Setting the Threshold for Surgical Prevention in Women at Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer

Infrastructural and public health awareness gaps for the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer: A literature review

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the sixth most common cancer in women. This literature review and thematic analysis presents gaps in Health Literacy including public knowledge on symptoms, risk, and screening for OC. We have identified a strong variation in national and international Healthcare Infrastructure, and access to specialized care, and treatment guidelines; all inequalities that have a direct impact on patient prognosis and survival. Promoting health behaviors such as self-efficacy, signposting, and regular surveying have the potential to improve health literacy and patient outcomes. Furthermore, increased funding, access to high-volume centers, and homogenization of treatment guidelines may reduce inequalities and improve prognosis.

Risk-reducing surgery for individuals with cancer-predisposing germline pathogenic variants and no personal cancer history: a review of current UK guidelines

Identifying healthy carriers of germline pathogenic variants in high penetrance cancer susceptibility genes offers the potential for risk-reducing surgery. The NHS England National Genomic Test Directory offers germline and somatic testing to patients with certain cancers or rare and inherited diseases, or, in some cases, to their relatives. This review summarises current UK guidelines for risk-reducing surgical interventions available for individuals with no personal history of cancer, who are determined to carry germline pathogenic variants. An electronic literature search of NICE guidelines and PubMed citable articles was performed. NICE guidelines are available for bilateral mastectomy and are currently in development for risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Guidelines developed with affiliation to, or through relevant British Surgical Societies or international consensus, are available for risk-reducing hysterectomy, polypectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy. There is a disparity in the development and distribution of national guidelines for interventions amongst tumour types. Whilst we are focusing on UK guidelines, we anticipate they will be relevant much more generally and so of interest to a wider audience including where there are no national guidelines to refer to. We suggest that, as genetic testing becomes rapidly more accessible, guideline development for interventions should be more closely aligned to those for testing.

UK consensus recommendations for clinical management of cancer risk for women with germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes: RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 and PALB2

Germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C are identified in approximately 15% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC). While there are clear guidelines around clinical management of cancer risk in patients with GPV in BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6, there are few guidelines on how to manage the more moderate OC risk in patients with GPV in BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C, with clinical questions about appropriateness and timing of risk-reducing gynaecological surgery. Furthermore, while recognition of RAD51C and RAD51D as OC predisposition genes has been established for several years, an association with breast cancer (BC) has only more recently been described and clinical management of this risk has been unclear. With expansion of genetic testing of these genes to all patients with non-mucinous OC, new data on BC risk and improved estimates of OC risk, the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project convened a 2-day meeting to reach a national consensus on clinical management of BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C carriers in clinical practice. In this paper, we present a summary of the processes used to reach and agree on a consensus, as well as the key recommendations from the meeting.

Precise, Genotype-First Breast Cancer Prevention: Experience With Transferring Monogenic Findings From a Population Biobank to the Clinical Setting

Although hereditary breast cancer screening and management are well accepted and established in clinical settings, these efforts result in the detection of only a fraction of genetic predisposition at the population level. Here, we describe our experience from a national pilot study (2018–2021) in which 180 female participants of Estonian biobank (of >150,000 participants in total) were re-contacted to discuss personalized clinical prevention measures based on their genetic predisposition defined by 11 breast cancer–related genes. Our results show that genetic risk variants are relatively common in the average-risk Estonian population. Seventy-five percent of breast cancer cases in at-risk subjects occurred before the age of 50 years. Only one-third of subjects would have been eligible for clinical screening according to the current criteria. The participants perceived the receipt of genetic risk information as valuable. Fluent cooperation of project teams supported by state-of-art data management, quality control, and secure transfer can enable the integration of research results to everyday medical practice in a highly efficient, timely, and well-accepted manner. The positive experience in this genotype-first breast cancer study confirms the value of using existing basic genomic data from population biobanks for precise prevention.

Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and the Use of Hormone Replacement Therapy Below the Age of Natural Menopause: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66 October 2021: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66

