1
|
Sun X, Verma SP, Jia G, Wang X, Ping J, Guo X, Shu XO, Chen J, Derkach A, Cai Q, Liang X, Long J, Offit K, Hun Oh J, Reiner AS, Watt GP, Woods M, Yang Y, Ambrosone CB, Ambs S, Chen Y, Concannon P, Garcia-Closas M, Gu J, Haiman CA, Hu JJ, Huo D, John EM, Knight JA, Li CI, Lynch CF, Mellemkjær L, Nathanson KL, Nemesure B, Olopade OI, Olshan AF, Pal T, Palmer JR, Press MF, Sanderson M, Sandler DP, Troester MA, Zheng W, Bernstein JL, Buas MF, Shu X. Case-Case Genome-Wide Analyses Identify Subtype-Informative Variants That Confer Risk for Breast Cancer. Cancer Res 2024; 84:2533-2548. [PMID: 38832928 PMCID: PMC11293972 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-23-3854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2023] [Revised: 03/15/2024] [Accepted: 05/31/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
Breast cancer includes several subtypes with distinct characteristic biological, pathologic, and clinical features. Elucidating subtype-specific genetic etiology could provide insights into the heterogeneity of breast cancer to facilitate the development of improved prevention and treatment approaches. In this study, we conducted pairwise case-case comparisons among five breast cancer subtypes by applying a case-case genome-wide association study (CC-GWAS) approach to summary statistics data of the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. The approach identified 13 statistically significant loci and eight suggestive loci, the majority of which were identified from comparisons between triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and luminal A breast cancer. Associations of lead variants in 12 loci remained statistically significant after accounting for previously reported breast cancer susceptibility variants, among which, two were genome-wide significant. Fine mapping implicated putative functional/causal variants and risk genes at several loci, e.g., 3q26.31/TNFSF10, 8q22.3/NACAP1/GRHL2, and 8q23.3/LINC00536/TRPS1, for TNBC as compared with luminal cancer. Functional investigation further identified rs16867605 at 8q22.3 as a SNP that modulates the enhancer activity of GRHL2. Subtype-informative polygenic risk scores (PRS) were derived, and patients with a high subtype-informative PRS had an up to two-fold increased risk of being diagnosed with TNBC instead of luminal cancers. The CC-GWAS PRS remained statistically significant after adjusting for TNBC PRS derived from traditional case-control GWAS in The Cancer Genome Atlas and the African Ancestry Breast Cancer Genetic Consortium. The CC-GWAS PRS was also associated with overall survival and disease-specific survival among patients with breast cancer. Overall, these findings have advanced our understanding of the genetic etiology of breast cancer subtypes, particularly for TNBC. Significance: The discovery of subtype-informative genetic risk variants for breast cancer advances our understanding of the etiologic heterogeneity of breast cancer, which could accelerate the identification of targets and personalized strategies for prevention and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaohui Sun
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Zhejiang, China
| | - Shiv Prakash Verma
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Guochong Jia
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Xinjun Wang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jie Ping
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Xingyi Guo
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jianhong Chen
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Andriy Derkach
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Qiuyin Cai
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jirong Long
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jung Hun Oh
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anne S. Reiner
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Gordon P. Watt
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Meghan Woods
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yaohua Yang
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- Center for Public Health Genomics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
- UVA Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Christine B. Ambrosone
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Stefan Ambs
- Laboratory of Human Carcinogenesis, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Yu Chen
- Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Patrick Concannon
- Genetics Institute and Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Montserrat Garcia-Closas
- Trans-Divisional Research Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jian Gu
- Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Christopher A. Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jennifer J. Hu
- The University of Miami School of Medicine, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Dezheng Huo
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Esther M. John
- Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Julia A. Knight
- Prosserman Centre for Health Research, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christopher I. Li
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Charles F. Lynch
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Lene Mellemkjær
- Diet, Cancer and Health, Danish Cancer Institute, Strandboulevarden 49, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Katherine L. Nathanson
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Barbara Nemesure
- Stony Brook Medicine, Department of Family, Population, and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, USA
| | | | - Andrew F. Olshan
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Tuya Pal
- Division of Genetic Medicine, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Julie R. Palmer
- Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Michael F. Press
- Department of Pathology, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Maureen Sanderson
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Dale P. Sandler
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Melissa A. Troester
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jonine L. Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Matthew F. Buas
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Xiang Shu
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Park BK, Schneider J, Suh YJ. Survival analysis for patients with metachronous contralateral breast cancer: Insights from a retrospective study. Oncol Lett 2024; 28:390. [PMID: 38966583 PMCID: PMC11223010 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2024.14523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2024] [Accepted: 05/22/2024] [Indexed: 07/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Continued advances in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer (BC) have led to an increase in the number of long-term BC survivors and an increase in the incidence of metachronous BC in the contralateral breast. Therefore, it is important to understand the factors that influence the development of metachronous BC; however, the impact of the laterality of the initial ipsilateral (I)BC as a risk factor for the development of metachronous contralateral (MC)BC has not been extensively investigated. The present study included 17,082 female patients with stage 0-3 IBC from the prospectively maintained Korean Breast Cancer Registry from 1989-2013 and divided them into two groups: Patients with MCBC (n=88) and those without MCBC (n=16,994). Risk factors that present at the initial BC diagnosis that could significantly influence the development of MCBC were screened for and risks were evaluated using the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model. Significant differences in baseline characteristics between MCBC and non-MCBC groups were demonstrated. Patients aged <40 years, those with histological and nuclear grade 3 tumors, and those with the triple-negative BC subtype were significantly more prevalent in the MCBC group than in the non-MCBC group. Additionally, the cumulative incidence of MCBC increased over time, with a notable increase from 0.1% in year 1 to 1.6% in year 10. Survival analysis revealed no significant differences in overall or BC-specific survival between the two groups. Key predictive factors identified for MCBC included an age of <40 years at initial diagnosis, a negative progesterone receptor status, and a Ki-67 score of >14%. Overall, the present study revealed several factors associated with MCBC and emphasized the need for long-term monitoring of BC survivors, considering these newly identified risk factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Byeong-Kwan Park
- Division of Breast and Thyroid Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea St. Vincent's Hospital, Suwon, Gyeonggi 16247, Republic of Korea
| | - Jean Schneider
- School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center, Lubbock, TX 79430, USA
| | - Young Jin Suh
- Division of Breast and Thyroid Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea St. Vincent's Hospital, Suwon, Gyeonggi 16247, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brantley KD, Rosenberg SM, Collins LC, Ruddy KJ, Tamimi RM, Schapira L, Borges VF, Warner E, Come SE, Zheng Y, Kirkner GJ, Snow C, Winer EP, Partridge AH. Second Primary Breast Cancer in Young Breast Cancer Survivors. JAMA Oncol 2024; 10:718-725. [PMID: 38602683 PMCID: PMC11009864 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 04/12/2024]
Abstract
Importance Among women diagnosed with primary breast cancer (BC) at or younger than age 40 years, prior data suggest that their risk of a second primary BC (SPBC) is higher than that of women who are older when they develop a first primary BC. Objective To estimate cumulative incidence and characterize risk factors of SPBC among young patients with BC. Design, Setting, and Participants Participants were enrolled in the Young Women's Breast Cancer Study, a prospective study of 1297 women aged 40 years or younger who were diagnosed with stage 0 to III BC from August 2006 to June 2015. Demographic, genetic testing, treatment, and outcome data were collected by patient surveys and medical record review. A time-to-event analysis was used to account for competing risks when determining cumulative incidence of SPBC, and Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to evaluate associations between clinical factors and SPBC risk. Data were analyzed from January to May 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures The 5- and 10- year cumulative incidence of SPBC. Results In all, 685 women with stage 0 to III BC (mean [SD] age at primary BC diagnosis, 36 [4] years) who underwent unilateral mastectomy or lumpectomy as the primary surgery for BC were included in the analysis. Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 10.0 (7.4-12.1) years, 17 patients (2.5%) developed an SPBC; 2 of these patients had cancer in the ipsilateral breast after lumpectomy. The median (IQR) time from primary BC diagnosis to SPBC was 4.2 (3.3-5.6) years. Among 577 women who underwent genetic testing, the 10-year risk of SPBC was 2.2% for women who did not carry a pathogenic variant (12 of 544) and 8.9% for carriers of a pathogenic variant (3 of 33). In multivariate analyses, the risk of SPBC was higher among PV carriers vs noncarriers (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 5.27; 95% CI, 1.43-19.43) and women with primary in situ BC vs invasive BC (sHR, 5.61; 95% CI, 1.52-20.70). Conclusions Findings of this cohort study suggest that young BC survivors without a germline pathogenic variant have a low risk of developing a SPBC in the first 10 years after diagnosis. Findings from germline genetic testing may inform treatment decision-making and follow-up care considerations in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristen D. Brantley
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shoshana M. Rosenberg
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Laura C. Collins
- Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kathryn J. Ruddy
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Rulla M. Tamimi
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Lidia Schapira
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, California
| | | | - Ellen Warner
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Steven E. Come
- Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yue Zheng
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Craig Snow
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Ann H. Partridge
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Breast Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Singh P, Agnese D, Amin M, Barrio AV, Botty Van den Bruele A, Burke E, Danforth DN, Dirbas FM, Eladoumikdachi F, Kantor O, Kumar S, Lee MC, Matsen C, Nguyen TT, Ozmen T, Park KU, Plichta JK, Reyna C, Showalter SL, Styblo T, Tranakas N, Weiss A, Laronga C, Boughey J. Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Site Working Group Statement on Contralateral Mastectomy: Indications, Outcomes, and Risks. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:2212-2223. [PMID: 38261126 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-14893-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Accepted: 12/29/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
Rates of contralateral mastectomy (CM) among patients with unilateral breast cancer have been increasing in the United States. In this Society of Surgical Oncology position statement, we review the literature addressing the indications, risks, and benefits of CM since the society's 2017 statement. We held a virtual meeting to outline key topics and then conducted a literature search using PubMed to identify relevant articles. We reviewed the articles and made recommendations based on group consensus. Patients consider CM for many reasons, including concerns regarding the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), desire for improved cosmesis and symmetry, and preferences to avoid ongoing screening, whereas surgeons primarily consider CBC risk when making a recommendation for CM. For patients with a high risk of CBC, CM reduces the risk of new breast cancer, however it is not known to convey an overall survival benefit. Studies evaluating patient satisfaction with CM and reconstruction have yielded mixed results. Imaging with mammography within 12 months before CM is recommended, but routine preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging is not; there is also no evidence to support routine postmastectomy imaging surveillance. Because the likelihood of identifying an occult malignancy during CM is low, routine sentinel lymph node surgery is not recommended. Data on the rates of postoperative complications are conflicting, and such complications may not be directly related to CM. Adjuvant therapy delays due to complications have not been reported. Surgeons can reduce CM rates by encouraging shared decision making and informed discussions incorporating patient preferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Puneet Singh
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| | | | | | - Andrea V Barrio
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY, USA
| | | | - Erin Burke
- University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | | | | | | | - Olga Kantor
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Shicha Kumar
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | | | | | | | - Tolga Ozmen
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ko Un Park
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Anna Weiss
