anticipation phenomenon among hereditary breast cancer patients, by evaluating trends in age at diagnosis and phenotype of breast cancer across two successive generation pairs of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers/non-carriers with breast cancer after reports of an earlier age of diagnosis in successive generations among BRCA1/2 mutation carrier families.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study. Patient characteristics, pathologic data and survival were compared between mothers and daughters and between carriers and non-carriers.

RESULTS

Overall, 126 patients were found, who formed 67 pairs of mothers and daughters diagnosed with breast cancer and genetically tested for BRCA mutations. Age at diagnosis was significantly younger in the daughter versus mother generation, in both groups of BRCA carriers/non-carriers. Tumor characteristics were not different between mothers and daughters. Survival analysis revealed a not significant better outcome for the daughter generation versus the mother generation.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer appeared to be diagnosed at an earlier age in successive generations among BRCA mutation carriers and non-carriers. The fact that we also observed a downshift at age of diagnosis in non-carrier pairs emphasizes that other factors (environmental, lifestyle, or social) may influence the age at diagnosis.

Recent Trends in Screening Breast MRI

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess trends in screening breast MRI utilization among privately insured women in the U.S. from 2007 to 2017.

METHODS

The utilization of screening breast MRI among women aged 25-64 years from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, was obtained using the MarketScan Commercial Database. We used Current Procedural Terminology codes to exclude breast MRI exams performed in women with a new breast cancer diagnosis and in women imaged to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy in the preceding 90 days. During the 11-year study, 351 763 study-eligible women underwent 488 852 MRI scans.

RESULTS

An overall 55.0% increase in screening breast MRI utilization was observed over the study period, with a steadily increasing trend. The greatest annual increase in percent utilization was from 2007 to 2008 at 16.6%. The highest utilization rate was in 2017, in which 0.4% of women aged 25-64 years underwent screening breast MRI. Of the women who underwent screening MRI with sufficient follow-up, 76.5% underwent only one examination during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Utilization of screening breast MRI has increased steadily in the past decade to a peak of 0.4% of adult women. However, an estimated 9% of U.S. women are eligible for high-risk breast MRI screening; thus, utilization falls short of optimal compliance. Further studies to evaluate the barriers to screening compliance may help optimize utilization.

12-year review of MRI-detected breast cancers. How often was a diagnosis of malignancy established using targeted ultrasound and standard 14-gauge core biopsy?

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study aimed to determine the percentage of MRI-detected breast cancers diagnosed using targeted ultrasound and standard 14-gauge (14g) biopsy in the setting of an Australian breast MRI service. This is of clinical relevance because malignancies not identifiable on mammography or by ultrasound may then require more invasive, technically demanding and costly MRI-guided interventional procedures, usually by large-core vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) or hook-wire localisation with open surgical biopsy.

METHODS

On review of the 12-year period 2006-2018, we identified 67 new breast cancer events in 64 women where the diagnosis was made on the basis of the MRI scan findings either alone (n = 60) or in combination with a concurrent mammogram (n = 7), with no recorded clinical abnormality. The percentage in which malignancy was confirmed on histopathology using targeted ultrasound in combination with 14g biopsy was determined versus other biopsy methods, for both invasive cancer and in situ disease.

RESULTS

Ultrasound-guided 14g biopsy was successful in establishing the presence of malignancy in 42/46 (91%) of events with a final diagnosis of invasive cancer, with 2 more proven by MRI-guided interventional procedures (1 VAB and 1 hook-wire) and 1 by open surgical biopsy. In the final case, a 5 mm focus on MRI with no sonographic correlate at the initial presentation was only identified and biopsied by ultrasound at 12-month follow-up. For events with a final diagnosis of DCIS/pLCIS (pleomorphic LCIS, n = 2), US-guided 14g biopsy was successful in 10/21 (48%), while 4/7 events with corresponding mammographic microcalcifications were proven by x-ray stereotactic interventions. A further 5 events had MRI-guided interventions (3 VAB and 2 hook-wires) and 1 an open surgical biopsy to confirm malignancy. In the final case (a woman with a 30 × 20 mm focal area of non-mass enhancement with corresponding microcalcifications consistent with DCIS), a pathologic diagnosis was not made until the patient presented 5 years later with invasive disease. There were also 3 instances of upgrades to invasion on final surgical pathology, one from pLCIS to microinvasion and 2 others from DCIS to IDC. Among the DCIS/pLCIS events, semi-random 14g core biopsy (sampling at the expected location of the MRI abnormality without a specific sonographic correlate) proved to be successful in 3 women.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided 14g core biopsy established a malignant diagnosis in 91% of invasive cancers and in 48% of DCIS/pLCIS cases. This relatively non-invasive, technically easy to perform and low-cost biopsy procedure can be used immediately when targeted ultrasound shows a correlate for a suspicious MRI scan finding. Careful imaging-pathologic correlation is required after 14g biopsy, and a discordant result will usually prompt recourse to an MRI-guided VAB or hook-wire localisation.

