Limitations of the Gail model in the specialized breast cancer risk assessment clinic

The Gail model is a risk assessment tool that is accurate for general breast cancer risk screening. Because of the limited way that this model incorporates family history information, however, there are concerns that it may underestimate risk for many women attending specialized breast cancer risk assessment clinics. We collected comprehensive breast cancer risk factor information for 213 women attending a specialized breast cancer risk assessment clinic using a modified version of the CancerGene software. Breast cancer risk was calculated using the models of Gail and Claus as well as BRCAPRO and the tables of Bodian (for women with lobular neoplasia). Eighty-six percent of the women had a family history of breast cancer. Although 74% of women had risk factor histories that are thought to confound the Gail model (family history of breast cancer in second-degree relatives, family history of breast cancer before the age of 50, family history of bilateral breast cancer, family history of ovarian cancer, or personal history of lobular neoplasia), the inclusion of other models increased the risk level assignment in only 13% of the cases. We conclude that the Gail model is an appropriate risk assessment tool for most women attending specialized clinics, although the inclusion of models better able to account for family history information and personal history of lobular neoplasia is required to accommodate all women.     

BRCA1/2 mutations and triple negative breast cancers

Identifying breast cancer patients at increased risk for carrying a mutation in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is an important objective in clinical practice. Although age at diagnosis, family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer, and ethnicity are all essential parameters to consider when assessing risk, there are limitations as to how well such factors accurately predict BRCA1/2 status, even when quantitative risk models are applied. Integrating information about triple negative (TN) disease may help refine these estimates. Among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, fewer than 10% have a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, and up to 20% present However, among BRCA1 mutation carriers at least one-third have TN breast cancers. In this paper, we review key studies that have assessed breast cancer cases with a known BRCA1/2 status and triple marker data. We also discuss how integrating such information into qualitative and quantitative risk assessments of BRCA1/2 carrier probability may improve the ability to identify women who are appropriate candidates for genetic testing. Identifying women at increased risk is critical as knowledge of mutation status may impact surgical and systemic treatment in newly diagnosed patients, as well as recommendations for ovarian cancer risk management.     

Gail model risk factors: impact of adding an extended family history for breast cancer

Abstract:  An approach commonly used in estimating breast cancer risk is the Gail model. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and impact of adding extended family history as a new breast cancer risk factor into the Gail model. The data of the present study include cases with breast cancer and hospitalized controls recruited in the National Cancer Institute of Naples (southern Italy) between 1997 and 2000. We compared the first-degree relative (FDR) risk factor (standard Gail model) with the second-degree relative (SDR) information; and the FDR risk factor (standard Gail model) with the combination of FDR and SDR. We computed the c-statistic by comparing the risks found in our population to those in Gail-US population. The concordance for the model with FDR was 0.55 (95% CI 0.53–0.58), the model with SDR shows a modest but significant discriminatory accuracy (0.56, 95% CI 0.53–0.59), and the combination of FDR+SDR gave the concordance statistic of 0.57 (95% CI 0.54–0.60), indicating a good comparison between the two models. The results of our study show that extended family history information could be useful to improve the discriminatory power of the Gail model risk factors.     

Breast Cancer Risk Assessments Comparing Gail and CARE Models in African-American Women

Abstract:  The Gail model has been used to predict invasive breast cancer risk in women using risk factors of age, age at menarche, age at first live birth, number of first-degree relatives with breast cancer, and number of previous benign breast biopsies. However, this model underestimates breast cancer risk in African-American women. The Contraceptive and Reproductive Experience (CARE) model has been developed to replace the Gail model in predicting breast cancer risk in African-American women. In a sample of 883 women who participated in the breast cancer screening program at Howard University Cancer Center, we compared the breast cancer risk estimates from the Gail model and the CARE model. The mean 5-year breast cancer risk was 0.88% (Range: 0.18–6.60%) for the Gail model and 1.29% (Range: 0.20–4.50%) for the CARE model. Using the usual cutoff-point of 1.67% or above for elevated risk, there is a significant difference in the proportion of women with elevated breast cancer risk between the Gail and the CARE models (McNemar's test, p < 0.0001). For both models, there was a significant mean risk difference between those with and without a family history of breast cancer (Wilcoxon rank-sum test, p < 0.0001). Our results confirm the need for validation of the Gail model in African-Americans and diversity in research. Although these findings are not perfect and perhaps not definitive, they are additive in the discussions during counseling and risk assessment in African-Americans. Furthermore, these findings will be complemented by new technologies such as genomics in refining our ability to assess risk.     

