Hereditary Breast Cancer: Risk Assessment Is the Easy Part

Individuals who seek genetic testing to determine hereditary risk of breast cancer may not be aware that genetic testing is uninformative in many high-risk families or that they may be at increased risk of other cancers as well. Many mistakenly believe that current genetic testing provides definitive information about the magnitude of cancer risk to carriers. This article describes the assessment of hereditary risk by pedigree analysis, epidemiology, and genetic testing within the cancer risk assessment and counseling setting, and discusses other information that helps patients to make informed health care decisions. Because the risk of ovarian cancer is increased in many families at high risk of breast cancer, information about prophylactic oophorectomy and hormone replacement therapy is essential. A case history is presented to show the efficacy of cancer risk assessment and counseling when genetic testing is uninformative. ▪     

Survey on Physicians' Knowledge and Training Needs in Genetic Counseling in Germany

BackgroundIn recent years, germline testing of women with a risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer has increased rapidly. This is due to lower costs for new high-throughput sequencing technologies and the manifold preventive and therapeutic options for germline mutation carriers. The growing demand for genetic counseling meets a shortfall of counselors and illustrates the need to involve the treating clinicians in the genetic testing process. This survey was undertaken to assess their state of knowledge and training needs in the field of genetic counseling and testing.MethodsA cross-sectional survey within the European Bridges Study (Breast Cancer Risk after Diagnostic Gene Sequencing) was conducted among physician members (n = 111) of the German Cancer Society who were primarily gynecologists. It was designed to examine their experience in genetic counseling and testing.ResultsOverall, the study revealed a need for training in risk communication and clinical recommendations for persons at risk. One-third of respondents communicated only relative disease risks (31.5%) instead of absolute disease risks in manageable time spans. Moreover, almost one-third of the respondents (31.2%) communicated bilateral and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy as an option for healthy women and unilateral-diseased breast cancer patients without mutations in high-risk genes (e.g. BRCA1 or BRCA2). Most respondents expressed training needs in the field of risk assessment models, the clinical interpretation of genetic test results, and the decision-making process.ConclusionThe survey demonstrates a gap of genetic and risk literacy in a relevant proportion of physicians and the need for appropriate training concepts.     

Genetic counseling impacts decision for prophylactic surgery for patients perceived to be at high risk for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study addresses the impact a comprehensive genetic counseling program had on women considering prophylactic mastectomy or oophorectomy. METHODS: Sixty patients underwent detailed family evaluation and risk was estimated. Recommendations were made regarding testing. Ramifications of testing were discussed in detail. RESULTS: Thirty-one women (37%) were considering prophylactic surgery believing themselves to be at high risk. Of these, 23 had testing recommended. Seven patients proceeded with prophylactic surgery based solely on high-risk assessment. Ten women were tested; five were positive. Three patients proceeded with prophylactic surgery despite a negative test. One decided against surgery despite a positive test. After counseling, prophylactic surgery was performed in just over half the initial candidates. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer risk estimation and genetic evaluation can be complex. Comprehensive genetic risk assessment programs can play a significant role in the management of patients considering prophylactic surgery for perceived high risk.     

Initial experience with surgical treatment planning in the newly diagnosed breast cancer patient at high risk for BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 mutation

Despite an abundance of information available for dealing with patients with BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 mutations, little guidance is available to assist the surgeon in dealing with the genetically high-risk patient recently diagnosed with breast cancer. A retrospective review was undertaken of 170 patients who underwent genetic counseling and testing over a 3-year period from March 2000 to March 2003. Forty-three of the 170 patients tested were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to genetic testing. Nine patients (20.9%) tested positive for a deleterious mutation. Fifty-eight percent underwent genetic counseling prior to definitive cancer surgery. Five of the 25 patients who underwent lumpectomy tested positive for a deleterious mutation. Testing results became available during systemic therapy or radiation was delayed until results were known. After counseling, all five patients testing positive went on to bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and reconstruction. None had radiation therapy. Because of a strong family history, eight patients elected to undergo prophylactic mastectomy and reconstruction prior to obtaining genetic test results; and despite compelling histories, all eight tested negative for a mutation. Treatment algorithms are developed to manage patients that are first discovered to be at high risk for a BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 mutation at the time they are diagnosed with breast cancer. Patients diagnosed with breast cancer who are discovered to be at high risk for a genetic mutation should undergo counseling prior to definitive surgery. This maximizes the time that patients have to consider options for prophylaxis and monitoring should their test be positive. It also prevents women who would otherwise be candidates for breast preservation from undergoing unnecessary radiation therapy should they chose prophylactic mastectomy in the face of a positive test.     

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.     