Disparities between Uptake of Germline BRCA1/2 Gene Tests and Implementation of Post-test Management Strategies in Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

To assess the rate of germline BRCA gene tests in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients and uptake of post-test risk management strategies in BRCA1/2-mutated patients.

METHODS

Institutional databases were searched to identify patients who were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (EOC) between 2009 and 2019 in two academic hospitals. Retrospective review on medical records was performed to collect clinico-pathologic variables, including performance of germline BRCA gene test and its results, as well as conduct of breast cancer screening tests and cascade testing. If annual mammography +/- breast ultrasonography was performed, it was considered that regular breast cancer surveillance was done.

RESULTS

A total of 840 women with EOC were identified during the study period. Of these, 454 patients (54.0%) received BRCA gene testing and 106 patients (106/454, 23.3%) were positive for BRCA1/2 mutations. The rate of BRCA tests has markedly increased from 25.8% in 2009-2012 to 62.7% in 2017-2019. Among the 93 patients with BRCA1/2 mutation without previous personal breast cancer history, 20 patients (21.5%) received annual mammography with or without breast ultrasonography for regular surveillance. Among the 106 BRCA1/2-mutated EOC patients, cascade testing on family members was performed only in 13 patients (12.3%).

CONCLUSION

Although BRCA1/2 gene tests have been substantially expanded, the uptake of post-test risk management strategies, including breast cancer screening for BRCA1/2-mutated patients and cascade testing for family members, has remained low. Strategies to increase its uptake and education about the importance of post-test risk managements are needed.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in the setting of breast cancer diagnosis and their insurance coverage in the United States

BACKGROUND

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is more common in the United States than the rest of the world. However, the benefit of this procedure is still under question in many breast cancer scenarios. CPM utilization in the United States is in part dependent on a patient's health insurance coverage of breast oncology surgery and any desired reconstruction. However, there are great discrepancies in the coverage provided by insurers.

METHODS

The authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of insurance policies for a CPM in the setting of diagnosed breast cancer. One hundred companies were selected based on their state enrollment and market share. Their policies were identified through a Web-based search and telephone interviews, and their medical necessity criteria were extracted.

RESULTS

Of the 100 companies assessed, 36 (36%) had a policy for CPM. Within those, significantly more provided coverage than denied the procedure (72% vs. 25%, p < 0.0001), with the remainder providing case-by-case coverage. Eleven criteria were identified from preauthorized policies, the most common prerequisite was breast cancer diagnosis under 45 years old (n = 9, 35%). Most policies did not differentiate between gender in their policies (n = 25, 69%), but of those that did, 100% (n = 11) provided coverage for men and women, with 82% (n = 9) requiring further criteria from the female patients.

CONCLUSION

The coverage of CPM in the United States varies from complete denial to unrestricted approval. This may be due to conflicting reports in the literature as to the utility of the procedure. The decision to undergo this procedure must be taken with thoughtful consideration and the support of a multidisciplinary approach.

Controversies in Hereditary Cancer Management

Personalized management of patients at risk ideally should involve a multidisciplinary team of not only genetic counselors and surgeons, but also women's health or menopause specialists, knowledgeable psychologists, and primary care providers or obstetrician-gynecologists aware of the risks and fears "previvors" (survivors of a predisposition to cancer who have not had the disease) face as well as the issues that are common postoperatively. Identification of patients at risk for hereditary cancer, understanding of current genetic testing modalities and potential results, knowledge about screening and prevention including timing of surveillance, preventive medication and risk-reducing surgeries, understanding limitations and comorbidities associated with these risk management strategies and long-term psychological support are all important in hereditary cancer management. We describe issues surrounding the identification of the high-risk patient, universal testing in breast and ovarian cancer, and testing in special populations. We describe a simplified approach to understanding and communicating genetic testing results and nuances of testing including direct-to-consumer testing. We highlight concerns surrounding breast cancer screening during pregnancy and lactation. A framework for practical management and counseling of women who opt for risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or risk-reducing mastectomy or both is provided. We provide an in-depth discussion of questions that arise in relation to timing of surgery, fertility preservation, management of menopausal symptoms, and surgical technique. Alternative choices in women who choose to delay bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy are reviewed. Finally, the psychosocial effects of carrying a genetic mutation and the issues that women face when undergoing to risk-reducing surgery including adjustment, sexuality issues, and cosmesis are addressed.

