Opinions of women with high inherited breast cancer risk about prophylactic mastectomy: an initial evaluation from a screening trial including magnetic resonance imaging and ductal lavage

The Psychological, Physiological, and Behavioral Responses of Patients to Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

MRI is generally well-tolerated although it may induce physiological stress responses and anxiety in patients.

PURPOSE

Investigate the psychological, physiological, and behavioral responses of patients to MRI, their evolution over time, and influencing factors.

STUDY TYPE

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

POPULATION

181,371 adult patients from 44 studies undergoing clinical MRI.

ASSESSMENT

Pubmed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Scopus were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Quality appraisal was conducted with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Meta-analysis was conducted via Meta-Essentials workbooks when five studies were available for an outcome. Psychological and behavioral outcomes could be analyzed. Psychological outcomes were anxiety (State-Trait-Anxiety Inventory, STAI-S; 37) and willingness to undergo MRI again. Behavioral outcomes included unexpected behaviors: No shows, sedation, failed scans, and motion artifacts. Year of publication, sex, age, and positioning were examined as moderators.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Meta-analysis, Hedge's g. A P value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

RESULTS

Of 12,755 initial studies, 104 studies were included in methodological review and 44 (181,371 patients) in meta-analysis. Anxiety did not significantly reduce from pre- to post-MRI (Hedge's g = -0.20, P = 0.051). Pooled values of STAI-S (37) were 44.93 (pre-MRI) and 40.36 (post-MRI). Of all patients, 3.9% reported unwillingness to undergo MRI again. Pooled prevalence of unexpected patient behavior was 11.4%; rates for singular behaviors were: Failed scans, 2.1%; no-shows, 11.5%; sedation, 3.3%; motion artifacts, 12.2%. Year of publication was not a significant moderator (all P > 0.169); that is, the patients' response was not improved in recent vs. older studies. Meta-analysis of physiological responses was not feasible since preconditions were not met for any outcome.

DATA CONCLUSION

Advancements of MRI technology alone may not be sufficient to eliminate anxiety in patients undergoing MRI and related unexpected behaviors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

Risk-reducing mastectomy for the prevention of primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent progress in understanding the genetic basis of breast cancer and widely publicized reports of celebrities undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) have increased interest in RRM as a method of preventing breast cancer. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2006 and 2010.

OBJECTIVES

(i) To determine whether risk-reducing mastectomy reduces death rates from any cause in women who have never had breast cancer and in women who have a history of breast cancer in one breast, and (ii) to examine the effect of risk-reducing mastectomy on other endpoints, including breast cancer incidence, breast cancer mortality, disease-free survival, physical morbidity, and psychosocial outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this Review update, we searched Cochrane Breast Cancer's Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 9 July 2016. We included studies in English.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Participants included women at risk for breast cancer in at least one breast. Interventions included all types of mastectomy performed for the purpose of preventing breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently abstracted data from each report. We summarized data descriptively; quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible due to heterogeneity of study designs and insufficient reporting. We analyzed data separately for bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM). Four review authors assessed the methodological quality to determine whether or not the methods used sufficiently minimized selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, and attrition bias.

MAIN RESULTS

All 61 included studies were observational studies with some methodological limitations; randomized trials were absent. The studies presented data on 15,077 women with a wide range of risk factors for breast cancer, who underwent RRM.Twenty-one BRRM studies looking at the incidence of breast cancer or disease-specific mortality, or both, reported reductions after BRRM, particularly for those women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Twenty-six CRRM studies consistently reported reductions in incidence of contralateral breast cancer but were inconsistent about improvements in disease-specific survival. Seven studies attempted to control for multiple differences between intervention groups and showed no overall survival advantage for CRRM. Another study showed significantly improved survival following CRRM, but after adjusting for bilateral risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (BRRSO), the CRRM effect on all-cause mortality was no longer significant.Twenty studies assessed psychosocial measures; most reported high levels of satisfaction with the decision to have RRM but greater variation in satisfaction with cosmetic results. Worry over breast cancer was significantly reduced after BRRM when compared both to baseline worry levels and to the groups who opted for surveillance rather than BRRM, but there was diminished satisfaction with body image and sexual feelings.Seventeen case series reporting on adverse events from RRM with or without reconstruction reported rates of unanticipated reoperations from 4% in those without reconstruction to 64% in participants with reconstruction.In women who have had cancer in one breast, removing the other breast may reduce the incidence of cancer in that other breast, but there is insufficient evidence that this improves survival because of the continuing risk of recurrence or metastases from the original cancer. Additionally, thought should be given to other options to reduce breast cancer risk, such as BRRSO and chemoprevention, when considering RRM.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While published observational studies demonstrated that BRRM was effective in reducing both the incidence of, and death from, breast cancer, more rigorous prospective studies are suggested. BRRM should be considered only among those at high risk of disease, for example, BRCA1/2 carriers. CRRM was shown to reduce the incidence of contralateral breast cancer, but there is insufficient evidence that CRRM improves survival, and studies that control for multiple confounding variables are recommended. It is possible that selection bias in terms of healthier, younger women being recommended for or choosing CRRM produces better overall survival numbers for CRRM. Given the number of women who may be over-treated with BRRM/CRRM, it is critical that women and clinicians understand the true risk for each individual woman before considering surgery. Additionally, thought should be given to other options to reduce breast cancer risk, such as BRRSO and chemoprevention when considering RRM.