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Clegg DJ, Whiteaker EN, Salomon BJ, Gee KN, Porter CG, Mazonas TW, Heidel RE, Brooks AJ, Bell JL, Boukovalas S, Lloyd JM. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in a rural population: A single-institution experience. Surg Open Sci 2024; 18:70-77. [PMID: 38435489 PMCID: PMC10905041 DOI: 10.1016/j.sopen.2024.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Revised: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The incidence of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral breast cancer (UBC) has continued to increase, despite an absent survival benefit except in populations at highest risk for developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC). CPM rates may be higher in rural populations but causes remain unclear. A study performed at our institution previously found that 21.8 % of patients with UBC underwent CPM from 2000 to 2009. This study aimed to evaluate the CPM trend at a single institution serving a rural population and identify the CPM rate in average-risk patients. Methods Retrospective review of patients who underwent mastectomies for UBC at our institution from 2017 to 2021 was performed. Analysis utilized frequencies and percentages, descriptive statistics, chi-square, and independent sample t-tests. Results A total of 438 patients were included, of whom 64.4 % underwent bilateral mastectomy for UBC (CPM). Patients who underwent CPM were significantly younger, underwent genetic testing, had germline pathogenic variants, had a family history of breast cancer, had smaller tumors, underwent reconstruction, and had more wound infections. Of CPM patients, 50.4 % had no identifiable factors for increased risk of developing CBC. Conclusions The rate of CPM in a rural population at a single institution increased from 21.8 % to 64.4 % over two decades, with an average-risk CPM rate of 50.4 %. Those that undergo CPM are more likely to undergo reconstruction and have more wound infections. Identifying characteristics of patients undergoing CPM in a rural population and the increased associated risks allows for a better understanding of this trend to guide conversations with patients. Key message This study demonstrates that the rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancers performed at a single institution serving a largely rural population has nearly tripled over the last two decades, with half of these patients having no factors that increase the risk for developing contralateral breast cancers. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy was significantly associated with smaller tumors, younger age, genetic testing, germline pathogenic variants, family history of breast cancer, breast reconstruction, and increased wound infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Devin J. Clegg
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Erica N. Whiteaker
- University of Tennessee Health Science Center, College of Medicine, Memphis, TN, United States of America
| | - Brett J. Salomon
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Kaylan N. Gee
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Christopher G. Porter
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Thomas W. Mazonas
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - R. Eric Heidel
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Biostatistics, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Ashton J. Brooks
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - John L. Bell
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Stefanos Boukovalas
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| | - Jillian M. Lloyd
- University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Knoxville, TN, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kang E, Jung JJ, Lim C, Kim HK, Lee HB, Han W, Moon HG. Increased risk of contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1/2 wild-type, high-risk Korean breast cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res 2024; 26:14. [PMID: 38254240 PMCID: PMC10801954 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-024-01769-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2023] [Accepted: 01/09/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to investigate the contralateral breast cancer (CBC) recurrence rate in Korean breast cancer patients according to their BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, focusing particularly on the CBC recurrence risk in BRCA1/2 negative (BRCAx) patients. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study on 13,107 primary breast cancer patients. The patients were divided into high-risk and low-risk groups for hereditary breast cancer based on the Korean National Health Insurance Service's eligibility criteria for BRCA1/2 germline mutation testing. The high-risk group was further categorized into the BRCA mutation group, the BRCAx group, and the not tested group. We evaluated the overall survival and cumulative risk of developing CBC in these patients. RESULTS Among 4494 high-risk patients, 973 (21.7%) underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2 germline mutation, revealing mutations in 158 patients (16.2%). We observed significant overall survival differences across all four groups, with the high-risk, not-tested group demonstrating notably worse overall survival (p < 0.001). However, when adjusted for other prognostic factors, there was no significant differences in hazard ratio of death between the four groups. The cumulative risk of CBC also varied among the groups. Patients with BRCA1/2 mutations showed a 7.3-fold increased risk of CBC compared to the low-risk group (95% CI 4.11-13.0, p < 0.001). Interestingly, BRCAx patients also demonstrated a significantly higher risk of CBC (HR 2.77, 95% CI 1.76-4.35, p < 0.001). The prognostic importance of the BRCAx for CBC recurrence persisted after adjusting for the age and subtype, but became insignificant when the family history of breast cancer was adjusted. CONCLUSION Breast cancer patients who are at high risk of hereditary breast cancer but with wild-type BRCA 1/2 genes (BRCAx) have increased risk of developing contralateral breast cancer when compared to the low-risk patients. More careful surveillance and follow-up can be offered to these patients especially when they have family history of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eunhye Kang
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
| | - Ji-Jung Jung
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
| | - Changjin Lim
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
| | - Hong-Kyu Kim
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Han-Byoel Lee
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Wonshik Han
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyeong-Gon Moon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea.
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea.
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kim H, Yoon TI, Kim S, Lee SB, Kim J, Chung IY, Ko BS, Lee JW, Son BH, Lee YJ, Gwark S, Kim HJ. Age-Related Incidence and Peak Occurrence of Contralateral Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2347511. [PMID: 38100108 PMCID: PMC10724757 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.47511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2023] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Young patients with breast cancer have higher risk for developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and have epidemiologic characteristics different from those of older patients. Objective To examine the incidence and peak occurrence of CBC according to age at primary breast cancer (PBC) surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included patients who were diagnosed with and underwent surgery for unilateral nonmetastatic breast cancer at Asan Medical Center, Korea, between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2013, with follow-up through December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, through April 30, 2023. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to their age at surgery for PBC: younger (≤35 years) vs older (>35 years). Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were cumulative incidence and hazard rate of CBC in the entire study population and in subgroups divided by cancer subtype, categorized according to hormone receptor (HR) and ERBB2 status. Results A total of 16 251 female patients with stage 0 to III breast cancer were analyzed; all patients were Korean. The mean (SD) age was 48.61 (10.06) years; 1318 patients (8.11%) were in the younger group, and 14 933 (91.89%) were in the older group. Median follow-up was 107 months (IQR, 79-145 months). Compared with the older group, the younger group had significantly higher incidence of CBC (10-year cumulative incidence, 7.1% vs 2.9%; P < .001) and higher risk (hazard ratio, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.62-2.74) of developing CBC. The hazard rate, which indicates risk for developing CBC at a certain time frame, differed according to the subtype of primary cancer. In patients with the HR+/ERBB2- subtype, the risk increased continuously in both age groups. In patients with the triple negative subtype, the risk increased until approximately 10 years and then decreased in both age groups. Meanwhile, in the HR-/ERBB2+ subtype, risk peaked earlier, especially in the younger group (1.7 years since first surgery in the younger group and 4.8 years in the older group). Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study, patients aged 35 years or younger with breast cancer had a higher risk of developing CBC than older patients. Moreover, young patients with the HR-/ERBB2+ subtype tended to have a shorter interval for developing CBC. These findings might be useful in guiding treatment decisions, such as contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hakyoung Kim
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- Department of Surgery, Dongguk University College of Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Tae In Yoon
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Dongnam Institute of Radiological and Medical Science, Busan, Republic of Korea
| | - Seonok Kim
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sae Byul Lee
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jisun Kim
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Il Yong Chung
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Beom Seok Ko
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jong Won Lee
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Byung Ho Son
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Young Jin Lee
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sungchan Gwark
- Department of Surgery, Ewha Woman’s University College of Medicine, Ewha Woman’s University Mokdong Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Hee Jeong Kim
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Li R, Zhang W, Shi B, Ma L, Jiang F, Wang X, Li J. A common variant SNP rs1937810 in the MPP7 gene contributes to the susceptibility of breast cancer in the Chinese Han population. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2023; 11:e2198. [PMID: 37194388 PMCID: PMC10496085 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.2198] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Revised: 04/23/2023] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer (BC) is common cancer caused by environmental factors and genetic ones. Previous evidence has linked gene MAGUK P55 Scaffold Protein 7 (MPP7) to BC, despite that there has been no research evaluating the relationship between MPP7 genetic polymorphisms and BC susceptibility. We aimed to investigate the potential association of the MPP7 gene with the susceptibility to BC in Han Chinese individuals. METHODS In total, 1390 patients with BC and 2480 controls were enrolled. For genotyping, 20 tag SNPs were chosen. The serum levels of protein MPP7 were measured in all subjects using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Genetic association analysis was performed in both genotypic and allelic modes, and the relationship between BC patients' clinical features and genotypes of relevant SNPs was examined. The functional implications of significant markers were also evaluated. RESULTS After adjusting for Bonferroni correction, SNP rs1937810 was found to be significantly associated with the risk of BC (p = 1.19 × 10-4 ). The odds ratio of CC genotypes in BC patients was 49% higher than in controls (1.49 [1.23-1.81]). Serum MPP7 protein levels were significantly higher in BC patients than in controls (p < 0.001). The protein level of the CC genotype was the highest, and that of the CT and TT genotypes decreased in turn (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Our results linked SNP rs1937810 to the susceptibility of BC and the clinical features of BC patients. This SNP is also proved to be significantly related to the serum level of protein MPP7 in both BC patients and controls.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rong Li
- Department of RadiotherapyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong UniversityXi'anChina
| | - Wenpei Zhang
- Key Laboratory of National Health Commission for Forensic SciencesXi'an Jiaotong University Health Science CenterXi'anChina
| | - Bohui Shi
- Department of Breast SurgeryThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong UniversityXi'anChina
| | - Li Ma
- Department of OncologyThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong UniversityXi'anChina
| | - Fanliu Jiang
- Key Laboratory of National Health Commission for Forensic SciencesXi'an Jiaotong University Health Science CenterXi'anChina
| | - Xiaochen Wang
- Key Laboratory of National Health Commission for Forensic SciencesXi'an Jiaotong University Health Science CenterXi'anChina
| | - Jieqiong Li
- Department of NursingThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong UniversityXi'anChina
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sun J, Chu F, Pan J, Zhang Y, Yao L, Chen J, Hu L, Zhang J, Xu Y, Wang X, Cao W, Xie Y. BRCA-CRisk: A Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model for BRCA Carriers. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:991-999. [PMID: 36480783 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00833] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The absolute cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) for patients with BRCA1/2 variants is unknown. The purpose of this study was to develop a CBC risk prediction model for assessing CBC risk for BRCA1/2 carriers. METHODS The primary cohort of 491 patients with BRCA1/2 variants was derived from a large series of unselected patients with breast cancer. A nomogram was established on the basis of the results of a multivariate Cox regression analysis from this cohort. This model, named BRCA-CRisk, was further validated by an independent cohort of 205 patients with BRCA1/2 variants. Discrimination and calibration of the model were assessed. RESULTS In the primary cohort of 491 patients, 66 developed contralateral breast cancer after a median follow-up of 7.0 years. Four variables were significantly associated with risk of CBC and were incorporated in the establishment of the BRCA-CRisk prediction model: younger age at first breast cancer (with continuous variable, P = .002), positive first-degree family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; 95% CI, 1.16 to 3.08; P = .011), variant located near the 3' region of BRCA (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.23 to 3.30; P = .006), and endocrine therapy (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.88; P = .013). The area under the time-dependent curves for the 5- and 10-year cumulative risks of CBC were 0.775 and 0.702, respectively. The model was well validated in the independent cohort of 205 BRCA1/2 carriers, with area under the curves of 0.750 and 0.691 for 5 and 10 years, respectively. CONCLUSION BRCA-CRisk model provides a useful tool for assessing the absolute cumulative risk of CBC for BRCA1/2 carriers and may help carriers and clinicians optimally select risk-reducing strategies on the basis of individual CBC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jie Sun
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Futao Chu
- Department of Breast Surgery, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Jiani Pan
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine (ICBM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China.,Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, P. R. China
| | - Yaxin Zhang
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Lu Yao
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Jiuan Chen
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Li Hu
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Juan Zhang
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Ye Xu
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China
| | - Xiaojia Wang
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine (ICBM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China
| | - Wenming Cao
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine (ICBM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China
| | - Yuntao Xie