The Distinct Performances of Ultrasound, Mammograms, and MRI in Detecting Breast Cancer in Patients With Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes

A proportion of up to 10% of breast cancer resulted from hereditary germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in cancer predisposition genes (CPGs), which been demonstrated distinct clinical features and imaging manifestations. However, the performance of imaging modalities for breast cancer surveillance in CPG mutation-carriers is still unclear, especially in Asian women. A population of 3002 breast cancer patients who received germline genetic testing of CPGs was enrolled from three hospitals in China. In total, 343 (11.6%) patients were found to harbor GPVs in CPGs, including 137 (4.6%) in BRCA1 and 135 (4.6%) in BRCA2. We compared the performances of ultrasound, mammograms, MRI, and the combining strategies in CPG mutation carriers and non-carriers. As a result, the ultrasound showed a higher detection rate compared with mammograms regardless of the mutation status. However, its detection rate was lower in CPG mutation carriers than in non-carriers (93.2% vs 98.0%, P=2.1×10-4), especially in the BRCA1 mutation carriers (90.9% vs 98.0%, P=2.0×10-4). MRI presented the highest sensitivity (98.5%) and the lowest underestimation rate (14.5%) in CPG mutation carriers among ultrasound, mammograms, and their combination. Supplemental ultrasound or mammograms would add no significant value to MRI for detecting breast cancer (P>0.05). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the family or personal cancer history could not replace the mutation status as the impact factor for the false-negative result and underestimation. In summary, clinicians and radiologists should be aware of the atypical imaging presentation of breast cancer in patients with GPVs in CPGs.

Current update on the molecular genetics and management of hereditary ovarian cancers: a primer for radiologists

More than one-fifth of ovarian cancers are hereditary, with most of them caused by BRCA genes. Malignant ovarian neoplasms are primarily epithelial tumors, a heterogeneous group of tumors with variable genetic backgrounds that translate into different biologic behaviors and morphologic features. Radiologists play an increasingly important role in the diagnosis and management of oncology patients. Familiarity with hereditary ovarian cancers will have a positive impact on patient management and radiologists' involvement in the multidisciplinary approach needed for this delicate patient population. In this paper, we review the basic histologic and genetic backgrounds of ovarian tumors with an emphasis on hereditary ovarian cancers, as well as the effects that these factors have on patient workup, primarily with regard to imaging studies.

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

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

•

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

•

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

•

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

•

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

•

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

Abnormal screens among nonmutation carriers in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program

BACKGROUND

The Ontario Breast Screening Program was expanded in 2011 to offer annual MRI and mammography to women with high-risk genetic mutations (e.g., BRCA1/2) and women with strong family histories and ≥25% estimated lifetime risk of breast cancer. Data to support high-risk screening is less clear in the nonmutation carrier group, as MRI has lower specificity among this population. The potential unintended consequences may be considerable and need to be explored. We aimed to describe the frequency of abnormal screens and biopsies.

METHODS

Demographic surveys and chart review consent were sent to a sample of 441 individuals enrolled in a high-risk screening program at two tertiary care hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Retrospective cross-sectional chart review was undertaken for clinicopathologic data. The frequencies of abnormal screens and biopsies were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-nine nonmutation carriers were included. The majority were white, employed, and highly educated. The median International Breast Cancer Intervention Study lifetime risk of breast cancer was 28.0% (range 24.5%-89.0%). 108 individuals (64%) experienced at least 1 abnormal screen and 13 (8%) had 3 or more over a median 3 years of screening (range 1-6 years). Of 55 biopsies, 3 (5.5%) were malignant. The cancer detection rate was 8.4/1000 screens (95% CI 3.2-22.4).