This paper deals with the use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after the removal of fallopian tubes and ovaries to prevent ovarian cancer in premenopausal high risk women. Some women have an alteration in their genetic code, which makes them more likely to develop ovarian cancer. Two well-known genes which can carry an alteration are the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Examples of other genes associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer include RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 and Lynch syndrome genes. Women with a strong family history of ovarian cancer and/or breast cancer, may also be at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women at increased risk can choose to have an operation to remove the fallopian tubes and ovaries, which is the most effective way to prevent ovarian cancer. This is done after a woman has completed her family. However, removal of ovaries causes early menopause and leads to hot flushes, sweats, mood changes and bone thinning. It can also cause memory problems and increases the risk of heart disease. It may reduce libido or impair sexual function. Guidance on how to care for women following preventative surgery who are experiencing early menopause is needed. HRT is usually advisable for women up to 51 years of age (average age of menopause for women in the UK) who are undergoing early menopause and have not had breast cancer, to minimise the health risks linked to early menopause. For women with a womb, HRT should include estrogen coupled with progestogen to protect against thickening of the lining of the womb (called endometrial hyperplasia). For women without a womb, only estrogen is given. Research suggests that, unlike in older women, HRT for women in early menopause does not increase breast cancer risk, including in those who are BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and have preventative surgery. For women with a history of receptor-negative breast cancer, the gynaecologist will liaise with an oncology doctor on a case-by-case basis to help to decide if HRT is safe to use. Women with a history of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are not normally offered HRT. A range of other therapies can be used if a woman is unable to take HRT. These include behavioural therapy and non-hormonal medicines. However, these are less effective than HRT. Regular exercise, healthy lifestyle and avoiding symptom triggers are also advised. Whether to undergo surgery to reduce risk or not and its timing can be a complex decision-making process. Women need to be carefully counselled on the pros and cons of both preventative surgery and HRT use so they can make informed decisions and choices.

Preventive population genomics: The model of BRCA related cancers

Preventive population genomics offers the prospect of population stratification for targeting screening and prevention and tailoring care to those at greatest risk. Within cancer, this approach is now within reach, given our expanding knowledge of its heritable components, improved ability to predict risk, and increasing availability of effective preventive strategies. Advances in technology and bioinformatics has made population-testing technically feasible. The BRCA model provides 30 years of insight and experience of how to conceive of and construct care and serves as an initial model for preventive population genomics. Population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population is feasible, acceptable, reduces anxiety, does not detrimentally affect psychological well-being or quality of life, is cost-effective and is now beginning to be implemented. Population-based BRCA-testing and multigene panel testing in the wider general population is cost-effective for numerous health systems and can save thousands more lives than the current clinical strategy. There is huge potential for using both genetic and non-genetic information in complex risk prediction algorithms to stratify populations for risk adapted screening and prevention. While numerous strides have been made in the last decade several issues need resolving for population genomics to fulfil its promise and potential for maximizing precision prevention. Healthcare systems need to overcome significant challenges associated with developing delivery pathways, infrastructure expansion including laboratory services, clinical workforce training, scaling of management pathways for screening and prevention. Large-scale real world population studies are needed to evaluate context specific population-testing implementation models for cancer risk prediction, screening and prevention.

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.

Women's Intentions to Engage in Risk-Reducing Behaviours after Receiving Personal Ovarian Cancer Risk Information: An Experimental Survey Study

Simple Summary

Risk stratification using genetic testing to identify women at increased risk of ovarian cancer may increase the number of patients to whom risk-reducing surgery (e.g., salpingo-oophorectomy) may be offered. However, little is known about public acceptability of such approaches. Our online experimental survey aimed to explore whether women aged 45–75 in the general population are willing to undergo ovarian cancer risk assessment, including genetic testing, and whether women’s potential acceptance of risk-reducing surgery differs depending on their estimated risk. We looked at whether psychological and cognitive factors mediated women’s decision-making. The majority of participants would be interested in having genetic testing. In response to our hypothetical scenarios, a substantial proportion of participants were open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased from 2% to 5 or 10%.

Abstract

Risk stratification using genetic and/or other types of information could identify women at increased ovarian cancer risk. The aim of this study was to examine women’s potential reactions to ovarian cancer risk stratification. A total of 1017 women aged 45–75 years took part in an online experimental survey. Women were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions describing hypothetical personal results from ovarian cancer risk stratification, and asked to imagine they had received one of three results: (a) 5% lifetime risk due to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and lifestyle factors; (b) 10% lifetime risk due to SNPs and lifestyle factors; (c) 10% lifetime risk due to a single rare mutation in a gene. Results: 83% of women indicated interest in having ovarian cancer risk assessment. After receiving their hypothetical risk estimates, 29% of women stated they would have risk-reducing surgery. Choosing risk-reducing surgery over other behavioural responses was associated with having higher surgery self-efficacy and perceived response-efficacy, but not with perceptions of disease threat, i.e., perceived risk or severity, or with experimental condition. A substantial proportion of women age 45–75 years may be open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased to as little as 5 or 10%.