- Familial & Hereditary Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, P. R. China.,Department of Breast Surgery, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, P. R. China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Larionov A, Fewings E, Redman J, Goldgraben M, Clark G, Boice J, Concannon P, Bernstein J, Conti DV, Tischkowitz M. The Contribution of Germline Pathogenic Variants in Breast Cancer Genes to Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk in BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2-Negative Women. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15020415. [PMID: 36672364 PMCID: PMC9856968 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15020415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2022] [Revised: 12/27/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is associated with younger age at first diagnosis, family history and pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2 and PALB2. However, data regarding genetic factors predisposing to CBC among younger women who are BRCA1/2/PALB2-negative remain limited. METHODS In this nested case-control study, participants negative for BRCA1/2/PALB2 PGVs were selected from the WECARE Study. The burden of PGVs in established breast cancer risk genes was compared in 357 cases with CBC and 366 matched controls with unilateral breast cancer (UBC). The samples were sequenced in two phases. Whole exome sequencing was used in Group 1, 162 CBC and 172 UBC (mean age at diagnosis: 42 years). A targeted panel of genes was used in Group 2, 195 CBC and 194 UBC (mean age at diagnosis: 50 years). Comparisons of PGVs burdens between CBC and UBC were made in these groups, and additional stratified sub-analysis was performed within each group according to the age at diagnosis and the time from first breast cancer (BC). RESULTS The PGVs burden in Group 1 was significantly higher in CBC than in UBC (p = 0.002, OR = 2.5, 95CI: 1.2-5.6), driven mainly by variants in CHEK2 and ATM. The proportions of PGVs carriers in CBC and UBC in this group were 14.8% and 5.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference in PGVs burden between CBC and UBC in Group 2 (p = 0.4, OR = 1.4, 95CI: 0.7-2.8), with proportions of carriers being 8.7% and 8.2%, respectively. There was a significant association of PGVs in CBC with younger age. Metanalysis combining both groups confirmed the significant association between the burden of PGVs and the risk of CBC (p = 0.006) with the significance driven by the younger cases (Group 1). CONCLUSION In younger BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2-negative women, the aggregated burden of PGVs in breast cancer risk genes was associated with the increased risk of CBC and was inversely proportional to the age at onset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexey Larionov
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
- School of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
- Correspondence: (A.L.); (M.T.)
| | - Eleanor Fewings
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - James Redman
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Mae Goldgraben
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Graeme Clark
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - John Boice
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Patrick Concannon
- Genetics Institute and Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | - Jonine Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - David V. Conti
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA
| | | | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
- Correspondence: (A.L.); (M.T.)
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mallory MA, Whiting K, Park A, Gönen M, Gilbert E, King TA, Pilewskie ML. Synchronous and metachronous bilateral breast cancer among women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2022; 194:137-148. [PMID: 35488092 PMCID: PMC11325477 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06532-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2021] [Accepted: 01/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) confers increased cancer risk in either breast, but it remains unclear if this population is at increased risk for bilateral breast cancer (BC) development. Here we report bilateral BC incidence among women with a history of LCIS. METHODS Women with classic-type LCIS diagnosed from 1980 to 2017 who developed unilateral BC (UBC) or bilateral BC were identified. Bilateral BC was categorized as synchronous (bilateral BC diagnosed < 6 months apart; SBBC) or metachronous (bilateral BC diagnosed ≥ 6 months apart; MBBC). Five-year incidence rates of bilateral BC among this population were evaluated. Comparisons were made to identify factors associated with bilateral BC. RESULTS At 7 years' median follow-up, 249/1651 (15%) women with LCIS developed BC; 34 with bilateral BC (2%). There were no clinicopathologic feature differences between those with UBC and bilateral BC. SBBC occurred in 18 without significant differences versus UBC. Among 211 with UBC and a contralateral breast at risk, 16 developed MBBC at a median follow-up of 3 years. MBBC patients were less likely to receive endocrine therapy and more likely to receive chemotherapy versus UBC. Tumor histology was not associated with MBBC. Estimated 5-year MBBC risk was 6.4%. Index estrogen/progesterone receptor positivity and endocrine therapy were the only factors associated with MBBC risk. CONCLUSION Bilateral BC occurred in 2% of women with LCIS history at median follow-up of 7 years. Similar to the general BC population, a decrease in MBBC is seen among women with a history of LCIS who develop hormone receptor-positive disease and those who receive endocrine therapy, highlighting the protective effects of this treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa Anne Mallory
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Karissa Whiting
- Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anna Park
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mithat Gönen
- Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Elizabeth Gilbert
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Tari A King
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Breast Oncology Program, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Melissa L Pilewskie
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dettwyler SA, Thull DL, McAuliffe PF, Steiman JG, Johnson RR, Diego EJ, Mai PL. Timely cancer genetic counseling and testing for young women with breast cancer: impact on surgical decision-making for contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2022; 194:393-401. [PMID: 35596825 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06619-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Genetic testing (GT) can identify individuals with pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in breast cancer (BC) predisposition genes, who may consider contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM). We report on CRRM rates in young women newly diagnosed with BC who received GT through a multidisciplinary clinic. METHODS Clinical data were reviewed for patients seen between November 2014 and June 2019. Patients with non-metastatic, unilateral BC diagnosed at age ≤ 45 and completed GT prior to surgery were included. Associations between surgical intervention and age, BC stage, family history, and GT results were evaluated. RESULTS Of the 194 patients, 30 (15.5%) had a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, NBN, NF1), with 66.7% in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Of 164 (84.5%) uninformative results, 132 (68%) were negative and 32 (16.5%) were variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, 67 (34.5%) had CRRM, including 25/30 (83.3%) PV/LPV carriers and 42/164 (25.6%) non-carriers. A positive test result (p < 0.01) and significant family history were associated with CRRM (p = 0.02). For the 164 with uninformative results, multivariate analysis showed that CRRM was not associated with age (p = 0.23), a VUS, (p = 0.08), family history (p = 0.10), or BC stage (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION In this cohort of young women with BC, the identification of a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene and a significant family history were associated with the decision to pursue CRRM. Thus, incorporation of genetic services in the initial evaluation of young patients with a new BC could contribute to the surgical decision-making process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shenin A Dettwyler
- UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (Cancer Genetics Program), Pittsburgh, PA, USA. .,Currently at NYU Langone Health (The Pancreatic Cancer Center), New York, NY, USA.
| | - Darcy L Thull
- UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (Cancer Genetics Program), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Jennifer G Steiman
- UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (Magee-Womens Surgical Associates), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Ronald R Johnson
- UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (Magee-Womens Surgical Associates), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Emilia J Diego
- UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (Magee-Womens Surgical Associates), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Phuong L Mai
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine (Center for Clinical Genetics and Genomics), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bouferraa Y, Haibe Y, Chedid A, Jabra E, Charafeddine M, Temraz S, Mukherji D, El Saghir N, Shamseddine A. The impact of young age (< 40 years) on the outcome of a cohort of patients with primary non-metastatic breast cancer: analysis of 10-year survival of a prospective study. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:27. [PMID: 34980002 PMCID: PMC8722326 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-09100-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 12/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The role of young age (< 40 years) at diagnosis as an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes in female patients with breast cancer has been highlighted in several studies. In this prospective study, we assessed the difference in 10-year survival between two groups of patients diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer based on an age cutoff of 40 years. We also assessed the impact of factors including tumor characteristics, molecular markers and immunohistochemical markers on survival outcomes, highlighting the interaction of those variables with age. Methods A total of 119 female patients with newly diagnosed non-metastatic breast cancer were recruited at the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) between July 2011 and May 2014. Patients were recruited and divided into 2 age groups (< 40 and ≥ 40 years). In addition to clinical characteristics, we assessed immunohistochemistry including estrogen, progesterone and HER2 receptors, p53, cyclin B1, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), and ki-67. Germline BRCA mutations were also performed on peripheral blood samples. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between the age groups. 10-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated accordingly. Cox regression analysis was performed in order to assess the effect of the different variables on clinical outcomes. Results After a median Follow-up of 96 (13–122) months, the estimated 10-year OS was 98.6% for patients ≥40 as compared to 77.6% in patients < 40 (p = 0.001). A similar trend was found for 10-year DFS reaching 90% for patients ≥40 and 70.4% for those < 40 (p = 0.004). On multivariate analysis for DFS and OS, only younger age (< 40 years), higher stage and triple negative phenotype among other parameters assessed significantly affected the outcome in this cohort. Conclusion This prospective study confirms the association between younger age and adverse survival outcomes in patients with non-metastatic breast cancer. Future studies of the whole genome sequences may reveal the genomic basis underlying the clinical differences we have observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Youssef Bouferraa
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Yolla Haibe
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Andrea Chedid
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Elio Jabra
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Maya Charafeddine
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Sally Temraz
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Deborah Mukherji
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Nagi El Saghir
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon
| | - Ali Shamseddine
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Arslan B, Tazeoğlu D, Dağ A, Berkeşoğlu M, Özdemir AA. Is there an increasing trend of risk-reducing prophylactic mastectomy procedure in preventing breast cancer among women? Turk J Surg 2021; 37:347-354. [PMID: 35677477 PMCID: PMC9130946 DOI: 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Objectives Prophylactic contralateral/bilateral mastectomy (PCM/PBM), as a risk-reducing mastectomy procedure, has a few evidence-based indica- tions; however, there is an increasing trend in the total number of operations globally. Worldwide famous actress Angelina Jolie was detected to have BRCA-1 mutation and underwent a prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in 2013. The procedure was perceived as 'lifesaving' worldwide, which eventually led to a significant increase in BRCA gene mutation analysis and PCM/PBM. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate our risk-reducing PCM/PBM results. Material and Methods Twenty-seven patients underwent risk-reducing PCM/PBM between 2010-2018, but only 22 patients were included into the study. A retrospective analysis was carried out on demographics, family history, preoperative diagnoses, pathological findings, mastectomy details, reconstructive procedures, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, BRCA analysis, educational status, and mastectomy indications. Results Surgical indications or major reasons for surgery were as follows: BRCA-1 mutation (n= 5), BRCA-2 mutation (n= 3), malignant-like areas in magnetic resonance imaging (n= 2), lobular carcinoma in situ (n= 3) and intense anxiety (n= 9). Eighteen patients (82%) underwent an additional re- constructive procedure via implantation or autologous tissue and four patients (18%) underwent mastectomy only. PCM/PBM by years was as: 2010 (n= 1), 2011 (n= 0), 2012 (n= 1), 2013 (n= 2), 2014 (n= 1), 2015 (n= 2), 2016 (n= 3), 2017 (n= 4), 2018 (n= 8), which represents the recently increasing trend. Conclusion Risk-reducing PCM/PBM was performed in 59.1% of the patients (n= 13) for a significant medical reason, whereas for distress about a relapse or a new disease on the contralateral breast on the remaining 40.9% of the patients (n= 9). Evidence in the literature shows that risk-reducing mastectomy does not affect survival, although it lowers breast cancer incidence. Close surveillance, cancer screening, and chemoprevention methods should have priority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bilal Arslan
- Department of General Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| | - Deniz Tazeoğlu
- Department of General Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| | - Ahmet Dağ
- Department of General Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| | - Mustafa Berkeşoğlu
- Department of General Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| | - Asena Ayça Özdemir
- Department of Biostatistics, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Carlson LE, Watt GP, Tonorezos ES, Chow EJ, Yu AF, Woods M, Lynch CF, John EM, Mellemkjӕr L, Brooks JD, Knight JA, Reiner AS, Liang X, Smith SA, Bernstein L, Dauer LT, Cerviño LI, Howell RM, Shore RE, Boice JD, Bernstein JL. Coronary Artery Disease in Young Women After Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: The WECARE Study. JACC: CARDIOONCOLOGY 2021; 3:381-392. [PMID: 34604798 PMCID: PMC8463731 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccao.2021.07.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Revised: 07/14/2021] [Accepted: 07/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