CONCLUSIONS

An MRI-based screening program for nonmutation carriers was effective at diagnosing breast cancer. However, this population experienced a high rate of abnormal screens and intervention. Further research is needed to improve the performance of MRI-based screening in these women.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer and recommended approaches to genetic testing/counseling and management strategies in individuals with these pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. This manuscript focuses on cancer risk and risk management for BRCA-related breast/ovarian cancer syndrome and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Carriers of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant have an excessive risk for both breast and ovarian cancer that warrants consideration of more intensive screening and preventive strategies. There is also evidence that risks of prostate cancer and pancreatic cancer are elevated in these carriers. Li-Fraumeni syndrome is a highly penetrant cancer syndrome associated with a high lifetime risk for cancer, including soft tissue sarcomas, osteosarcomas, premenopausal breast cancer, colon cancer, gastric cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma, and brain tumors.

Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Audit: Pitfalls, Challenges, and Future Considerations

Breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the most sensitive imaging modality for breast cancer detection and guidelines recommend its use, in addition to screening mammography, for high-risk women. The most recent American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) manual coordinated cross-modality BI-RADS terminology and established an outcome monitoring section that helps guide a medical imaging outcomes audit. This article provides a framework for performing a breast MR imaging audit in clinical practice, incorporating ACR BI-RADS guidance and more recently published data, clarifies common pitfalls, and discusses audit challenges related to evolving clinical practice.

Breast Cancer Mortality among Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation in a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Plus Mammography Screening Program

Simple Summary

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation have up to an 80% lifetime risk of breast cancer unless their breasts are surgically removed, but many decline or defer surgery and choose screening, hoping that if cancer occurs, it will be detected at a curable stage. In this study 489 women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation aged from 25 to 65 years, who had never had breast or ovarian cancer, were screened annually with breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to mammography and were followed for an average of 13 years (range: 9 to 23 years). Ninety-five of the 489 women enrolled in the study had a bilateral preventive mastectomy in the follow-up period. Of the 91 women diagnosed with breast cancer, four died of breast cancer. The most common cause of death was ovarian cancer. For women with BRCA mutations who choose annual screening with MRI and mammography, the probability of dying of breast cancer within 20 years is 2%.

Abstract

Annual breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plus mammography is the standard of care for screening women with inherited BRCA1/2 mutations. However, long-term breast cancer-related mortality with screening is unknown. Between 1997 and June 2011, 489 previously unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers aged 25 to 65 years were screened with annual MRI plus mammography on our study. Thereafter, participants were eligible to continue MRI screening through the high-risk Ontario Breast Screening Program. In 2019, our data were linked to the Ontario Cancer Registry of Cancer Care Ontario to identify all incident cancers, vital status and causes of death. Observed breast cancer mortality was compared to expected mortality for age-matched women in the general population. There were 91 women diagnosed with breast cancer (72 invasive and 19 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)) with median follow-up 7.4 (range: 0.1 to 19.2) years. Four deaths from breast cancer were observed, compared to 2.0 deaths expected (standardized mortality ratio (SMR) 2.0, p = 0.14). For the 489 women in the study, the probability of not dying of breast cancer at 20 years from the date of the first MRI was 98.2%. Annual screening with MRI plus mammography is a reasonable option for women who decline or defer risk-reducing mastectomy.

Embedding a genetic counselor into oncology clinics improves testing rates and timeliness for women with ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Germline genetic testing is crucial to the care of ovarian cancer patients, and as part of the guideline-based care for ovarian cancer patient's adherence to this recommendation has been low. We sought to determine whether embedding a genetic counselor (GC) within a medical and gynecologic oncology clinic would increase testing rates and improve the timeliness of testing.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of 358 ovarian cancer patients seen by medical and gynecologic oncologists between 2013 and 2015. Rates of referrals, completion of counseling, and genetic testing and timeliness of counseling were abstracted before and after a GC was embedded in the clinic in 2014. An additional year of data (2015) was collected to evaluate sustainability of the intervention.

RESULTS

Between 2013 and 2015, 88-92% of women were referred for genetic testing, but in 2013 only 66% completed counseling and 61% were tested. After a GC was embedded in the clinic in 2014, more than 80% of referred women completed counseling and germline genetic testing. Time to genetic counseling also decreased from a median of 107 to 40 days, irrespective of age and cancer family history (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Embedding a GC into the workflow for ovarian cancer patients is an effective way of improving access to genetic counseling, testing rates, and the timeliness of testing.