The breast surgeon's role in BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing

Five percent to 10% of all women who develop breast cancer carry a hereditary mutation in the genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. Genetic testing is now clinically available, and the results of such testing can dramatically alter a patient's risks for an ipsilateral or contralateral primary breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Therefore, genetic testing will become integral in tailoring surveillance, chemoprevention, and surgical management plans for patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Such results will also impact the cancer risks for the patient's nuclear and extended family members. Surgeons will play a pivotal role in eliciting personal and family histories from patients, determining which of those histories is suggestive of a germline mutation, facilitating referrals for genetic counseling and testing, and incorporating the results of genetic testing into the patient's short- and long-term management plans.     

The effectiveness of the Gail model in estimating risk for development of breast cancer in women under 40 years of age

Epidemiologic studies have provided information on risk factors for breast cancer. Gail and associates identified five risk factors using the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP) population and developed a model to calculate a composite relative risk (RR). This model is commonly used to counsel women regarding their risk for breast cancer and was used by the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) for eligibility for the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. Because the BCDDP population was composed almost entirely of women 40 years of age or older, our purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Gail model in estimating the risk of breast cancer for women under 40 in the clinical setting. The Gail risk factors were assessed for 124 patients under the age of 40 treated for either ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer at the Lahey Hitchcock Medical Center between 1983 and 1995. The RR was calculated using the Gail model. For comparison, two cohorts of women under the age of 40 were used: 107 randomly selected patients who underwent a breast biopsy because of a benign condition and 129 nurses from our institution who responded to a questionnaire that included reproductive and family history information as used in the Gail model. The RR calculated was the RR that existed at the time of the surgical consultation for a suspicious breast lesion. The Tarone-Ware method was used to analyze statistical significance of differences between distribution. Contingency tables were analyzed using Miettinen's modification of Fisher's exact test. No differences were found between the median RR for all groups. Only 2 of the 124 patients with breast cancer had a RR of 5 or more (the RR required to enter the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial). The distribution of age at menarche (AGEMEN) was the same for each group. No difference was found for the distribution of age at first live birth (AGEFLB) between those with breast cancer and those with a benign biopsy or the control group. The number of breast biopsies (NBIOPS) was higher in patients with a benign breast biopsy. No difference was found in the distribution of number of first-degree relatives with breast cancer (NUMREL). Overall the Gail model failed to differentiate those women about to have cancer diagnosed from two control populations. The Gail model is not useful in identifying immediate risk of breast cancer in women under 40 and should not be used for that purpose.     

Prophylactic Mastectomy

Abstract: Prophylactic mastectomy may be an appropriate treatment for several groups of women. These groups include women with a strong family history of breast cancer, especially those with known BRCA mutations, women with high risk pathologic changes found on previous breast biopsies, women with an immobilizing fear of developing breast cancer, and women with contralateral breast cancer. The effectiveness of prophylactic mastectomy is controversial although recent data suggests a possible gain in life expectancy for high risk women undergoing bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Each woman should have a thorough discussion with her treatment team, which should include a oncologic surgeon, plastic surgeon, psychologist, and genetic counselor, to realistically assess her risk due to family history, genetic mutations, or high risk pathologic findings, as well as the expectations and limitations of prophylactic mastectomy.     