Background Radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer increases risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). Women treated for left- vs right-sided breast cancer receive greater heart radiation exposure, which may further increase this risk. The risk of radiation-associated CAD specifically among younger breast cancer survivors is not well defined. Objectives The purpose of this study was to report CAD risk among participants in the Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology Study. Methods A total of 1,583 women who were <55 years of age when diagnosed with breast cancer between 1985 and 2008 completed a cardiovascular health questionnaire. Risk of radiation-associated CAD was evaluated by comparing women treated with left-sided RT with women treated with right-sided RT using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Effect modification by treatment and cardiovascular risk factors was examined. Results In total, 517 women who did not receive RT and 94 women who had a pre-existing cardiovascular disease diagnosis were excluded, leaving 972 women eligible for analysis. Their median follow-up time was 14 years (range 1-29 years). The 27.5-year cumulative incidences of CAD for women receiving left- vs right-sided RT were 10.5% and 5.8%, respectively (P = 0.010). The corresponding HR of CAD for left- vs right-sided RT in the multivariable Cox model was 2.5 (95% CI: 1.3-4.7). There was no statistically significant effect modification by any factor evaluated. Conclusions Young women treated with RT for left-sided breast cancer had over twice the risk of CAD compared with women treated with RT for right-sided breast cancer. Laterality of RT is independently associated with an increased risk of CAD and should be considered in survivorship care of younger breast cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gordon P. Watt
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Address for correspondence: Dr Gordon P. Watt, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, Second Floor, New York, New York 10017. @gp_watt
| | - Emily S. Tonorezos
- National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Eric J. Chow
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Anthony F. Yu
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Meghan Woods
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | | | | | - Jennifer D. Brooks
- University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Julia A. Knight
- University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anne S. Reiner
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Susan A. Smith
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California, USA
| | | | | | - Rebecca M. Howell
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Roy E. Shore
- New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - John D. Boice
- National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ramin C, Mullooly M, Schonfeld SJ, Advani PG, Bodelon C, Gierach GL, Berrington de González A. Risk factors for contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer Causes Control 2021; 32:803-813. [PMID: 33877513 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-021-01432-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The role of established breast cancer risk factors and clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer in the development of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) among postmenopausal women is unclear. METHODS We identified 10,934 postmenopausal women diagnosed with a first primary breast cancer between 1995 and 2011 in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. CBC was defined as a second primary breast cancer diagnosed in the contralateral breast ≥ 3 months after the first breast cancer. Exposures included pre-diagnosis risk factors (lifestyle, reproductive, family history) and clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS Over a median follow-up of 6.8 years, 436 women developed CBC. We observed an increasing trend in CBC risk by age (p-trend = 0.002) and decreasing trend by year of diagnosis (p-trend = 0.001) of the first breast cancer. Additional risk factor associations were most pronounced for endocrine therapy (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87) and family history of breast cancer (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.06-1.80, restricted to invasive first breast cancer). No associations were found for lifestyle (body mass index, physical activity, smoking, alcohol) or reproductive factors (age at menarche, parity, age at first birth, age at menopause). CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that clinical characteristics of the first breast cancer and family history of breast cancer, but not pre-diagnosis lifestyle and reproductive factors, are strongly associated with CBC risk among postmenopausal women. Future studies are needed to understand how these factors contribute to CBC etiology and to identify further opportunities for prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody Ramin
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Maeve Mullooly
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Sara J Schonfeld
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Pragati G Advani
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Clara Bodelon
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de González
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Agarwal S, Pappas L, Matsen CB, Agarwal JP. Second primary breast cancer after unilateral mastectomy alone or with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Cancer Med 2020; 9:8043-8052. [PMID: 32918537 PMCID: PMC7643660 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3394] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2020] [Revised: 07/05/2020] [Accepted: 07/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background An increasing number of patients undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral breast cancer. However, the benefit of CPM has not been quantified in the setting of contemporary breast cancer therapy. Methods We performed an analysis of 180 068 patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, diagnosed with unilateral ductal breast carcinoma between 1998 and 2013 and treated with unilateral mastectomy (UM) or CPM. UM was performed in 146 213 patients (81.2%); CPM was performed in 33 855 patients (19.8%). Primary outcome of interest was cumulative incidence of a second primary breast cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast greater than 3 months after initial diagnosis. Cumulative incidence analysis was based on a Cox proportional model to generate curves of second primary breast cancer in any breast, ipsilateral breast only, or contralateral breast only. Results Patients who underwent CPM had a significantly reduced incidence of second primary breast cancer 10 and 15 years after surgery (CPM 0.93% [0.73%, 1.12%] vs UM 4.44% [4.28%, 4.60%]). Patients who underwent CPM had significantly lower adjusted hazard of second primary breast cancer when compared with UM (HR 0.38 vs 1.0, P < .0001). Conclusions CPM offers some protection from a second primary breast cancer, attributable to a reduced incidence in the contralateral breast. These findings provide additional information to providers and patients as they make decisions regarding surgical management. They should also be interpreted in the context of the absolute incidence of second primary breast cancer after UM and previous literature demonstrating no survival benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shailesh Agarwal
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Lisa Pappas
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Cindy B Matsen
- Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Jayant P Agarwal
- Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Abstract
In the past decades the demand for prophylactic mastectomies has increased substantially. For healthy non high risk germ line mutation carriers there is no real objective justification for such a procedure, and screening according established evidence based guidelines is strongly advised. More demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy is coming from women diagnosed with breast cancer. First counseling and appropriate germ line gene mutation testing has to be established. In absence of high risk mutations, breast conservation therapy for the diagnosed breast cancer is as good as mastectomy, and the risk of a contralateral breast cancer is low (0.3-0.6% per annum follow up). So bilateral mastectomy will not provide any survival benefit and is associated with worsened body image and QoL, and more complications and re-operations as compared to breast conservation followed by screening. The patient asking for a CPM deserves careful counseling and a shared decision process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emiel J T Rutgers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Montagna G, Morrow M. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer: what to discuss with patients. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2020; 20:159-166. [PMID: 32077338 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2020.1732213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: The contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate in the U.S. has been steadily increasing. This is of particular concern because many women who undergo this procedure are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.Areas covered: CPM's medical benefit is related to the risk of contralateral cancer development and whether CPM provides a survival benefit. Contralateral cancer rates have decreased, and CPM does not provide a survival benefit. Other potential benefits of the procedure may be improved quality of life; these data are reviewed. Research efforts have been undertaken to better understand the decision-making process of patients who consider, and ultimately undergo, this procedure.Expert opinion: Decisional traits, personal values, the desire for peace of mind, and the desire to obtain breast symmetry are important factors that drive a woman's decision to undergo CPM. Additionally, many patients lack the knowledge on how different types of breast surgery impact outcomes. To improve the shared decision-making process, a stepwise approach to address possible misconceptions, and clarify the real risks/benefits of this procedure should be utilized. A clear recommendation (for/against) should be made for every patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer who considers CPM. Communication tools to assist patients and surgeons in this process are sorely needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giacomo Montagna
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Lee S, Liang X, Woods M, Reiner AS, Concannon P, Bernstein L, Lynch CF, Boice JD, Deasy JO, Bernstein JL, Oh JH. Machine learning on genome-wide association studies to predict the risk of radiation-associated contralateral breast cancer in the WECARE Study. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0226157. [PMID: 32106268 PMCID: PMC7046218 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2019] [Accepted: 11/20/2019] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify germline single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that optimally predict radiation-associated contralateral breast cancer (RCBC) and to provide new biological insights into the carcinogenic process. Fifty-two women with contralateral breast cancer and 153 women with unilateral breast cancer were identified within the Women’s Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study who were at increased risk of RCBC because they were ≤ 40 years of age at first diagnosis of breast cancer and received a scatter radiation dose > 1 Gy to the contralateral breast. A previously reported algorithm, preconditioned random forest regression, was applied to predict the risk of developing RCBC. The resulting model produced an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.62 (p = 0.04) on hold-out validation data. The biological analysis identified the cyclic AMP-mediated signaling and Ephrin-A as significant biological correlates, which were previously shown to influence cell survival after radiation in an ATM-dependent manner. The key connected genes and proteins that are identified in this analysis were previously identified as relevant to breast cancer, radiation response, or both. In summary, machine learning/bioinformatics methods applied to genome-wide genotyping data have great potential to reveal plausible biological correlates associated with the risk of RCBC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sangkyu Lee
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Meghan Woods
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Anne S. Reiner
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Patrick Concannon
- Genetics Institute and Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope, Duarte, CA, United States of America
| | - Charles F. Lynch
- Department of Epidemiology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America
| | - John D. Boice
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Joseph O. Deasy
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Jonine L. Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Jung Hun Oh
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Su L, Xu Y, Ouyang T, Li J, Wang T, Fan Z, Fan T, Lin B, Xie Y. Contralateral breast cancer risk in
BRCA1
and
BRCA2
mutation carriers in a large cohort of unselected Chinese breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer 2020; 146:3335-3342. [PMID: 32037537 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32918] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2019] [Revised: 01/22/2020] [Accepted: 02/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Liming Su
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Ye Xu
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Tao Ouyang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Jinfeng Li
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Tianfeng Wang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Zhaoqing Fan
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Tie Fan
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Benyao Lin
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| | - Yuntao Xie
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Center Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University Cancer Hospital Beijing People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Teoh V, Tasoulis MK, Gui G. Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in Women with Unilateral Breast Cancer Who Are Genetic Carriers, Have a Strong Family History or Are just Young at Presentation. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:E140. [PMID: 31935898 PMCID: PMC7016894 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12010140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2019] [Revised: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 12/20/2019] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
The uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy is rising with increasing trends that are possibly highest in the USA. Whilst its role is generally accepted in carriers of recognized high-risk predisposition genes such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 when the affected individual is premenopausal, controversy surrounds the benefit in less understood risk-profile clinical scenarios. This comprehensive review explores the current evidence underpinning the role of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and its impact on contralateral breast cancer risk and survival in three distinct at-risk groups affected by unilateral breast cancer: known genetic carriers, those with strong familial risk but no demonstrable genetic mutation and women who are of young age at presentation. The review supports the role of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in "high risk" groups where the evidence suggests a reduction in contralateral breast cancer risk. However, this benefit is less evident in women who are just young at presentation or those who have strong family history but no demonstrable genetic mutation. A multidisciplinary and personalized approach to support individuals in a shared-decision making process is recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria Teoh
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Road, London SW36JJ, UK; (M.-K.T.); (G.G.)