Effect of genetic cancer risk assessment on surgical decisions at breast cancer diagnosis

HYPOTHESIS: Breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutation status affects patients' surgical decisions when genetic cancer risk assessment is offered at the time of breast cancer diagnosis, prior to definitive treatment. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Outcomes following genetic cancer risk assessment were studied for women newly diagnosed as having breast cancer who were prospectively enrolled in an institutional review board-approved hereditary cancer registry during a 1-year sampling frame. BRCA gene analysis was offered to subjects with a calculated mutation probability of 10% or higher. Review of medical records and telephone survey were used to document surgical treatment decisions following genetic cancer risk assessment. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 233 women in the registry were enrolled at the time of a breast cancer diagnosis. The interval from diagnosis to genetic cancer risk assessment ranged from 3 to 60 days. The mean calculated probability of a BRCA gene mutation was 21% across the cohort. Two women were not tested because of low prior probabilities of mutation detection, and 3 declined owing to intercurrent psychological stressors. Of the remaining 32 patients, no BRCA gene mutation was detected in 22 (69%), 3 (9%) were found to carry a variant of uncertain significance, and 7 (22%) had a deleterious mutation. All 7 subjects with a deleterious mutation opted for bilateral mastectomy, whereas 20 of 22 patients with negative test results chose stage-appropriate treatment (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Genetic cancer risk assessment at the time of breast cancer diagnosis significantly affected women's treatment decisions. Although need and feasibility are demonstrated, the logistics of genetic cancer risk assessment during breast cancer diagnosis prove challenging.     

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.     

Prognosis of pregnancy after breast cancer diagnosis according to the type of treatment: A population-based study in Korea by the SMARTSHIP group

BackgroundsIn this study, we evaluated the incidence and outcomes of pregnancy after breast cancer was diagnosed in women of childbearing age. Additionally, we evaluated the prognosis of patients who became pregnant after breast cancer, according to the treatment.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of women aged 20–45 years who were surgically treated for breast cancer between 2004 and 2014 using the Korean National Health Insurance database. The patients were classified into six groups according to the treatment. Propensity score matching was applied to the cohort to analyze the risk of breast cancer-associated mortality after pregnancy and childbirth.ResultsOf the 45,765 patients who had been newly diagnosed with breast cancer, 1826 (4%) became pregnant after breast cancer diagnosis. Among the pregnant group, the HR of the risk of death was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.36) for patients who became pregnant ≥49 months after the diagnosis. In patients who received endocrine therapy and chemotherapy, the pregnant group had better prognosis than the non-pregnant group. There was no significant difference between the pregnant group and the non-pregnant group in patients who received chemotherapy and trastuzumab with or without endocrine therapy.ConclusionThe risk of death was low in women who became pregnant ≥49 months after the diagnosis of breast cancer. The prognosis of pregnant women was non-inferior to that of non-pregnant women, even in women who received trastuzumab. These findings provide reassurance to patients with HER2-positive cancer who are considering future pregnancy.     

Distress in partners of high-risk women undergoing breast cancer surveillance

BackgroundPartners are an importance source of support for women at risk for hereditary breast cancer. The impact of regular breast cancer surveillance in at-risk women on psychological distress in the partners of these women is unknown. This study aimed to (1) examine the levels and courses of psychological distress of partners and high-risk women around breast cancer surveillance appointments at the clinic, (2) to explore the relationship between partners’ and women's distress, and (3) to identify factors that were associated with distress in partners.MethodsPartners of 77 high-risk women adhering to breast cancer surveillance, and participating in a psychological follow-up study, completed questionnaires measuring psychological distress 2 months before (T0), on the day of (T1) and 1 to 4 weeks after (T2) two consecutive biannual appointments for the women at the clinic.ResultsPartners’ breast cancer-specific distress was positively related to the women's cancer-specific distress prior to breast cancer surveillance. Fatherhood and affective risk perception were positively associated with distress in partners.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that the psychological distress associated with stressful waiting for the breast cancer surveillance appointment, and – after the appointment – for the results, is an interpersonal experience, which is shared within the couple. These findings underscore the importance of involving partners in the clinical interventions for high-risk women. Clinicians should address the affective risk perception of partners, i.e. how they experience the increased breast cancer risk of the woman.     

Information needs on breast cancer genetic and non-genetic risk factors in relatives of women with a BRCA1/2 or PALB2 pathogenic variant

ObjectivesComprehensive breast cancer (BC) risk models integrating effects of genetic (GRF) and non-genetic risk factors (NGRF) may refine BC prevention recommendations. We explored the perceived information received on BC risk factors, and related characteristics, in female relatives of women with a BRCA1/2 or PALB2 pathogenic variant, undergoing BC risk assessment using the CanRisk© prediction tool.MethodsOf 200 consecutive cancer-free women approached after the initial genetic consultation, 161 (80.5%) filled in questionnaires on their perception of information received and wished further information on BC risk factors (e.g., being a carrier of a moderate risk altered gene, personal genetic profile, lifestyles). Multilevel multivariate linear models were performed accounting for the clinician who met the counselee and exploring the effect of counselees’ socio-demographic, familial and psychological characteristics on the perceived extent of information received.ResultsPerceived no/little information received and wish for further information were more frequent for NGRF (>50%) than for GRF, especially high-risk genes (<20%). Perceived amount of information received and desire for further information were inversely correlated (p=<0.0001). Higher education level related to lower perceived levels of information received on GRF. Younger counselees' age (β = 0.13, p = 0.02) and less frequent engagement coping (e.g., inclination to solicit information) (β = 0.24, p = 0.02) related to lower perceived information received about NGRF. Other assessed counselees’ features were not found to be associated to GRF and NGRF information perception.ConclusionsAwareness of counselees’ perceived lack of information on BC risk factors indicates a need to enhance evidence-based information on BC NGRF especially.     