BRCA1/2基因突变对乳腺癌保乳术后局部复发的影响及相关预后模型的构建

背景与目的 保乳手术现已成为乳腺癌的标准手术方式之一,保乳手术能够保留患者的乳房外形,极大地改善患者术后的心理状态和生活质量。BRCA1/2基因是与乳腺癌密切相关的易感基因,BRCA1/2基因突变对保乳术后乳腺癌患者局部复发的影响目前尚有争议。因此,本研究分析BRCA1/2基因突变与乳腺癌保乳术后局部复发的关系,并构建相关预测模型,预测保乳术后乳腺癌患者的无局部复发生存（LRFS）率,为乳腺癌患者保乳手术适应证的选择提供可靠的依据。方法 回顾性分析2014年6月—2016年6月于中国人民解放军空军军医大学第一附属医院进行保乳手术的189例乳腺癌患者临床资料,并比较不同临床病理特征下患者BRCA1/2基因突变的差异,通过单因素及多因素Cox等比例回归模型分析BRCA1/2基因突变及其它临床病理因素对乳腺癌患者保乳术后局部复发的影响,并构建列线图来预测患者的LRFS率。通过一致性指数（C-index）、受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线及曲线下面积（AUC）对模型进行内部验证,通过校准曲线评估模型的准确性,并通过临床决策曲线分析（DCA）评价模型的临床获益和应用价值。结果 BRCA1/2基因突变组和未突变组的年龄和分子分型进行差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。单因素Cox等比例回归模型分析结果显示,BRCA1/2突变、肿瘤分级、肿瘤大小、N分期及分子分型是保乳术后乳腺癌患者LRFS率的影响因素（均P<0.1）。多因素Cox等比例回归模型分析结果显示,BRCA1/2基因突变、肿瘤大小、N分期及分子分型是保乳术后乳腺癌患者局部复发的独立影响因素（P<0.05）。将这些因素纳入并建立LRFS率的列线图预测模型。模型的C-index为0.86,内部验证C-index为0.81。ROC曲线分析结果显示,模型的3、5年LRFS率预测的AUC分别为0.89、0.85;校准曲线显示列线图预测的LRFS率与实际LRFS率接近;DCA分析显示模型的临床获益及应用价值较高。结论 BRCA1/2基因突变与保乳术后乳腺癌患者的局部复发相关,基于BRCA1/2基因突变列线图模型能够准确地预测保乳术后乳腺癌患者的LRFS率,并为乳腺癌患者手术方式的选择提供有效的科学依据。     

Immunohistochemical detection of a germline BRCA1 mutation in a breast and ovarian cancer family

Tumours from four individuals in a breast and ovarian cancer family with a known deleterious germline BRCA1 mutation, were analyzed using BRCA1 antibodies. In addition, we examined tumours from 96 female patients with early-onset breast cancer, who were not selected because of any family history. Paraffin-embedded tumour sections were examined by standard immunohistochemical analysis. Three familial tumours from BRCA1 carriers displayed focal negativity. This observation was not seen in a non-mutation carrier from the same family. It was found that 9/96 (9%) early-onset breast tumours had total BRCA1 negativity. In addition, 2/2 (100%) medullary breast carcinomas displayed negativity for both antibodies. Our results indicate that BRCA1 antibodies can discriminate between familial tumours with and without a deleterious mutation from one family. Further mutation studies in early-onset breast cancer group will be necessary to evaluate the use of immunohistochemistry as a rapid, initial screening technique to identify BRCA1 mutations.     

Medical Management of newly diagnosed breast cancer in a BRCA1/2 mutation carrier

Germline BRCA1/2 mutations may be infrequent in unselected breast cancer population but are concentrated in those with triple‐negative breast cancer or high‐risk family history. Insight into the biology of BRCA mutation is now allowing a targeted therapeutic approach to these carriers with breast cancer. Functional BRCA genes play a critical role in DNA damage repair. Agents such as platinum salts and poly (ADP‐ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors exploit this vulnerability of impaired DNA damage repair mechanism in BRCA mutant cancers to leverage therapeutic benefit. Research has demonstrated improved response rates to platinum salts in BRCA‐mutated compared with non‐BRCA‐mutated breast cancer, particularly in the metastatic setting. Additionally, clinical trials of single‐agent PARP inhibitors have shown encouraging response rates and progression‐free survival in patients with BRCA1/2‐mutated breast cancer. In this review, we summarize the medical management of BRCA‐associated breast cancer.     

Bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and breast reconstruction in BRCA1 mutation-positive simultaneous bilateral breast cancer: A case study

BackgroundMutation-positive patients who develop unilateral breast cancer require different treatments, such as prophylactic mastectomy of the contralateral breast, from those used for other breast cancer patients. If a mutation is found before surgery, it is necessary to consider a surgical procedure that includes reconstruction. For BRCA mutation-positive patients, a suitable treatment must be selected. In Japan, a test for BRCA mutation has been covered by health insurance since 2020, making it possible to preoperatively test patients who are suspected of being positive. We report a case of simultaneous bilateral breast cancer that was found to be BRCA mutation-positive preoperatively and underwent bilateral subcutaneous mastectomy and breast reconstruction.Case presentationA 57-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital after a breast cancer screening revealed a mass in the left breast. She had a family history of breast cancer, including her sister, aunt, and cousin. She was suspected of being malignant with a mass on both sides of her breast on imaging. She underwent needle biopsy and was diagnosed as having bilateral invasive ductal carcinoma, for which she was placed on preoperative chemotherapy. Due to the strong family history of bilateral breast cancer, the patient was recommended to undergo a BRCA gene-mutation test and she consented. The result was positive for BRCA1 mutation. Although it was judged that bilateral breast-conserving surgery was sufficiently possible, bilateral subcutaneous mastectomy and breast reconstruction were performed based on BRCA mutation-positive status.DiscussionPerforming a preoperative BRCA test may change the surgical procedure.BRCA tests are beneficial to patients, but the timing of the tests is important. Care must be taken not to force the patient.ConclusionsKnowing whether the patient is BRCA mutation-positive is extremely important for selecting surgical procedures and treatment methods. BRCA testing should be recommended for patients who are strongly suspected of being positive, but the decision should be the patient’s. It is therefore necessary to provide accurate information and engage in a dialogue with the patient, but the medical staff should not pressure the patient to have the test.     