Rare Germline Genetic Variants and the Risks of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

A family history of ovarian or breast cancer is the strongest risk factor for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Germline deleterious variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer EOC risks by age 80, of 44% and 17% respectively. The mismatch repair genes, particularly MSH2 and MSH6, are also EOC susceptibility genes. Several other DNA repair genes, BRIP1, RAD51C, RAD51D, and PALB2, have been identified as moderate risk EOC genes. EOC has five main histotypes; high-grade serous (HGS), low-grade serous (LGS), clear cell (CCC), endometrioid (END), and mucinous (MUC). This review examines the current understanding of the contribution of rare genetic variants to EOC, focussing on providing frequency data for each histotype. We provide an overview of frequency and risk for pathogenic variants in the known susceptibility genes as well as other proposed genes. We also describe the progress to-date to understand the role of missense variants and the different breast and ovarian cancer risks for each gene. Identification of susceptibility genes have clinical impact by reducing disease-associated mortality through improving risk prediction, with the possibility of prevention strategies, and developing new targeted treatments and these clinical implications are also discussed.

Population-based genetic testing for Women's cancer prevention

Germline mutations in cancer-susceptibility-genes (CSG) can dramatically increase womens' lifetime risk of ovarian, endometrial, breast and bowel cancers. Identification of unaffected carriers is important to enable proactive engagement with highly effective screening and preventive options to minimise cancer risk. Currently, a family-history model is used to identify individuals with CSGs. Complex regional referral guidelines specify the family-history criteria required before an individual is eligible for genetic-testing. This model is ineffective, resource intense, misses >50% CSG carriers, is associated with underutilisation of genetic-testing services and delays detection of mutation carriers. Although awareness and detection of CSG-carriers has improved, over 97% carriers remain unidentified. This reflects significant missed opportunities for precision-prevention. Population-based genetic-testing (PBGT) represents a novel healthcare strategy with the potential to dramatically improve detection of unaffected CSG-carriers along with enabling population risk-stratification for cancer precision-prevention. Several research studies have assessed the impact, feasibility, acceptability, long-term psychological outcomes and cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA-testing in the Ashkenazi-Jewish population. Initial data on PBGT in the general-population is beginning to emerge and large implementation studies investigating PBGT in the general-population are needed. This review will summarise the current research into the clinical, psycho-social, health-economic, societal and ethical consequences of a PBGT model for women's cancer precision-prevention.

PLAG1 silencing promotes cell chemosensitivity in ovarian cancer via the IGF2 signaling pathway

Ovarian cancer (OC) is one of the most lethal gynecological diseases. Novel prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets for OC are urgently required. The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanisms that govern how pleomorphic adenoma gene 1 (PLAG1) influences the biological processes and chemosensitivity of OC cells via the insulin‑like growth factor‑2 (IGF2) signaling pathway. Differentially expressed genes in OC were selected based on bioinformatics data. OC and adjacent tissue specimen were collected, followed by the determination of the expression of PLAG1 and IGF2 signaling pathway‑associated genes. The regulatory mechanisms of PLAG1 in OC cells were analyzed following treatment with pcDNA or small interfering RNA (siRNA), and included the assessment of cell proliferation, migration, invasion and cisplatin resistance. PLAG1 was identified as an upregulated gene in OC. OC tissues exhibited increased expression of PLAG1 and IGF2 compared with the controls. Moreover, PLAG1 was observed to positively regulate the IGF2 signaling pathway. The siRNA‑mediated silencing of PLAG1 resulted in decreased expression of IGF2, IGF1 receptor and insulin receptor substrate 1, as well as inhibited proliferation, migration, invasion and cisplatin resistance of OC cells. Furthermore, the effect of PLAG1 was dependent on IGF2. PLAG1 may therefore be considered as a possible target for the treatment of OC.

Primary immunoprevention of adult onset cancers by vaccinating against retired tissue-specific self-proteins

Despite the enormous success of childhood prophylactic vaccination against diseases caused by pathogens, there is currently no similar preventive vaccine program against diseases confronted with age like breast cancer and ovarian cancer. With the exception of the annual influenza vaccine, current recommendations for adult vaccination are for either primary vaccines not received during childhood or for booster vaccinations to maintain the immunity against pathogens already induced during childhood. Here we describe a strategy to provide prophylactic pre-emptive immunity against the development of adult onset cancers not associated with any definitive etiopathogenic agent. We propose that safe and effective pre-emptive immunity may be induced in cancer-free subjects by vaccination against immunodominant tissue-specific self-proteins that are 'retired' from expression in normal tissues as part of the normal aging process but are expressed in tumors that emerge with age. Primary immunoprevention of adult onset cancers like breast cancer and ovarian cancer represents a great challenge and an even greater unmet need for our current healthcare.

Risk of ovarian cancer in women treated with ovarian stimulating drugs for infertility

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Library in 2013 (Issue 8) on the risk of ovarian cancer in women using infertility drugs when compared to the general population or to infertile women not treated. The link between fertility drugs and ovarian cancer remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risk of invasive ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumours in women treated with ovarian stimulating drugs for subfertility.