Supplemental Screening for Patients at Intermediate and High Risk for Breast Cancer

The sensitivity of mammography is more limited in patients with dense breasts and some patients at higher risk for breast cancer. Patients with intermediate or high risk for breast cancer may begin screening earlier and benefit from supplemental screening techniques beyond standard 2-dimensional mammography. A patient's individual risk factors for developing breast cancer, their breast density, and the evidence supporting specific modalities for a given clinical scenario help to determine the need for supplemental screening and the modality chosen. Additional factors include the availability of supplemental screening techniques at an individual institution, cost, insurance coverage, and state-specific breast density legislation.

Applications of Computational Methods in Biomedical Breast Cancer Imaging Diagnostics: A Review

With the exponential increase in new cases coupled with an increased mortality rate, cancer has ranked as the second most prevalent cause of death in the world. Early detection is paramount for suitable diagnosis and effective treatment of different kinds of cancers, but this is limited to the accuracy and sensitivity of available diagnostic imaging methods. Breast cancer is the most widely diagnosed cancer among women across the globe with a high percentage of total cancer deaths requiring an intensive, accurate, and sensitive imaging approach. Indeed, it is treatable when detected at an early stage. Hence, the use of state of the art computational approaches has been proposed as a potential alternative approach for the design and development of novel diagnostic imaging methods for breast cancer. Thus, this review provides a concise overview of past and present conventional diagnostics approaches in breast cancer detection. Further, we gave an account of several computational models (machine learning, deep learning, and robotics), which have been developed and can serve as alternative techniques for breast cancer diagnostics imaging. This review will be helpful to academia, medical practitioners, and others for further study in this area to improve the biomedical breast cancer imaging diagnosis.

Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast: Standardization of Image Acquisition and Interpretation

Diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a rapid, unenhanced imaging technique that measures the motion of water molecules within tissues and provides information regarding the cell density and tissue microstructure. DW MRI has demonstrated the potential to improve the specificity of breast MRI, facilitate the evaluation of tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and can be employed in unenhanced MRI screening. However, standardization of the acquisition and interpretation of DW MRI is challenging. Recently, the European Society of Breast Radiology issued a consensus statement, which described the acquisition parameters and interpretation of DW MRI. The current article describes the basic principles, standardized acquisition protocols and interpretation guidelines, and the clinical applications of DW MRI in breast imaging.

Performance Measures of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Plus Mammography in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program

BACKGROUND

The Ontario Breast Screening Program expanded in July 2011 to screen high-risk women age 30-69 years with annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and digital mammography. This study examined the benefits of screening with mammography and MRI by age and risk criteria.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 8782 women age 30-69 years referred to the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program from July 2011 to June 2015, with final results to December 2016. Cancer detection rates, sensitivity, and specificity of MRI and mammography combined were compared with each modality individually within risk groups stratified by age using generalized estimating equation models. Prognostic features of screen-detected breast cancers were compared by modality using Fisher exact test. All P values are two-sided.

RESULTS

Among 20 053 screening episodes, there were 280 screen-detected breast cancers (cancer detection rate = 14.0 per 1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.4 to 15.7). The sensitivity of mammography was statistically significantly lower than that of MRI plus mammography (40.8%, 95% CI = 29.3% to 53.5% vs 96.0%, 95% CI = 92.2% to 98.0%, P < .001). In mutation carriers age 30-39 years, sensitivity of the combination was comparable with MRI alone (100.0% vs 96.8%, 95% CI = 79.2% to 100.0%, P = .99) but with statistically significantly decreased specificity (78.0%, 95% CI = 74.7% to 80.9% vs 86.2%, 95% CI = 83.5% to 88.5%, P < .001). In women age 50-69 years, combining MRI and mammography statistically significantly increased sensitivity compared with MRI alone (96.3%, 95% CI = 90.6% to 98.6% vs 90.9%, 95% CI = 83.6% to 95.1%, P = .02), with a small but statistically significant decrease in specificity (84.2%, 95% CI = 83.1% to 85.2% vs 90.0%, 95% CI = 89.2% to 90.9%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening high risk women age 30-39 years with annual MRI only may be sufficient for cancer detection and should be evaluated further, particularly for mutation carriers. Among women age 50-69 years, detection is most effective when mammography is included with annual MRI.