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Terkelsen T, Rønning H, Skytte AB. Impact of genetic counseling on the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among younger women with breast cancer. Acta Oncol 2020; 59:60-65. [PMID: 31379231 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2019.1648860] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Background: Preoperative genetic testing affects the surgical decision-making among women with breast cancer. To avoid breast-conserving surgery and to offer the possibility of mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in high-risk patients, genetic testing for pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and a pedigree-based familial breast cancer risk assessment was offered to younger women with breast cancer in Denmark. We evaluated the impact of the risk stratification through genetic counseling on the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).Material and methods: The prospective cohort study included all women with unilateral breast cancer before the age of 45 who participated in a genetic counseling program during their primary diagnostics in the Central Denmark Region (2013-2018). Each patient was followed from the time of the genetic test result to the end of follow-up to estimate the long-term uptake of CPM as a competing risk-adjusted cumulative incidence. We compared the uptake of CPM between the various genetic risk categories, ages of onset, and family histories in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, reporting hazard ratios (HR) with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: 156 females, aged 21-44, learned their genetic test result within a median of 92 days [interquartile range (IQR): 75-114]. The maximal follow-up was 3.8 years (median 1.8; IQR: 0.49-2.5), after which 33% (95% CI: 24-42%) of the patients had undergone CPM. The uptake of CPM was inversely associated with the age of onset (HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.86-0.98) and significantly higher among BRCA carriers (HR 2.9; 95% CI: 1.3-6.8) and patients from the high risk of breast cancer families (HR 5.6; 95% CI: 1.9-16) compared to the lower genetic risk categories.Conclusion: The risk stratification obtained through genetic counseling had a considerable impact on the surgical decision-making among younger women with breast cancer at long-term follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thorkild Terkelsen
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Hanne Rønning
- Plastic and Breast Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Anne-Bine Skytte
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
DeBiase SR, Sun W, Boulware D, Laronga C, Lee MC. Busting the Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Myth: Incidence of Follow-up Imaging and Biopsy After Risk-Reductive Breast Surgery. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-019-00338-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
25
|
Yoon KH, Chae S, Kang E, Shin HC, Kim JH, Kim IA, Park SY, Kim SW, Kim EK. Contralateral Breast Cancer and Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence in BRCA1/2 Carriers and Non-Carriers at High-Risk of Hereditary Breast Cancer. J Breast Cancer 2019; 22:587-598. [PMID: 31897332 PMCID: PMC6933036 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2019.22.e47] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose We evaluated the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and investigated the predictive factors for CBC and IBTR in breast cancer patients with BRCA mutations and non-carriers at high-risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Methods We analyzed prospectively collected clinical data of patients with unilateral breast cancer who were at high-risk for HBOC and were tested for the BRCA mutation between 2003 and 2013. Results The cohort comprised 540 patients with 45 BRCA1 carriers, 50 BRCA2 carriers, and 445 non-carriers. The median follow-up was 84.5 months. Overall, 61 patients (11.3%) developed CBC (24.4% for BRCA1 carriers, 20% for BRCA2 carriers, and 9% for non-carriers). The 10-year cumulative risk for CBC was 23.8% for BRCA1 carriers, 19.1% for BRCA2 carriers, and 9.8% for non-carriers (p = 0.174). Among the 277 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery, 29 (10.5%) developed IBTR (9.1% for BRCA1 carriers, 16.7% for BRCA2 carriers, and 10.2% for non-carriers). The 10-year cumulative risk for IBTR for BRCA1 carriers, BRCA2 carriers, and non-carriers was 8.7%, 14.1%, and 20%, respectively (p = 0.577). BRCA1 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-7.20; p = 0.019) and BRCA2 (HR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.13-7.35; p = 0.027) mutations and negative estrogen receptor status (HR, 4.02; 95% CI, 1.60-10.08; p = 0.003) were the significant predictive factors for CBC, while tumor size ≥ 2 cm was predictive of IBTR (HR, 6.11; 95% CI, 2.03-18.33; p = 0.001). Conclusion While BRCA1/2 mutation carriers had a higher risk of developing CBC compared to non-carriers at high-risk of HBOC, the risk of IBTR was similarly high across breast cancer patients irrespective of the BRCA mutation. Further preventive strategies to reduce CBC and IBTR for all patients at high-risk of HBOC should be investigated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyung-Hwak Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Sumin Chae
- Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eunyoung Kang
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Hee-Chul Shin
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Jee Hyun Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - In Ah Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - So Yeon Park
- Department of Pathology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Sung-Won Kim
- Department of Surgery, Daerim St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eun-Kyu Kim
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Miller ME, Muhsen S, Zabor EC, Flynn J, Olcese C, Giri D, Van Zee KJ, Pilewskie M. Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Associated with Synchronous Ipsilateral Lobular Carcinoma In Situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2019; 26:4317-4325. [PMID: 31552614 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-019-07796-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is a risk factor for breast cancer, but the effect of LCIS found in association with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is unknown. In this study, we compared contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) rates among women with DCIS with or without synchronous ipsilateral LCIS treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS DCIS patients undergoing BCS from 2000 to 2011 with a contralateral breast at risk were stratified by the presence or absence of synchronous ipsilateral LCIS with the index DCIS (DCIS + LCIS vs. DCIS). Those with contralateral, bilateral, or prior ipsilateral LCIS were excluded. Associations of patient, tumor, and treatment factors with CBC and IBTR were evaluated. RESULTS Of 1888 patients identified, 1475 (78%) had DCIS and 413 (22%) had DCIS + LCIS. At median follow-up of 7.2 (range 0-17) years, 307 patients had a subsequent first breast event; 207 IBTR and 100 CBC. The 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was similar in both groups: 15.0% vs. 14.2% (log-rank, p = 0.8) for DCIS + LCIS vs. DCIS, respectively. The 10-year cumulative incidence of CBC was greater in the DCIS + LCIS group: 10.9% vs. 6.1% for DCIS (log-rank, p < 0.001). After adjustment for other factors, CBC risk remained higher in DCIS + LCIS compared with DCIS (hazard ratio 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.36-3.11, p = 0.001); there was no significant difference in IBTR risk. CONCLUSIONS Compared with DCIS alone, DCIS + LCIS is associated with similar IBTR risk but double the risk of CBC. This finding should inform treatment decisions, in particular regarding endocrine therapy for risk reduction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan E Miller
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Surgery, University Hospitals, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Shirin Muhsen
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Clemenceau Medical Center/Johns Hopkins International, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Emily C Zabor
- Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jessica Flynn
- Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Cristina Olcese
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dilip Giri
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kimberly J Van Zee
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Melissa Pilewskie
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Watt GP, Reiner AS, Smith SA, Stram DO, Capanu M, Malone KE, Lynch CF, John EM, Knight JA, Mellemkjær L, Bernstein L, Brooks JD, Woods M, Liang X, Haile RW, Riaz N, Conti DV, Robson M, Duggan D, Boice JD, Shore RE, Tischkowitz M, Orlow I, Thomas DC, Concannon P, Bernstein JL. Association of a Pathway-Specific Genetic Risk Score With Risk of Radiation-Associated Contralateral Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e1912259. [PMID: 31560388 PMCID: PMC6777239 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Radiation therapy for breast cancer is associated with increased risk of a second primary contralateral breast cancer, but the genetic factors modifying this association are not well understood. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a genetic risk score comprising single nucleotide polymorphisms in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway is associated with radiation-associated contralateral breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This case-control study included a case group of women with contralateral breast cancer that was diagnosed at least 1 year after a first primary breast cancer who were individually matched to a control group of women with unilateral breast cancer. Inclusion criteria were receiving a first invasive breast cancer diagnosis prior to age 55 years between 1985 and 2008. Women were recruited through 8 population-based cancer registries in the United States, Canada, and Denmark as part of the Women's Environment, Cancer, and Radiation Epidemiology Studies I (November 2000 to August 2004) and II (March 2010 to December 2012). Data analysis was conducted from July 2017 to August 2019. EXPOSURES Stray radiation dose to the contralateral breast during radiation therapy for the first breast cancer. A novel genetic risk score comprised of genetic variants in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway was considered the potential effect modifier, dichotomized as high risk if the score was above the median of 74 and low risk if the score was at or below the median. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcome was risk of contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose stratified by genetic risk score, age, and latency. RESULTS A total of 5953 women were approached for study participation, and 3732 women (62.7%) agreed to participate. The median (range) age at first diagnosis was 46 (23-54) years. After 5 years of latency or more, among women who received the first diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years, exposure to 1.0 Gy (to convert to rad, multiply by 100) or more of stray radiation was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of contralateral breast cancer compared with women who were not exposed (rate ratio, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.1-3.6]). The risk was higher among women with a genetic risk score above the median (rate ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.1-8.1]), and there was no association among women with a genetic risk score below the median (rate ratio, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.5-3.7]). Among younger women with a high genetic risk score, the attributable increased risk for contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose was 28%. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer that was attributable to stray radiation exposure among women with a high genetic risk score and who received a first breast cancer diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years after 5 years or more of latency. This genetic risk score may help guide treatment and surveillance for women with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gordon P. Watt
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anne S. Reiner
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Susan A. Smith
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Daniel O. Stram
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | | | | | | | - Esther M. John
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Julia A. Knight
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Canada
- Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Leslie Bernstein
- Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Jennifer D. Brooks
- Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Meghan Woods
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Nadeem Riaz
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - David V. Conti
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | - Mark Robson
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - David Duggan
- Translational Genomics Research Institute, An Affiliate of City of Hope, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - John D. Boice
- National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland
- Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Roy E. Shore
- New York University School of Medicine, New York
| | | | - Irene Orlow
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Duncan C. Thomas
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Engel C, Fischer C, Zachariae S, Bucksch K, Rhiem K, Giesecke J, Herold N, Wappenschmidt B, Hübbel V, Maringa M, Reichstein-Gnielinski S, Hahnen E, Bartram CR, Dikow N, Schott S, Speiser D, Horn D, Fallenberg EM, Kiechle M, Quante AS, Vesper AS, Fehm T, Mundhenke C, Arnold N, Leinert E, Just W, Siebers-Renelt U, Weigel S, Gehrig A, Wöckel A, Schlegelberger B, Pertschy S, Kast K, Wimberger P, Briest S, Loeffler M, Bick U, Schmutzler RK. Breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and noncarriers under prospective intensified surveillance. Int J Cancer 2019; 146:999-1009. [PMID: 31081934 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2018] [Revised: 03/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/25/2019] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