Performance of BOADICEA and BRCAPRO genetic models and of empirical criteria based on cancer family history for predicting BRCA mutation carrier probabilities: A retrospective study in a sample of Italian cancer genetics clinics

PurposeTo evaluate in current practice the performance of BOADICEA and BRCAPRO risk models and empirical criteria based on cancer family history for the selection of individuals for BRCA genetic testing.Patients and methodsThe probability of BRCA mutation according to the three tools was retrospectively estimated in 918 index cases consecutively undergone BRCA testing at 15 Italian cancer genetics clinics between 2006 and 2008.Results179 of 918 cases (19.5%) carried BRCA mutations. With the strict use of the criteria based on cancer family history 173 BRCA (21.9%) mutations would have been detected in 789 individuals. At the commonly used 10% threshold of BRCA mutation carrier probability, the genetic models showed a similar performance [PPV (38% and 37%), sensitivity (76% and 77%) and specificity (70% and 69%)]. Their strict use would have avoided around 60% of the tests but would have missed approximately 1 every 4 carriers.ConclusionOur data highlight the complexity of BRCA testing referral in routine practice and question the strict use of genetic models for BRCA risk assessment.     

Chemoprevention for high-risk women: tamoxifen and beyond

The demonstration by the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) that 5 years of tamoxifen therapy is associated with an approximate 50% reduction in breast cancer incidence in high-risk women was a milestone in breast cancer prevention. Because tamoxifen is associated with increased risk of side-effects such as hot flashes, menstrual abnormalities, uterine cancer, and thromboembolic phenomena, its use will not be advisable or acceptable for all high-risk women. Women over 50 years of age appear to be at highest risk for serious adverse events, such as uterine cancer and thromboembolic phenomena. Individuals in whom tamoxifen-associated breast cancer risk reduction appears to outweigh risk of serious side-effects include women with prior in situ or estrogen receptor (ER)-positive invasive cancer, atypical hyperplasia, and/or women ages 35-49 with a calculated Gail 5-year risk of > or =1.7%, hysterectomized women aged 50 and older with a 5-year Gail risk of > or =2.5%, and nonhysterectomized women aged 50 and older with a 5-year Gail risk of >5.0%. It is not yet clear whether tamoxifen can reduce breast cancer incidence in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, although preliminary evidence favors benefit for at least those with a BRCA2 mutation. Raloxifene is a selective ER modulator with less uterine estrogen agonist activity than tamoxifen, and it is hoped that it will result in fewer uterine cancers but will be equally efficacious in reducing the risk of breast cancer. The NSABP is currently conducting a randomized study of tamoxifen versus raloxifene in high-risk postmenopausal women. Approximately one third of invasive cancers are ER negative. Tamoxifen does not reduce the incidence of ER-negative cancers, nor does it appear to be effective in preventing the appearance of one third of ER-positive cancers. Priorities in prevention research are to develop (a) biomarkers to refine short-term risk assessments based on epidemiologic models, (b) biomarkers predictive of response to specific classes of preventive agents, (c) drugs with fewer side-effects and/or effective in ER-negative or ER-positive tamoxifen-resistant precancerous disease, and (d) efficient clinical trial models to assess new agent efficacy. Breast intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN) may be sampled by minimally invasive techniques and is an attractive short-term risk biomarker. Molecular abnormalities observed in IEN may be used to select potential agents for testing/therapy, and modulation of these abnormalities may be used in phase I trials to select appropriate doses and in phase II trials to assess response. Breast density volume and certain serum markers such as insulin-like growth factor-1 are also being studied as potential risk and response biomarkers. Reversal or prevention of advanced IEN as well as modulation of other risk biomarkers in randomized phase II and phase III trials is being evaluated as a means of more efficiently evaluating prevention drugs in the future. A number of agents are being developed that target molecular abnormalities in IEN, have fewer or different side effects than tamoxifen, and may be effective in ER-negative or tamoxifen-resistant disease.     