Risk for breast cancer and management of unaffected individuals with non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer

About 5%-10% of breast cancer is hereditary with BRCA1 and BRCA2 being the most common genes associated with hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Several additional genes have recently been associated with HBC. These genes can be classified as highly or moderately penetrant genes with lifetime risk >30% or 17%-30%, respectively. Highly penetrant genes associated with HBC include TP53, PTEN, CDH1, STK11, and PALB2. While, moderately penetrant genes include CHEK2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, NBN, NF1, RAD51D, and MSH6. Breast cancer risk and recommendations for screening and risk-reduction vary by gene. In general, screening breast MRI is recommended for women at >20% lifetime risk, which includes women with mutations in highly penetrant genes and the majority (but not all) moderately penetrant genes. Consideration of chemoprevention is recommended for women with mutations in high and moderately penetrant genes. Risk-reducing mastectomy does reduce the risk of breast cancer to the greatest extent and can be considered for women with highly penetrant genes. However, this procedure is associated with significant morbidities that should be considered, especially given the benefit of using screening breast MRI for high-risk women. BSO is only recommended for women with mutations in genes associate with increased risk for ovarian cancer and not as a breast cancer risk-reducing strategy. As more women undergo testing, additional genes may be identified and risk estimates for current genes and management recommendations may be modified.

Contralateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients Who Undergo Multigene Panel Testing

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of breast cancer patients are undergoing expanded genetic testing and are being identified as germline mutation carriers. We sought to determine rates of contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) in patients with various germline mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All women ≥ 18 years of age with unilateral breast cancer who underwent multigene panel testing between January 1, 2014 and August 1, 2019 at our academic institution were identified. Demographic, tumor, and treatment variables were identified from the medical record. Multivariable analyses were performed to compare factors associated with performance of CRRM.

RESULTS

We identified 1613 patients, of whom 28.1% had a pathogenic variant and 40.1% had variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, 420 patients (26.0%) underwent a CRRM. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with CRRM included age < 50 years (OR 3.8, 95% CI 3.0, 5.0), race (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3, 0.7 and OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.7 for Black and Asian women, respectively, versus White women), and the presence of any germline mutation or VUS (OR 13.2, 95% CI 8.7, 20.2 for BRCA1/2; OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.7, 5.8 for non-BRCA germline mutation; and OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3, 2.6 for VUS).

CONCLUSIONS

In breast cancer patients who undergo multigene panel testing, a sizeable number of women with pathogenic non-BRCA germline findings are opting for CRRM. Given that the risk of contralateral breast cancer in women with most pathogenic mutations other than BRCA1/2 remains poorly characterized, these data have implications for risk counseling and for ascertaining the true risks of contralateral breast cancer in this population.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for risk-stratified screening in women with BRCA mutations or high familial risk for breast cancer: are we there yet?

PURPOSE

Women at an elevated lifetime risk for breast cancer (BC), including carriers of pathogenic mutations in BC predisposition genes, are recommended intensified BC screening that includes annual mammography (MG) and annual breast MRI. Controversy exists regarding the clinical utility of MRI as a screening tool in high-risk women. This paper is intended to review recent advances and remaining areas of uncertainty in order to further facilitate the incorporation of breast MRI into an intensified BC screening protocol for women at high familial risk and BRCA carriers.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team of medical oncologists and a radiologist specializing in the treatment of BC and high-risk patients searched PubMed to identify studies deemed to have the highest scientific value. Since none of the initial MRI studies were randomized, meta-analyses examining breast MRI screening in high-risk women were prioritized for inclusion.

RESULTS

Breast MRI performs well in high-risk women, including mutation carriers. Breast MRI screening allows for the detection of early stage, likely curable invasive BC. It is mandatory that radiologists receive appropriate MRI training to reduce false positives and unnecessary biopsies. MRI screening is cost-effective in the highest risk patients and new clinical trials are open examining abbreviated and ultra-fast MRI techniques as a tool to drive down costs and improve specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

As breast MRI is recommended as part of an intensified screening program in addition to mammography for high-risk women, it important that health care providers understand the benefits and limitations of this screening modality for high-risk women, as well as areas for further investigation.

Management of Hereditary Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline

PURPOSE

To develop recommendations for management of patients with breast cancer (BC) with germline mutations in BC susceptibility genes.