Imaging surveillance programs for women at high breast cancer risk in Europe: Are women from ethnic minority groups adequately included? (Review)

Women from ethnic minority groups, including immigrants and refugees are reported to have low breast cancer (BC) screening rates. Active, culturally-sensitive outreach is vital for increasing participation of these women in BC screening programs. Women at high BC risk and who belong to an ethnic minority group are of special concern. Such women could benefit from ongoing trials aimed at optimizing screening strategies for early BC detection among those at increased BC risk. Considering the marked disparities in BC survival in Europe and its enormous and dynamic ethnic diversity, these issues are extremely timely for Europe. We systematically reviewed the literature concerning European surveillance studies that had imaging in the protocol and that targeted women at high BC risk. The aim of the present review was thereby to assess the likelihood that women at high BC risk from minority ethnic groups were adequately included in these surveillance programs. Twenty-seven research groups in Europe reported on their imaging surveillance programs for women at increased BC risk. The benefit of strategies such as inclusion of magnetic resonance imaging and/or more intensive screening was clearly documented for the participating women at increased BC risk. However, none of the reports indicated that sufficient outreach was performed to ensure that women at increased BC risk from minority ethnic groups were adequately included in these surveillance programs. On the basis of this systematic review, we conclude that the specific screening needs of ethnic minority women at increased BC risk have not yet been met in Europe. Active, culturally-sensitive outreach is needed to identify minority women at increased BC risk and to facilitate their inclusion in on-going surveillance programs. It is anticipated that these efforts would be most effective if coordinated with the development of European-wide, population-based approaches to BC screening.

Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent progress in understanding the genetic basis of breast cancer has increased interest in prophylactic mastectomy (PM) as a method of preventing breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES

(i) To determine whether prophylactic mastectomy reduces death rates from any cause in women who have never had breast cancer and in women who have a history of breast cancer in one breast, and (ii) to examine the effect of prophylactic mastectomy on other endpoints, including breast cancer incidence, breast cancer mortality, disease-free survival, physical morbidity, and psychosocial outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2002), MEDLINE and Cancerlit (1966 to June 2006), EMBASE (1974 to June 2006), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) search portal (until June 2006). Studies in English were included.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Participants included women at risk for breast cancer in at least one breast. Interventions included all types of mastectomy performed for the purpose of preventing breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two authors independently abstracted data. Data were summarized descriptively; quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible due to heterogeneity of study designs and insufficient reporting. Data were analyzed separately for bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).

MAIN RESULTS

All 39 included studies were observational studies with some methodological limitations; randomized trials were absent. The studies presented data on 7,384 women with a wide range of risk factors for breast cancer who underwent PM.BPM studies on the incidence of breast cancer and/or disease-specific mortality reported reductions after BPM particularly for those with BRCA1/2 mutations. For CPM, studies consistently reported reductions in incidence of contralateral breast cancer but were inconsistent about improvements in disease-specific survival. Only one study attempted to control for multiple differences between intervention groups and this study showed no overall survival advantage for CPM at 15 years. Another study showed significantly improved survival following CPM but after adjusting for bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy, the CPM effect on all-cause mortality was no longer significant.Sixteen studies assessed psychosocial measures; most reported high levels of satisfaction with the decision to have PM but more variable satisfaction with cosmetic results. Worry over breast cancer was significantly reduced after BPM when compared both to baseline worry levels and to the groups who opted for surveillance rather than BPM.Case series reporting on adverse events from PM with or without reconstruction reported rates of unanticipated re-operations from 4% in those without reconstruction to 49% in patients with reconstruction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sixteen studies have been published since the last version of the review, without altering our conclusions. While published observational studies demonstrated that BPM was effective in reducing both the incidence of, and death from, breast cancer, more rigorous prospective studies (ideally randomized trials) are needed. BPM should be considered only among those at very high risk of disease. There is insufficient evidence that CPM improves survival and studies that control for multiple confounding variables are needed.

Survival analysis of cancer risk reduction strategies for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

PURPOSE

Women with BRCA1/2 mutations inherit high risks of breast and ovarian cancer; options to reduce cancer mortality include prophylactic surgery or breast screening, but their efficacy has never been empirically compared. We used decision analysis to simulate risk-reducing strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and to compare resulting survival probability and causes of death.

METHODS

We developed a Monte Carlo model of breast screening with annual mammography plus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from ages 25 to 69 years, prophylactic mastectomy (PM) at various ages, and/or prophylactic oophorectomy (PO) at ages 40 or 50 years in 25-year-old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

RESULTS

With no intervention, survival probability by age 70 is 53% for BRCA1 and 71% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The most effective single intervention for BRCA1 mutation carriers is PO at age 40, yielding a 15% absolute survival gain; for BRCA2 mutation carriers, the most effective single intervention is PM, yielding a 7% survival gain if performed at age 40 years. The combination of PM and PO at age 40 improves survival more than any single intervention, yielding 24% survival gain for BRCA1 and 11% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. PM at age 25 instead of age 40 offers minimal incremental benefit (1% to 2%); substituting screening for PM yields a similarly minimal decrement in survival (2% to 3%).