An Alternative Approach to Selecting Patients for High‐risk Screening with Breast MRI

Current guidelines for adding breast MRI to annual screening mammography are based entirely upon stratification of risk, with a heavy focus on lifetime calculations. This approach is fraught with difficulty due to the reliance on mathematical models that vary widely in their calculations, the inherent age discrimination of using lifetime risks rather than short‐term incidence, and the failure to incorporate mammographic density, the latter being an independent risk as well as the greatest predictor of mammographic failure. By utilizing a system of patient selection similar to what was used in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666 trial for multi‐modality imaging, 33 women without a prior diagnosis of breast cancer were found to harbor mammographically occult carcinoma through MRI screening. These 33 patients represent a 2% yield, closely approximating the yields seen in prospective MRI screening trials of women at very high risk of breast cancer. Using the “~20–25%” minimum established by the American Cancer Society and later the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the Gail model would have prompted the use of MRI in only 9 of 33 (27.3%) patients, the Claus model 1 of 33 (3%), and the Tyrer–Cuzick model 12 of 33 (36.4%). Using all three models and opting for the highest calculated risk, then including BRCA‐positivity, still would have identified only 16 of 33 (48.5%) patients with occult breast cancer discovered by MRI. Only one patient was BRCA‐positive, and none had lobular carcinoma in situ, while 6 of 33 patients (18.2%) had atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH). Measures are proposed to refine patient selection for MRI screening through the use of short‐term or categorical risks, mammographic density, while maintaining cost‐effectiveness through longer MRI screening intervals.     

Breast cancer risk assessment in patients who test negative for a hereditary cancer syndrome

BackgroundThe majority of women who undergo genetic testing due to a significant family history of breast cancer will receive a negative result. The purpose of this study was to calculate the lifetime risk of breast cancer in women undergoing genetic counseling who received an uninformative genetic test result.MethodsA retrospective chart review of mutation-negative women presenting to a cancer risk assessment clinic was performed. Lifetime risks of breast cancer were calculated using the Claus, Gail, and Tyrer-Cuzick risk assessment models.ResultsApproximately half (51%) of the women were classified as high-risk by at least one risk assessment model. The Tyrer-Cuzick model identified the highest proportion (43.2%) of patients as high-risk. Four percent (n = 4) of the sample was considered high-risk by all three models.ConclusionsMore than half (51%) of women who underwent genetic counseling and received an uninformative negative genetic test result had a significantly elevated risk for the development of breast cancer. It is, therefore, imperative that women do not conclude that a negative genetic test result represents a lack of risk.     

Role of Breast Surgery in BRCA Mutation Carriers

BRCA mutation carriers have a life-long breast cancer risk between 55 and 85% and a high risk of developing breast cancer at a very young age, depending on the type of mutation. The risk of developing contralateral breast cancer after a first breast cancer is elevated up to 65%, especially in case of BRCA1 mutation and young age at the first breast cancer. Since bilateral prophylactic mastectomy is associated with a risk reduction of 90–95% of developing primary or contralateral breast cancer, this option is a key point within the counseling process for patient information and shared decision-making of mutation carriers. Although the local control after breast-conserving therapy in mutation carriers seems to be comparable to that of sporadic breast cancer patients, individual patient information and counseling should include all alternative procedures of oncologically adequate mastectomy techniques and immediate reconstruction. Excellent cosmetic results, high levels of life quality, and good patient acceptance can be achieved with the recent developments in reconstructive surgery of the breast.     