SEARCH METHODS

The original review included published and unpublished observational studies from 1990 to February 2013. For this update, we extended the searches from February 2013 to November 2018; we evaluated the quality of the included studies and judged the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. We have reported the results in a Summary of findings table to present effect sizes across all outcome types.

SELECTION CRITERIA

In the original review and in this update, we searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies and case series including more than 30 participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently conducted eligibility and 'Risk of bias' assessments and extracted data. We grouped studies based on the fertility drug used for two outcomes: borderline ovarian tumours and invasive ovarian cancer. We conducted no meta-analyses due to expected methodological and clinical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 case-control and 24 cohort studies (an additional nine new cohort and two case-control studies), which included a total of 4,684,724 women.Two cohort studies reported an increased incidence of invasive ovarian cancer in exposed subfertile women compared with unexposed women. One reported a standardised incidence ratio (SIR) of 1.19 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 2.25) based on 17 cancer cases. The other cohort study reported a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.93 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.18), and this risk was increased in women remaining nulligravid after using clomiphene citrate (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.30 to 4.78) versus multiparous women (HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.42) (very low-certainty evidence). The slight increase in ovarian cancer risk among women having between one and three cycles of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) was reported, but this was not clinically significant (P = 0.18). There was no increase in risk of invasive ovarian cancer after use of infertility drugs in women with the BRCA mutation according to one cohort and one case-control study. The certainty of evidence as assessed using GRADE was very low.For borderline ovarian tumours, one cohort study reported increased risk in exposed women with an SIR of 3.61 (95% CI 1.45 to 7.44), and this risk was greater after treatment with clomiphene citrate (SIR 7.47, 95% CI 1.54 to 21.83) based on 12 cases. In another cohort study, the risk of a borderline ovarian tumour was increased, with an HR of 4.23 (95% CI 1.25 to 14.33), for subfertile women treated with IVF compared with a non-IVF-treated group with more than one year of follow-up. A large cohort reported increased risk of borderline ovarian tumours, with HR of 2.46 (95% CI 1.20 to 5.04), and this was based on 17 cases. A significant increase in serous borderline ovarian tumours was reported in one cohort study after the use of progesterone for more than four cycles (risk ratio (RR) 2.63, 95% CI 1.04 to 6.64). A case-control study reported increased risk after clomiphene citrate was taken, with an SIR of 2.5 (95% CI 1.3 to 4.5) based on 11 cases, and another reported an increase especially after human menopausal gonadotrophin was taken (odds ratio (OR) 9.38, 95% CI 1.66 to 52.08). Another study estimated an increased risk of borderline ovarian tumour, but this estimation was based on four cases with no control reporting use of fertility drugs. The certainty of evidence as assessed using GRADE was very low.However, although some studies suggested a slight increase in risks of ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumour, none provided moderate- or high-certainty evidence, as summarised in the GRADE tables.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, only a few new relevant studies have provided additional findings with supporting evidence to suggest that infertility drugs may increase the risk of ovarian cancer slightly in subfertile women treated with infertility drugs when compared to the general population or to subfertile women not treated. The risk is slightly higher in nulliparous than in multiparous women treated with infertility drugs, and for borderline ovarian tumours. However, few studies have been conducted, the number of cancers is very small, and information on the dose or type of fertility drugs used is insufficient.

Population Based Testing for Primary Prevention: A Systematic Review

The current clinical model for genetic testing is based on clinical-criteria/family-history (FH) and a pre-defined mutation probability threshold. It requires people to develop cancer before identifying unaffected individuals in the family to target prevention. This process is inefficient, resource intensive and misses >50% of individuals or mutation carriers at risk. Population genetic-testing can overcome these limitations. It is technically feasible to test populations on a large scale; genetic-testing costs are falling and acceptability and awareness are rising. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pubmed, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases were searched using free-text and MeSH terms; retrieved reference lists of publications were screened; additionally, web-based platforms, Google, and clinical-trial registries were searched. Quality of studies was evaluated using appropriate check-lists. A number of studies have evaluated population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. This has been found to be acceptable, feasible, clinically-effective, safe, associated with high satisfaction rates and extremely cost-effective. Data support change in guidelines for population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. Population panel testing for BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 gene mutations is the most cost-effective genetic-testing strategy in general-population women and can prevent thousands more breast and ovarian cancers than current clinical-criteria based approaches. A few ongoing studies are evaluating population-based genetic-testing for multiple cancer susceptibility genes in the general population but more implementation studies are needed. A future population-testing programme could also target other chronic diseases.