Comparably little is known about breast cancer (BC) risks in women from families tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations despite an indicative family history, as opposed to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We determined the age-dependent risks of first and contralateral breast cancer (FBC, CBC) both in noncarriers and carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, who participated in an intensified breast imaging surveillance program. The study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2017, at 12 university centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Two cohorts were prospectively followed up for incident FBC (n = 4,380; 16,398 person-years [PY], median baseline age: 39 years) and CBC (n = 2,993; 10,090 PY, median baseline age: 42 years). Cumulative FBC risk at age 60 was 61.8% (95% CI 52.8-70.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 43.2% (95% CI 32.1-56.3%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 15.7% (95% CI 11.9-20.4%) for noncarriers. FBC risks were significantly higher than in the general population, with incidence rate ratios of 23.9 (95% CI 18.9-29.8) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 13.5 (95% CI 9.2-19.1) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 4.9 (95% CI 3.8-6.3) for BRCA1/2 noncarriers. Cumulative CBC risk 10 years after FBC was 25.1% (95% CI 19.6-31.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 6.6% (95% CI 3.4-12.5%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 3.6% (95% CI 2.2-5.7%) for noncarriers. CBC risk in noncarriers was similar to women with unilateral BC from the general population. Further studies are needed to confirm whether less intensified surveillance is justified in women from BRCA1/2 negative families with elevated risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Engel
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Christine Fischer
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Silke Zachariae
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Karolin Bucksch
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Jutta Giesecke
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Natalie Herold
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Barbara Wappenschmidt
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Verena Hübbel
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Monika Maringa
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Simone Reichstein-Gnielinski
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Eric Hahnen
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Claus R Bartram
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nicola Dikow
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sarah Schott
- Department of Gynaecology, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Dorothee Speiser
- Department of Gynecology with Breast Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Denise Horn
- Institute of Medical Genetics and Human Genetics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marion Kiechle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne S Quante
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne-Sophie Vesper
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital and Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital and Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Norbert Arnold
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Institute of Clinical Molecular Biology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Elena Leinert
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Walter Just
- Institute of Human Genetics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | - Stefanie Weigel
- Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - Andrea Gehrig
- Institute of Human Genetics, Würzburg University, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Würzburg University Hospital, Würzburg, Germany
| | | | - Stefanie Pertschy
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Karin Kast
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Dresden and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Dresden and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Susanne Briest
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Markus Loeffler
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Bedrosian I, Parker PA, Brewster AM. Who should get a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer? Cancer 2019; 125:1400-1403. [PMID: 30645775 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31915] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Isabelle Bedrosian
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Patricia A Parker
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Abenaa M Brewster
- Department of Clinical Cancer Prevention, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with breast cancer without a family history or genetic predisposition : Consensus statement from the Austrian Gynecologic Oncology Working Group of the Austrian Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2019; 131:233-236. [PMID: 30887224 DOI: 10.1007/s00508-019-1468-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2018] [Accepted: 02/07/2019] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
The working group recommends against contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women with breast cancer without a family history or genetic predisposition with unilateral breast cancer. This is based on the low risk of developing contralateral breast cancer, the lack of a survival benefit, the increased risk of surgical complications, and the lack of benefit on quality of life.
Collapse
|
31
|
Brooks JD, Comen EA, Reiner AS, Orlow I, Leong SF, Liang X, Mellemkjær L, Knight JA, Lynch CF, John EM, Bernstein L, Woods M, Doody DR, Malone KE, Bernstein JL. CYP2D6 phenotype, tamoxifen, and risk of contralateral breast cancer in the WECARE Study. Breast Cancer Res 2018; 20:149. [PMID: 30526633 PMCID: PMC6288916 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-018-1083-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/19/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tamoxifen treatment greatly reduces a woman's risk of developing a second primary breast cancer. There is, however, substantial variability in treatment response, some of which may be attributed to germline genetic variation. CYP2D6 is a key enzyme in the metabolism of tamoxifen to its active metabolites, and variants in this gene have been associated with reduced tamoxifen metabolism. The impact of variation on risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is unknown. METHODS Germline DNA from 1514 CBC cases and 2203 unilateral breast cancer controls was genotyped for seven single nucleotide polymorphisms, one three-nucleotide insertion-deletion, and a full gene deletion. Each variant has an expected impact on enzyme activity, which in combination allows for the classification of women as extensive, intermediate, and poor metabolizers (EM, IM, and PM respectively). Each woman was assigned one of six possible diplotypes and a corresponding CYP2D6 activity score (AS): EM/EM (AS = 2), EM/IM (AS = 1.5), EM/PM (AS = 1), IM/IM (AS = 0.75), IM/PM (AS = 0.5), and PM/PM (AS = 0). We also collapsed categories of the AS to generate an overall phenotype (EM, AS ≥ 1; IM, AS = 0.5-0.75; PM, AS = 0). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between tamoxifen treatment and risk of CBC in our study population were estimated using conditional logistic regression, stratified by AS. RESULTS Among women with AS ≥ 1 (i.e., EM), tamoxifen treatment was associated with a 20-55% reduced RR of CBC (AS = 2, RR = - 0.81, 95% CI 0.62-1.06; AS = 1.5, RR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.30-0.68; and AS = 1, RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.74). Among women with no EM alleles and at least one PM allele (i.e., IM and PM), tamoxifen did not appear to impact the RR of CBC in this population (AS = 0.5, RR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.59-1.96; and AS = 0, RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.58-2.35) (p for homogeneity = - 0.02). CONCLUSION This study suggests that the CYP2D6 phenotype may contribute to some of the observed variability in the impact of tamoxifen treatment for a first breast cancer on risk of developing CBC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer D. Brooks
- University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, 155 College St. HSB 676, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada
| | | | - Anne S. Reiner
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Irene Orlow
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Siok F. Leong
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | | | - Julia A. Knight
- University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, 155 College St. HSB 676, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Esther M. John
- Department of Medicine and Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA USA
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Centre, Duarte, CA USA
| | - Meghan Woods
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Akdeniz D, Schmidt MK, Seynaeve CM, McCool D, Giardiello D, van den Broek AJ, Hauptmann M, Steyerberg EW, Hooning MJ. Risk factors for metachronous contralateral breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast 2018; 44:1-14. [PMID: 30580169 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2018] [Revised: 11/12/2018] [Accepted: 11/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The risk of developing metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is a recurrent topic at the outpatient clinic. We aimed to provide CBC risk estimates of published patient, pathological, and primary breast cancer (PBC) treatment-related factors. METHODS PubMed was searched for publications on factors associated with CBC risk. Meta-analyses were performed with grouping of studies by mutation status (i.e., BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100delC), familial cohorts, and general population-based cohorts. RESULTS Sixty-eight papers satisfied our inclusion criteria. Strong associations with CBC were found for carrying a BRCA1 (RR = 3.7; 95%CI:2.8-4.9), BRCA2 (RR = 2.8; 95%CI:1.8-4.3) or CHEK2 c.1100delC (RR = 2.7; 95%CI:2.0-3.7) mutation. In population-based cohorts, PBC family history (RR = 1.8; 95%CI:1.2-2.6), body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.3-1.9), lobular PBC (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.8), estrogen receptor-negative PBC (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.0-2.3) and treatment with radiotherapy <40 years (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.7) was associated with increased CBC risk. Older age at PBC diagnosis (RR per decade = 0.93; 95%CI:0.88-0.98), and treatment with chemotherapy (RR = 0.7; 95%CI:0.6-0.8) or endocrine therapy (RR = 0.6; 95%CI:0.5-0.7) were associated with decreased CBC risk. CONCLUSIONS Mutation status, family history, and PBC treatment are key factors for CBC risk. Age at PBC diagnosis, BMI, lobular histology and hormone receptor status have weaker associations and should be considered in combination with key factors to accurately predict CBC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delal Akdeniz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Caroline M Seynaeve
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Danielle McCool
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Alexandra J van den Broek
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Johnson RH, Anders CK, Litton JK, Ruddy KJ, Bleyer A. Breast cancer in adolescents and young adults. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2018; 65:e27397. [PMID: 30156052 PMCID: PMC6192832 DOI: 10.1002/pbc.27397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 95] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2017] [Revised: 06/22/2018] [Accepted: 06/25/2018] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer of adolescents and young adult (AYA) women aged 15 to 39 years, accounting for 5.6% of all invasive breast cancer in women. In comparison with older women, AYAs are more likely to have familial cancer predisposition genes, larger breast tumors, unfavorable biological characteristics, distant metastatic disease at diagnosis, and adverse outcome. Endocrine therapy and some chemotherapy recommendations differ between young and older women. AYAs require coordinated multidisciplinary care, treatment regimens that minimize late effects such as premature menopause and osteoporosis, and proactive management of psychological and sexual health during and after cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Carey K. Anders
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center; Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | | | - Archie Bleyer
- Oregon Health and Science University; Portland, Oregon
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Özkan Pehlivanoğlu EF, Balcıoğlu H, Bilge U, Ünlüoğlu İ. EVALUATION OF KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS ON THE BREAST CARE OF PATIENTS AND HEALTH CARE PERSONNELS WHO APPLY TO FAMILY MEDICINE POLICLINIC. KONURALP TIP DERGISI 2018. [DOI: 10.18521/ktd.444162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
|
35
|
Personalised medicine and population health: breast and ovarian cancer. Hum Genet 2018; 137:769-778. [DOI: 10.1007/s00439-018-1944-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2018] [Accepted: 10/11/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|
36
|
|
37
|
Krontiras H, Farmer M, Whatley J. Breast Cancer Genetics and Indications for Prophylactic Mastectomy. Surg Clin North Am 2018; 98:677-685. [PMID: 30005767 DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2018.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022]
Abstract
As more genetic information becomes available to inform breast cancer treatment, screening, and risk-reduction approaches, clinicians must become more knowledgeable about possible genetic testing and prevention strategies, including outcomes, benefits, risks, and limitations. The aim of this article is to define and distinguish high- and moderate-risk breast cancer predisposition genes, summarize the clinical recommendations that may be considered based on the identification of pathogenic variants (mutations) in these genes, and indications for risk-reducing and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen Krontiras
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Faculty Office Tower Suite 1153, 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL 35294-3411, USA.