Establishing a Family Risk Assessment Clinic for Breast Cancer

Abstract:  Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting European women and the leading cause of cancer-related death. A total of 15–20% of women who develop breast cancer have a family history and 5–10% a true genetic predisposition. The identification and screening of women at increased risk may allow early detection of breast cancer and improve prognosis. We established a family risk assessment clinic in May 2005 to assess and counsel women with a family history of breast cancer, to initiate surveillance, and to offer risk-reducing strategies for selected high-risk patients. Patients at medium or high risk of developing breast cancer according to NICE guidelines were accepted. Family history was determined by structured questionnaire and interview. Lifetime risk of developing breast cancer was calculated using Claus and Tyrer-Cuzick scoring. Risk of carrying a breast cancer-related gene mutation was calculated using the Manchester system. One thousand two hundred and forty-three patients have been referred. Ninety-two percent were at medium or high risk of developing breast cancer. Formal assessment of risk has been performed in 368 patients, 73% have a high lifetime risk of developing breast cancer, and 72% a Manchester score ≥16. BRCA1/2 mutations have been identified in 14 patients and breast cancer diagnosed in two. Our initial experience of family risk assessment has shown there to be a significant demand for this service. Identification of patients at increased risk of developing breast cancer allows us to provide individuals with accurate risk profiles, and enables patients to make informed choices regarding their follow-up and management.     

Medullary carcinoma of breast with a novel germline mutation 1123T >G in exon 11 of BRCA1

Breast cancer, the most common malignancy in females, has an estimated 5-10% hereditary predisposition. BRCA1 is a tumor suppressor gene and is known to be responsible for breast cancer and breast-ovarian cancers running in families. In breast caner patients, several mutations in BRCA1 have been reported throughout the gene. This report describes identification of a mutation in BRCA1 gene using protein truncation (PTT) assay in a patient with medullary carcinoma of breast who also had a family history of breast cancer. Following DNA sequencing, the mutation was confirmed as substitution of thymine at position 1123 with guanine of exon 11 (1123 T>G). This mutation can be added to the pool of known BRCA1 mutations in Pakistani population, which will help in developing a local screening panel of BRCA1 mutations.     

Breast cancer and ovarian cancer genetics

Breast and ovarian cancers are the second and fifth leading causes of cancer death, respectively, among women in the United States. Individuals with breast cancer have a 20--30% chance of having at least one relative with the disease. However, only 5--10% of the cases are a direct result of germline mutations in highly penetrable genes, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) as well as genes TP53 and PTEN. Since 1996, genetic testing for these mutations has been clinically available. A strategy for the management of women at increased familial risk of breast and ovarian cancers is described, which includes genetic assessment, chemoprevention, radiologic screening, and clinical and self-examination. Genetic testing should occur within a cancer genetic clinic after genetic counseling. A blood sample allows determination of the presence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, the TP53 gene, the PTEN gene, and the ATM gene. Tumor examination has identified a growth factor receptor gene, human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER-2).With regard to diet and lifestyle, women at increased risk of breast cancer could be advised to reduce dietary fat, avoid obesity, decrease alcohol consumption, and take regular exercise. Although chemoprotection is a valuable consideration, it is important to emphasize that the use of Tamoxifen in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is not established, nor is the optimum duration of benefit. An overview of the main outcomes of the current published studies confirms a 38% decrease in breast cancer incidence with Tamoxifen but recommends its use be restricted to women at high risk of breast cancer and low risk for potential side effects. The role of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy or prophylactic mastectomy has been controversial for several reasons, including the psychosocial significance of the breast in Western cultures, the wide acceptance of breast conservation in surgery for early breast cancer, and the previous lack of data on its efficacy. The surgical procedure should aim to remove substantially all at-risk breast tissue. However, there is a balance between reduction of cancer risk and cosmetic outcome. Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy can significantly decrease ovarian cancer risk in women who carry BCRA1 mutations. Oophorectomy lowers the risk of breast cancer, even in women who have previously used hormone replacement therapy. There are no published randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of mammographic screening in women under 50 years of age with a family history of breast cancer. However, the published studies do suggest that mammographic screening of a high-risk group of women under 50 years of age may detect cancer at a rate equivalent to that seen in women 10 years older with normal risk. Other initial studies also support MRI as having a greater sensitivity than mammography in high-risk women. Breast clinical and self-examination is often advocated, but its effectiveness is unproved, and only one randomized study has been undertaken in women at risk. On the basis of this study as well as one nonrandomized study, it can be concluded that clinical examination as well as mammography are essential in detecting breast cancer. under 50 years of age with a family history of breast cancer. However, the published studies do suggest that mammographic screening of a high-risk group of women under 50 years of age may detect cancer at a rate equivalent to that seen in women 10 years older with normal risk. Other initial studies also support MRI as having a greater sensitivity than mammography in high-risk women. Breast clinical and self-examination is often advocated, but its effectiveness is unproved, and only one randomized study has been undertaken in women at risk. On the basis of this study as well as one nonrandomized study, it can be concluded that clinical examination as well as mammography are essential in detecting breast cancer.