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight articles met eligibility criteria and formed the evidentiary basis for the local therapy recommendations; six randomized controlled trials of systemic therapy met eligibility criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients with newly diagnosed BC and BRCA1/2 mutations may be considered for breast-conserving therapy (BCT), with local control of the index cancer similar to that of noncarriers. The significant risk of a contralateral BC (CBC), especially in young women, and the higher risk of new cancers in the ipsilateral breast warrant discussion of bilateral mastectomy. Patients with mutations in moderate-risk genes should be offered BCT. For women with mutations in BRCA1/2 or moderate-penetrance genes who are eligible for mastectomy, nipple-sparing mastectomy is a reasonable approach. There is no evidence of increased toxicity or CBC events from radiation exposure in BRCA1/2 carriers. Radiation therapy should not be withheld in ATM carriers. For patients with germline TP53 mutations, mastectomy is advised; radiation therapy is contraindicated except in those with significant risk of locoregional recurrence. Platinum agents are recommended versus taxanes to treat advanced BC in BRCA carriers. In the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting, data do not support the routine addition of platinum to anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib and talazoparib) are preferable to nonplatinum single-agent chemotherapy for treatment of advanced BC in BRCA1/2 carriers. Data are insufficient to recommend PARP inhibitor use in the early setting or in moderate-penetrance carriers. Additional information available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Screening in patients with increased risk of breast cancer (part 2). Where are we now? Actual MRI screening controversies

For women with a high risk of breast cancer, early detection plays an important role. Due to the high incidence of breast cancer, and at a younger age than in the general population, screening begins earlier, and there is considerable evidence that magnetic resonance is the most sensitive diagnostic tool, and the principal American and European guidelines agree on the recommendation to perform annual magnetic resonance (with supplemental annual mammography) as an optimal mode of screening. In addition to the absence of current consensus on which patients should be included in the recommendation for magnetic resonance screening (widely discussed in the introduction of part 1 of this work), there are other aspects that are different between guidelines, that are not specified, or that are susceptible to change based on the evidence of several years of experience, that we have called «controversies», such as the age to begin screening, the possible advisability of using a different strategy in different subgroups, performing alternate versus synchronous magnetic resonance and mammography, the age at which to terminate the two techniques, or how to follow up after risk reduction surgery.The aim of the second part of the paper is, by reviewing the literature, to provide an update in relation to some of the main «controversies» in high risk screening with magnetic resonance. And finally, based on all this, to propose a possible model of optimal and updated screening protocol.

Breast Cancer Screening Practices for High-Risk Women: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Primary Care Providers

Background: Little literature exists on primary care providers' knowledge and preferences toward breast cancer screening for high-risk women. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey of primary care providers in Minnesota was conducted in 2016. The primary aim was to determine the breast cancer screening practices of primary care providers for women at high risk for breast cancer. A multipart questionnaire focused on breast cancer screening practices for high-risk women and perceived risks/benefits of breast cancer screening was administered. Statistical analyses, included descriptive statistics and tests of differences in screening practices and knowledge across key professional characteristics, were conducted. Results: Eight hundred five primary care providers completed the survey (7.7% response). Participants were predominantly female (72.2%); 43.9% were physicians, 11.4% physician assistants, and 44.8% advanced practice registered nurses. One-quarter of providers recommended mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for high-risk women ages 40-49 years. There were no differences in breast MRI recommendations based on years of experience or practice setting. In high-risk women with prior chest radiation and an increased risk of breast cancer, for whom guidelines recommend mammography and MRI, 75.0% of providers recommended mammography, but only 44.3% recommended breast MRI. Recent continuing education on breast cancer screening was associated with providers being more comfortable giving high-risk screening recommendations (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Most primary care providers believe mammography is helpful in women at high risk for breast cancer. Less than half of practitioners, however, recommend breast MRI to screen women at high risk for breast cancer, despite guidelines promoting the use of breast MRI. Increased provider education is warranted.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

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

Conclusions

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

Screening in patients with increased risk of breast cancer (part 1): pros and cons of MRI screening

Screening plays an important role in women with a high risk of breast cancer. Given this population's high incidence of breast cancer and younger age of onset compared to the general population, it is recommended that screening starts earlier. There is ample evidence that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive diagnostic tool, and American and the European guidelines both recommend annual MRI screening (with supplementary annual mammography) as the optimum screening modality. Nevertheless, the current guidelines do not totally agree about the recommendations for MRI screening in some subgroups of patients. The first part of this article on screening in women with increased risk of breast cancer reviews the literature to explain and evaluate the advantages of MRI screening compared to screening with mammography alone: increased detection of smaller cancers with less associated lymph node involvement and a reduction in the rate of interval cancers, which can have an impact on survival and mortality (with comparable effects to other preventative measures). At the same time, however, we would like to reflect on the drawbacks of MRI screening that affect its applicability.