CONCLUSION

Although PM at age 25 plus PO at age 40 years maximizes survival probability, substituting mammography plus MRI screening for PM seems to offer comparable survival. These results may guide women with BRCA1/2 mutations in their choices between prophylactic surgery and breast screening.

Tolerability of breast ductal lavage in women from families at high genetic risk of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Ductal lavage (DL) has been proposed as a minimally-invasive, well-tolerated tool for obtaining breast epithelial cells for cytological evaluation of breast cancer risk. We report DL tolerability in BRCA1/2 mutation-positive and -negative women from an IRB-approved research study.

METHODS

165 BRCA1/2 mutation-positive, 26 mutation-negative and 3 mutation unknown women underwent mammography, breast MRI and DL. Psychological well-being and perceptions of pain were obtained before and after DL, and compared with pain experienced during other screening procedures.

RESULTS

The average anticipated and experienced discomfort rating for DL, 47 and 48 (0-100), were significantly higher (p < 0.01) than the anticipated and experienced discomfort of mammogram (38 and 34), MRI (36 and 25) or nipple aspiration (42 and 27). Women with greater pre-existing emotional distress experienced more DL-related discomfort than they anticipated. Women reporting DL-related pain as worse than expected were nearly three times more likely to refuse subsequent DL than those reporting it as the same or better than expected. Twenty-five percent of participants refused repeat DL at first annual follow-up.

CONCLUSION

DL was anticipated to be and experienced as more uncomfortable than other procedures used in breast cancer screening. Higher underlying psychological distress was associated with decreased DL tolerability.

Perception of screening and risk reduction surgeries in patients tested for a BRCA deleterious mutation

BACKGROUND

Women at a high risk for breast cancer are offered choices for screening or prophylactic surgeries. The aim of this study was to evaluate opinions regarding screening and surgical strategies in high-risk women.

METHODS

Women at the authors' institution who received BRCA1 of 2 testing before July 2005 were sent a follow-up patient survey. The authors compared responses of women who tested positive for a deleterious mutation with those who tested negative. For those who expressed an opinion (agree vs disagree), a 2-sided Fisher exact test was used to compare responses.

RESULTS

A total of 540 surveys were sent, and 312 were returned (58%). Of these, 217 had breast cancer, and 86 women tested positive for a mutation. No BRCA+ women felt mammograms were difficult to get because of discomfort, whereas 5.4% of the BRCA- group did (P = .039). Seventy percent of BRCA+ women agreed that prophylactic mastectomy (PM) is the most effective means for reducing risk, compared with 40% of BRCA- women (P < .001). PM was felt to be the only way to reduce worry in 64.7% of BRCA+ and in 34.4% of BRCA- women (P < .001). PM was felt to be too drastic for 36.1% of BRCA+ and 40.5% of BRCA- women (P = .562). Difficulty in deciding between screening and PM occurred in 23.9% of BRCA+ and 12.5% of BRCA- women (P = .046). After excluding women with bilateral breast cancers, 81.0% of women who agreed that PM was best to reduce risk underwent a PM versus 19.1% of those who disagreed (P < .001). Of women who felt PM was the only way to reduce worry, 84.2% underwent PM. Only 15.8% of women who did not believe that it was the only way to decrease worry underwent PM (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to believe PM to be the best way to reduce both risk and worry of breast cancer. High-risk women who agreed that PM was more likely to reduce risk and worry of breast cancer were more likely to proceed with this intervention.

Cancer risk reduction and reproductive concerns in female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND

Women with mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 cancer susceptibility genes face unique choices regarding management of their high risk for breast and ovarian cancer that impact their reproductive options. In order to explore women's preferences for management of elevated cancer risk, we evaluated the decisions of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers about contraception, prophylactic surgery, and family planning.

METHODS

An internet-based questionnaire assessing high-risk women's preferences about cancer risk management and reproductive options was designed, pilot-tested and administered electronically to 284 participants of an internet-based advocacy group for women with BRCA1/2 mutations.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirteen eligible participants completed the majority of the survey. Mean age was 34 years; 66% were BRCA1 mutation carriers and 34% were BRCA2 mutation carriers. Most women (92%) had used oral contraceptive pills. About 88% of responders reported frequent or extreme worry about transmitting the mutation to their children. Despite their high level of worry, few responders said they would likely consider using assisted reproduction technologies such as a pregnancy surrogate (3%), cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos (8%), or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to select embryos without BRCA1/2 mutations (13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although they expressed substantial concern about transmitting BRCA1/2 mutations to their children, only a minority of the high-risk women surveyed were likely to consider currently available assisted reproductive strategies. Further research is necessary to explore the risk management preferences of patients with inherited cancer predisposition, and to incorporate these preferences into clinical care.