| | - Meagan Farmer
- Department of Genetics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Kaul Human Genetics Building, Suite 230, 720 20th Street, South Birmingham, AL 35294-0024, USA
| | - Julie Whatley
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Faculty Office Tower Suite 1153, 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL 35294-3411, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Ager B, Jansen J, Porter D, Phillips KA, Glassey R, Butow P. Development and pilot testing of a Decision Aid (DA) for women with early-stage breast cancer considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Breast 2018; 40:156-164. [PMID: 29857282 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.05.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2018] [Revised: 04/23/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Describe the development, acceptability and feasibility of a Decision Aid (DA) for women with early-stage breast cancer (BC) at average contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). METHODS The DA was developed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. It provides evidence-based information about CPM in a booklet format combining text, graphs and images of surgical options. Twenty-three women with a history of early-stage breast cancer were interviewed in person or over the phone using a 'think aloud approach'. Framework analysis was used to code and analyse data. RESULTS Twenty-three women participated in the study. Mean age of participants was 58.6 years and time since diagnosis ranged from 14 months to 21 years. Five women had CPM and eighteen had not. Women strongly endorsed the DA. Many felt validated by a section on appearance and found information on average risk of recurrence and metastases helpful, however, noted the importance of discussing personal risk with their surgeon. Many requested more information on surgery details (time taken, recovery) and costs of the different options. CONCLUSION The DA was acceptable to women, including the format, content and proposed implementation strategies. Practical and financial issues are important to women in considering treatment options. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Women appreciate information about CPM at diagnosis and emphasised the importance of discussing potential downsides of the procedure in addition to benefits. The DA was considered acceptable to facilitate such discussions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Ager
- School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Australia
| | - J Jansen
- Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Australia; Psycho-Oncology Co-Operative Research Group (PoCoG), The University of Sydney, Australia
| | - D Porter
- Department of Medical Oncology, Auckland Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand; Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, New Zealand
| | - K A Phillips
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victoria, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - R Glassey
- Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | | | - P Butow
- Psycho-Oncology Co-Operative Research Group (PoCoG), The University of Sydney, Australia; Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence Based Decision-Making, The University of Sydney, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Reiner AS, Sisti J, John EM, Lynch CF, Brooks JD, Mellemkjær L, Boice JD, Knight JA, Concannon P, Capanu M, Tischkowitz M, Robson M, Liang X, Woods M, Conti DV, Duggan D, Shore R, Stram DO, Thomas DC, Malone KE, Bernstein L, Bernstein JL. Breast Cancer Family History and Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk in Young Women: An Update From the Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology Study. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36:1513-1520. [PMID: 29620998 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.77.3424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) study demonstrated the importance of breast cancer family history on contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk, even for noncarriers of deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations. With the completion of WECARE II, updated risk estimates are reported. Additional analyses that exclude women negative for deleterious mutations in ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2 were performed. Patients and Methods The WECARE Study is a population-based case-control study that compared 1,521 CBC cases with 2,212 individually matched unilateral breast cancer (UBC) controls. Participants were younger than age 55 years when diagnosed with a first invasive breast cancer between 1985 and 2008. Women were interviewed about breast cancer risk factors, including family history. A subset of women was screened for deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated using multivariable conditional logistic regression. Cumulative absolute risks (ARs) were estimated by combining RRs from the WECARE Study and population-based SEER*Stat cancer incidence data. Results Women with any first-degree relative with breast cancer had a 10-year AR of 8.1% for CBC (95% CI, 6.7% to 9.8%). Risks also were increased if the relative was diagnosed at an age younger than 40 years (10-year AR, 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.8% to 20.8%) or with CBC (10-year AR, 14.1%; 95% CI, 9.5% to 20.7%). These risks are comparable with those seen in BRCA1/2 deleterious mutation carriers (10-year AR, 18.4%; 95% CI, 16.0% to 21.3%). In the subset of women who tested negative for deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2, estimates were unchanged. Adjustment for known breast cancer single-nucleotide polymorphisms did not affect estimates. Conclusion Breast cancer family history confers a high CBC risk, even after excluding women with deleterious mutations. Clinicians are urged to use detailed family histories to guide treatment and future screening decisions for young women with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne S Reiner
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Julia Sisti
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Esther M John
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Charles F Lynch
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Jennifer D Brooks
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Lene Mellemkjær
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - John D Boice
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Julia A Knight
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Patrick Concannon
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Marinela Capanu
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Mark Robson
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Meghan Woods
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - David V Conti
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - David Duggan
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Roy Shore
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Daniel O Stram
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Duncan C Thomas
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Kathleen E Malone
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Jonine L Bernstein
- Anne S. Reiner, Julia Sisti, Marinela Capanu, Mark Robson, Xiaolin Liang, Meghan Woods, and Jonine L. Bernstein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Mark Robson, Cornell University; Roy Shore, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, and Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford; David V. Conti, Daniel O. Stram, and Duncan C. Thomas, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Leslie Bernstein, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Charles F. Lynch, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA; Jennifer D. Brooks and Julia A. Knight, University of Toronto; Julia A. Knight, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Lene Mellemkjær, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; John D. Boice, Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Patrick Concannon, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; Marc Tischkowitz, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; David Duggan, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, AZ; and Kathleen E. Malone, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Kenny R, Reed M, Subramanian A. Mastectomy for risk reduction or symmetry in women without high risk gene mutation: A review. Int J Surg 2018; 50:60-64. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.12.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2017] [Revised: 12/15/2017] [Accepted: 12/15/2017] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
|
41
|
Henderson LM, Hubbard RA, Zhu W, Weiss J, Wernli KJ, Goodrich ME, Kerlikowske K, DeMartini W, Ozanne EM, Onega T. Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Use by Breast Density and Family History of Breast Cancer. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2018; 27:987-993. [PMID: 29334616 DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6428] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) among women with a new breast cancer has increased over the past decade. MRI use is more frequent in younger women and those with lobular carcinoma, but associations with breast density and family history of breast cancer are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data for 3075 women ages >65 years with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent breast conserving surgery or mastectomy from 2005 to 2010 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium were linked to administrative claims data to assess associations of preoperative MRI use with mammographic breast density and first-degree family history of breast cancer. Multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association of MRI use with breast density and family history, adjusting for woman and tumor characteristics. RESULTS Overall, preoperative MRI use was 16.4%. The proportion of women receiving breast MRI was similar by breast density (17.6% dense, 16.9% nondense) and family history (17.1% with family history, 16.5% without family history). After adjusting for potential confounders, we found no difference in preoperative MRI use by breast density (OR = 0.95 for dense vs. nondense, 95% CI: 0.73-1.22) or family history (OR = 0.99 for family history vs. none, 95% CI: 0.73-1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among women aged >65 years with breast cancer, having dense breasts or a first-degree relative with breast cancer was not associated with greater preoperative MRI use. This utilization is in keeping with lack of evidence that MRI has higher yield of malignancy in these subgroups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise M Henderson
- 1 Department of Radiology, The University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Rebecca A Hubbard
- 2 Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Weiwei Zhu
- 3 Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute , Seattle, Washington
| | - Julie Weiss
- 4 Department of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth , Lebanon , New Hampshire
| | - Karen J Wernli
- 3 Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute , Seattle, Washington
| | - Martha E Goodrich
- 4 Department of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth , Lebanon , New Hampshire
| | - Karla Kerlikowske
- 5 Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California , San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Wendy DeMartini
- 6 Department of Radiology, Stanford University , Stanford, California
| | - Elissa M Ozanne
- 7 Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah School of Medicine , Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Tracy Onega
- 8 The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice and Norris Cotton Cancer Center , Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon , New Hampshire
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Li D, Mai V, Gerke T, Pinney SM, Yaghjyan L. Interactions of Family History of Breast Cancer with Radiotherapy in Relation to the Risk of Breast Cancer Recurrence. J Breast Cancer 2017; 20:333-339. [PMID: 29285037 PMCID: PMC5743992 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2017.20.4.333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2017] [Accepted: 12/07/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose We examined associations between a family history of breast cancer and the risk of breast cancer recurrence in women who received or did not receive radiotherapy. Methods Our study included 2,440 women enrolled in the Breast Cancer Registry of Greater Cincinnati. Information on breast cancer risk factors, including detailed family history of breast cancer, characteristics of the primary tumor, treatment received, and recurrence status was collected at baseline and via updates. Associations between a family history of breast cancer and the risk of breast cancer recurrence were examined separately in women treated with and without radiotherapy using survival analysis. Results Over an average follow-up time of 8.78 years, we found no associations between a family history of breast cancer and the risk of breast cancer recurrence among women with a history of radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75–1.23). Among women who did not receive radiotherapy, the total number of relatives with breast cancer was positively associated with the risk of breast cancer recurrence (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00–1.47). We found no interactions of radiotherapy with family history (p-interaction >0.05). Conclusion Radiotherapy for a primary breast cancer in women with a family history of breast cancer does not increase risk of breast cancer recurrence. If these findings are replicated in future studies, the results may translate into an important health message for breast cancer survivors with a family history of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danmeng Li
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| | - Volker Mai
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| | - Travis Gerke
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| | - Susan Mengel Pinney
- Department of Environmental Health, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, USA
| | - Lusine Yaghjyan
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
|
44
|
Miller ME, Muhsen S, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M, Van Zee KJ. Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Is it High Enough to Justify Bilateral Mastectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24:2889-2897. [PMID: 28766208 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-017-5931-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2017] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are increasingly choosing bilateral mastectomy. We sought to quantify rates of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for DCIS, and to compare risk factors for CBC and IBTR. METHODS From 1978 to 2011, DCIS patients undergoing BCS with a contralateral breast at risk were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The association of clinicopathologic and treatment factors with CBC and IBTR were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, multivariable Cox regression, and competing risk regression (CRR). RESULTS Of 2759 patients identified, 151 developed CBC and 344 developed IBTR. Five- and 10-year Kaplan-Meier CBC rates were 3.2 and 6.4%. Overall, 10-year IBTR rates were 2.5-fold higher than CBC rates, and, without radiation, 4-fold higher. On CRR, 5- and 10-year rates were 2.9 and 5.8% for CBC, and 7.8 and 14.5% for IBTR. CBC risk and invasive CBC risk were not significantly associated with age, family history, presentation, nuclear grade, year of surgery, or radiation. By multivariable Cox regression, endocrine therapy was associated with lower CBC risk (hazard ratio 0.57, p = 0.03). Ten-year risk of subsequent CBC in the subset of patients who developed IBTR was similar to the cohort as a whole (8.1 vs. 6.4%). CONCLUSIONS CBC rates were low across all groups, including those who experienced IBTR. CBC was not associated with factors that increase IBTR risk. While factors associated with IBTR risk are important in decision making regarding management of the index DCIS, they are not an indication for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan E Miller
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shirin Muhsen
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Cristina Olcese
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sujata Patil
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Weill Medical College at Cornell University, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kimberly J Van Zee