SEOM clinical guideline for secondary prevention (2019)

Cancer is one of the major public health problems in our society. It is estimated that more than 18 million new cases are diagnosed worldwide every year; 280,000 in Spain. Incidence in following a growing trend. This epidemic could be controlled with research into new treatments and, above all, with adequate prevention. Primary prevention could prevent avoid up to half of all cases. For many others, secondary prevention is essential, as it make diagnosis possible in the stages of the disease when it is easily curable. These guidelines present the scientific evidence regarding secondary prevention in tumors in which its use is well-accepted: breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, lung, ovarian, melanoma, and gastric cancer.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer

Importance

Moving to multigene testing for all women with breast cancer (BC) could identify many more mutation carriers who can benefit from precision prevention. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach remains unaddressed.

Objective

To estimate incremental lifetime effects, costs, and cost-effectiveness of multigene testing of all patients with BC compared with the current practice of genetic testing (BRCA) based on family history (FH) or clinical criteria.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cost-effectiveness microsimulation modeling study compared lifetime costs and effects of high-risk BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (multigene) testing of all unselected patients with BC (strategy A) with BRCA1/BRCA2 testing based on FH or clinical criteria (strategy B) in United Kingdom (UK) and US populations. Data were obtained from 11 836 patients in population-based BC cohorts (regardless of FH) recruited to 4 large research studies. Data were collected and analyzed from January 1, 2018, through June 8, 2019. The time horizon is lifetime. Payer and societal perspectives are presented. Probabilistic and 1-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty.

Interventions

In strategy A, all women with BC underwent BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 testing. In strategy B, only women with BC fulfilling FH or clinical criteria underwent BRCA testing. Affected BRCA/PALB2 carriers could undertake contralateral preventive mastectomy; BRCA carriers could choose risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Relatives of mutation carriers underwent cascade testing. Unaffected relative carriers could undergo magnetic resonance imaging or mammography screening, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy for BC risk and RRSO for ovarian cancer (OC) risk.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and compared with standard £30 000/QALY and $100 000/QALY UK and US thresholds, respectively. Incidence of OC, BC, excess deaths due to heart disease, and the overall population effects were estimated.

Results

BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 multigene testing for all patients detected with BC annually would cost £10 464/QALY (payer perspective) or £7216/QALY (societal perspective) in the United Kingdom or $65 661/QALY (payer perspective) or $61 618/QALY (societal perspective) in the United States compared with current BRCA testing based on clinical criteria or FH. This is well below UK and US cost-effectiveness thresholds. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, unselected multigene testing remained cost-effective for 98% to 99% of UK and 64% to 68% of US health system simulations. One year's unselected multigene testing could prevent 2101 cases of BC and OC and 633 deaths in the United Kingdom and 9733 cases of BC and OC and 2406 deaths in the United States. Correspondingly, 8 excess deaths due to heart disease occurred in the United Kingdom and 35 in the United States annually.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found unselected, high-risk multigene testing for all patients with BC to be extremely cost-effective compared with testing based on FH or clinical criteria for UK and US health systems. These findings support changing current policy to expand genetic testing to all women with BC.

Association of Retrospective Peer Review and Positive Predictive Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Needle Biopsies of Breast

Objective

To evaluate the association between retrospective peer review of breast magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsies and positive predictive value of subsequent magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies.

Materials and Methods

In January, 2015, a weekly conference was initiated in our institution to evaluate all breast magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsies performed over January 1, 2014-December 31, 2015. During this weekly conferences, breast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging findings of 6 anonymized cases were discussed and then the faculty voted on whether they agree with the biopsy indication, accurate sampling and radiology-pathology correlation. We retrospectively reviewed and compared the magnetic resonance imaging indication, benign or malignant pathology rates, lesion types and the positive predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsy in the years before and after initiating this group peer review.

Results

The number of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsies before and after initiating the review were 1447 vs 1596 (p=0.0002), and 253 (17.5%) vs 203 (12.7%) (p=0.04), respectively. There was a significant decrease in the number of benign biopsies in 2015 (n=104) compared to 2014 (n=154, p=0.04). The positive predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy significantly increased after group review was implemented (Positive predictive value in 2014=%39.1 and positive predictive value in 2015=%48.8) (p=0.03), although the indications (p=0.49), history of breast cancer (p=0.14), biopsied magnetic resonance imaging lesion types (p=0.53) were not different. Less surgical excision was performed on magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsy identified high-risk lesions in 2015 (p=0.25).

Conclusion

Our study showed an association between retrospective peer review of past biopsies and increased positive predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsies in our institution.