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. .,Weill Medical College at Cornell University, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Robson ME, Reiner AS, Brooks JD, Concannon PJ, John EM, Mellemkjaer L, Bernstein L, Malone KE, Knight JA, Lynch CF, Woods M, Liang X, Haile RW, Duggan DJ, Shore RE, Smith SA, Thomas DC, Stram DO, Bernstein JL. Association of Common Genetic Variants With Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk in the WECARE Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109:3611466. [PMID: 28521362 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djx051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2016] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Women with unilateral breast cancer (UBC) are at risk of developing a subsequent contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Common variants are associated with breast cancer risk. Whether these influence CBC risk is unknown. Methods Participants were breast cancer cases from the population-based Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study. Sixty-seven established breast cancer risk loci were genotyped directly or by imputation in 1459 case subjects with CBC and 2126 UBC control subjects. An unweighted polygenic risk score (PRS) was created by summing the number of risk alleles for each directly genotyped single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), or for imputed loci, the imputed dosage. A weighted PRS was calculated similarly, but where each SNP's contribution was weighted by the published per-allele log odds ratio. Unweighted and weighted polygenic risk scores and CBC risk were modeled using conditional logistic regression. Cumulative CBC risk was estimated and benchmarked using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results population incidence rates. Results Both unweighted and weighted PRS were statistically significantly associated with CBC risk. The adjusted risk ratio of CBC in women in the upper quartile of unweighted PRS compared with the lowest quartile was 1.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33 to 2.00). The estimated 10-year cumulative risk for women in the upper quartile of the unweighted PRS was 7.4% (95% CI = 6.0% to 9.1%). For women in the upper quartile of the weighted PRS, the risk ratio for CBC was 1.75 (95% CI = 1.41 to 2.18) compared with women in the lowest quartile. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity by age, treatment (radiation therapy dose, tamoxifen, chemotherapy), estrogen receptor status of the first primary, histology of the first primary, length of at-risk period for CBC, or breast cancer family history. Conclusions Common genomic variants associated with the development of first primary breast cancer are also associated with the development of CBC; the risk is strongest among those who carry more risk alleles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark E Robson
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anne S Reiner
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York,NY, USA
| | - Jennifer D Brooks
- Epidemiology Division, University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Esther M John
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Research and Policy, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, CA, USA.,Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | | | - Leslie Bernstein
- Division of Cancer Etiology, Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Kathleen E Malone
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Julia A Knight
- Epidemiology Division, University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Charles F Lynch
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Meghan Woods
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York,NY, USA.,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York,NY, USA.,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert W Haile
- Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.,Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, California
| | - David J Duggan
- Integrated Cancer Genomics Division, Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen), Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Roy E Shore
- Department of Population Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Susan A Smith
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Duncan C Thomas
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.,Division of Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Daniel O Stram
- Division of Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jonine L Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York,NY, USA.,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Hamilton JG, Genoff MC, Salerno M, Amoroso K, Boyar SR, Sheehan M, Fleischut MH, Siegel B, Arnold AG, Salo-Mullen EE, Hay JL, Offit K, Robson ME. Psychosocial factors associated with the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 162:297-306. [PMID: 28150129 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-017-4123-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2016] [Accepted: 01/18/2017] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Women who are newly diagnosed with breast cancer may consider contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to reduce their future risk of cancer in their unaffected breast. Pre-surgical BRCA1/2 genetic testing can provide valuable risk information to guide this choice. However, little is understood about why BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers, who are generally not at substantially elevated risk of contralateral disease, select CPM. METHODS We examined the uptake of CPM among breast cancer patients identified as BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers (n = 92) as part of a larger prospective study of the impact of pre-surgical BRCA1/2 testing. Data obtained from self-report questionnaires and patient medical records were used to examine associations between theoretically relevant background and psychosocial factors and BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers' decisions to undergo CPM. RESULTS Among BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers, 25% (n = 23) elected to undergo CPM. Psychosocial factors including a self-reported physician recommendation for CPM, greater perceived contralateral breast cancer risk, and greater perceived benefits of CPM were all significantly associated with the uptake of CPM. CONCLUSIONS A sizeable minority of BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers choose to undergo CPM after learning their mutation status through pre-surgical genetic testing. BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers' cognitive perceptions and social influences appear to be important in shaping their decisions regarding CPM. This work highlights the importance of several psychosocial factors in influencing patients' surgical decisions. Future research is needed that examines the formation of BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers' beliefs regarding their disease and available treatment options, and that characterizes the physician-patient communication that occurs in this complex decision-making context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jada G Hamilton
- Behavioral Sciences Service, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, 7th floor, New York, 10022, NY, USA. .,Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Margaux C Genoff
- Behavioral Sciences Service, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, 7th floor, New York, 10022, NY, USA
| | - Melissa Salerno
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kimberly Amoroso
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sherry R Boyar
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Genetics & Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Margaret Sheehan
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Megan Harlan Fleischut
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Beth Siegel
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Angela G Arnold
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Erin E Salo-Mullen
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer L Hay
- Behavioral Sciences Service, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, 7th floor, New York, 10022, NY, USA.,Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mark E Robson
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Kim Y, McCarthy AM, Bristol M, Armstrong K. Disparities in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy use among women with early-stage breast cancer. NPJ Breast Cancer 2017. [PMID: 28649642 PMCID: PMC5460130 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-017-0004-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy use has increased over the past decades among women with early-stage breast cancer. Racial differences in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy use are well described, but with unclear causes. This study examined contralateral prophylactic mastectomy use among black and white women and the contribution of differences in perceived risk to differences in use. We surveyed women diagnosed with early-stage unilateral breast cancer between ages 41-64 in Pennsylvania and Florida between 2007-2009 to collect data on breast cancer treatment, family history, education, income, insurance, and perceived risk. Clinical factors-age,stage at diagnosis, receptor status-were obtained from cancer registries. The relationships between patient factors and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy were assessed using logistic regression. The interaction between race and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy on the perceived risk of second breast cancers was tested using linear regression. Of 2182 study participants, 18% of whites underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy compared with 10% of blacks (p < 0.001). The racial difference remained after adjustment for clinical factors and family history (odds ratio = 2.32, 95% confidence interval 1.76-3.06, p < 0.001). The association between contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and a reduction in the perceived risk of second breast cancers was significantly smaller for blacks than whites. Blacks were less likely than whites to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy even after adjustment for clinical factors. This racial difference in use may relate to the smaller impact of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy on the perceived risk of second breast cancers among blacks than among whites. Future research is needed to understand the overall impact of perceived risk on decisions about contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and how that may explain racial differences in use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Younji Kim
- Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford Street, 9-940L, Boston, MA 02114 USA
| | - Anne Marie McCarthy
- Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford Street, 9-940L, Boston, MA 02114 USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| | - Mirar Bristol
- Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford Street, 9-940L, Boston, MA 02114 USA
| | - Katrina Armstrong
- Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford Street, 9-940L, Boston, MA 02114 USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Anderson C, Islam JY, Elizabeth Hodgson M, Sabatino SA, Rodriguez JL, Lee CN, Sandler DP, Nichols HB. Long-Term Satisfaction and Body Image After Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24:1499-1506. [PMID: 28058563 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5753-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates have been increasing in the US, and although high levels of satisfaction with CPM have been reported, few studies have evaluated the long-term effects on body image, comparing CPM with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and unilateral mastectomy (UM). METHODS We analyzed responses from a survey of women with both a personal and family history of breast cancer who were enrolled in the Sister Study (n = 1176). Among women who underwent mastectomy, we examined satisfaction with the mastectomy decision, as well as variation in the use of reconstruction and experience of complications. Five survey items, evaluated individually and as a summed total score, were used to compare body image across surgery types (BCS, UM without reconstruction, CPM without reconstruction, UM with reconstruction, and CPM with reconstruction). RESULTS Participants were, on average, 3.6 years post-diagnosis at the time of survey (standard deviation 1.7). The majority of women (97% of CPM, 89% of UM) were satisfied with their mastectomy decision. Reconstruction was more common after CPM than after UM (70 vs. 47%), as were complications (28 vs. 19%). Body image scores were significantly worse among women who underwent CPM than among women who underwent BCS, with the lowest scores among women who underwent CPM without reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS In our sample, most women were highly satisfied with their mastectomy decision, including those who elected to undergo CPM. However, body image was lower among those who underwent CPM than among those who underwent BCS. Our findings may inform decisions among women considering various courses of surgical treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chelsea Anderson
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Jessica Y Islam
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | - Susan A Sabatino
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Juan L Rodriguez
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Clara N Lee
- Department of Plastic Surgery, School of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Dale P Sandler
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Hazel B Nichols
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Chowdhury M, Euhus D, Onega T, Biswas S, Choudhary PK. A model for individualized risk prediction of contralateral breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 161:153-160. [PMID: 27815748 PMCID: PMC5224985 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-4039-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer (BC) or ductal carcinoma in situ are increasingly choosing to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to reduce their risk of contralateral BC (CBC). This is a particularly disturbing trend as a large proportion of these CPMs are believed to be medically unnecessary. Many BC patients tend to substantially overestimate their CBC risk. Thus, there is a pressing need to educate patients effectively on their CBC risk. We develop a CBC risk prediction model to aid physicians in this task. METHODS We used data from two sources: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results to build the model. The model building steps are similar to those used in developing the BC risk assessment tool (popularly known as Gail model) for counseling women on their BC risk. Our model, named CBCRisk, is exclusively designed for counseling women diagnosed with unilateral BC on the risk of developing CBC. RESULTS We identified eight factors to be significantly associated with CBC-age at first BC diagnosis, anti-estrogen therapy, family history of BC, high-risk pre-neoplasia status, estrogen receptor status, breast density, type of first BC, and age at first birth. Combining the relative risk estimates with the relevant hazard rates, CBCRisk projects absolute risk of developing CBC over a given period. CONCLUSIONS By providing individualized CBC risk estimates, CBCRisk may help in counseling of BC patients. In turn, this may potentially help alleviate the rate of medically unnecessary CPMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marzana Chowdhury
- Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd, FO 35, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA
| | - David Euhus
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
| | - Tracy Onega
- Department of Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, USA
| | - Swati Biswas
- Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd, FO 35, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA.
| | - Pankaj K Choudhary
- Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd, FO 35, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Hunt KK, Euhus DM, Boughey JC, Chagpar AB, Feldman SM, Hansen NM, Kulkarni SA, McCready DR, Mamounas EP, Wilke LG, Van Zee KJ, Morrow M. Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Working Group Statement on Prophylactic (Risk-Reducing) Mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 24:375-397. [PMID: 27933411 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5688-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Over the past several years, there has been an increasing rate of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) surgeries. Since publication of the 2007 SSO position statement on the use of risk-reducing mastectomy, there have been significant advances in the understanding of breast cancer biology and treatment. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the current literature as a resource to facilitate a shared and informed decision-making process regarding the use of risk-reducing mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly K Hunt
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Monica Morrow
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|