Influence of the subtype on local recurrence risk of breast cancer with or without radiation therapy

PurposeTo investigate if intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer predict different risks of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with and without postoperative radiation therapy.Patients and methodsWe randomized 381 women with a unifocal T1N0M0 breast cancer to BCS alone (197 women) or BCS plus postoperative radiation therapy (XRT) (184 women). All available histopathological material was re-analyzed with modern immunohistochemical methods (223 women). After 20 years of complete follow-up we analyzed the risk of IBTR by intrinsic breast cancer subtypes (luminal A, luminal B/HER2-negative, luminal B/HER2-positive, HER2-positive and triple negative). We used Cox regression analyses to estimate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsIn a multivariate analysis the luminal B/HER2-negative subtype, compared with the luminal A subtype, was associated with a higher risk of IBTR overall (HR 3.04; 95% CI 1.38–6.71) and in both the XRT-group (HR 5.08 95% CI 1.31–19.7) and the non-XRT-group (HR 2.58 95%CI 1.07–6.20); (p for interaction = 0.37). The risk of IBTR in the XRT- and non-XRT group, stratified by intrinsic subtype, revealed an absolute risk difference at 20 years to the benefit of XRT of 14% (95% CI 1.0%–26%) for luminal A, 17% (95% CI -6.0% to 39%) for luminal B/HER2 negative and 22% (95% CI -7.0–51%) for the high-risk group.ConclusionsAmong breast cancer patients treated with BCS, the luminal B/HER2-negative subtype predicts an about 3-fold higher risk for IBTR compared to other intrinsic subtypes independent of postoperative radiation therapy.     

Prognosis of selected triple negative apocrine breast cancer patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy

BackgroundTriple negative breast cancer encompasses several biological entities with different outcomes and is a priority to identify which patients require more treatment to reduce the risk of recurrence and which patients need less treatment.Patients and methodsAmong the 210 women with first primary invasive apocrine non metastatic breast cancer operated on between January 1998 and December 2016 at the European Institute Oncology, Milan, we identified 24 patients with a pT1-pT2, node-negative, triple negative subtype and Ki-67 ≤ 20% who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). We compared the outcome of this cohort with a similar group of 24 patients with ductal tumors who received adjuvant chemotherapy, matched by pathological stage and biological features and also with a similar group of 12 patients with apocrine tumors who received adjuvant chemotherapy.ResultsThe median age was 64 and 61 years in the apocrine (w/o CT) and ductal group, respectively. The median value of Ki-67 expression was 12% in the apocrine group (w/o CT) and 16% in the ductal group (p < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 7.5 years, no patients in the apocrine group (w/o CT) experienced a breast cancer related event compared with 4 events in the ductal carcinoma group (Gray test p-value = 0.11).ConclusionsThe outcome of selected apocrine triple negative breast cancer patients who did not received adjuvant chemotherapy is excellent and supports a treatment de-escalation. Multicenter projects focusing on the possibility of avoiding adjuvant chemotherapy in selected subtypes of triple negative breast cancers with favorable outcome are warranted.     

The effect of postmastectomy radiation therapy on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer

BackgroundThe prognostic impact of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer is controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect of PMRT on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer.MethodsA total of 3439 patients diagnosed with T1-2N0 breast cancer who received mastectomy between 2000 and 2016 in our institute were retrospectively analyzed. Leveraging the Fine and Gray competing risks regression in unirradiated patients, risk factors of locoregional recurrence (LRR) were identified. All patients were stratified into high-risk (3 or 4 risk factors) and low-risk (no more than 2 risk factors) groups. The prognostic effect of PMRT was estimated in two subgroups. This subgroup analysis was also performed in patients with T2N0 breast cancer.ResultsThe median follow-up was 89 months. The 5-year cumulative incidence of LRR was 2.2% in unirradiated patients. Tumor size, estrogen receptor (ER) status, histologic grade and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were identified as independent risk factors of LRR. In the high-risk group, PMRT was correlated with a 8.3% risk reduction of 5-year LRR, 7.8% risk reduction of 5-year distant recurrence (DR), and 6.4% risk reduction of 5-year breast cancer mortality (BCM), whereas it was not correlated with LRR, DR, or BCM in low-risk group. In patients with T2N0 breast cancer, PMRT was associated with decreased LRR, DR and BCM in high-risk group, other than low-risk group.ConclusionsPMRT presented heterogenous effect on patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer. Patients at high risk of LRR were more likely to benefit from PMRT.     

Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients

Background  The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of genetic counseling (GC). This qualitative study examined the impact of a surgeon referral letter on recently diagnosed breast cancer patients’ uptake of BRCA GC. Methods  Qualitative open-ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 high-risk breast cancer patients sent a referral letter for BRCA GC by their surgeon. Data were analyzed by a grounded theory approach. Results  Most women (~80%) recalled receiving the letter, and 62% of all (n = 16) women pursued GC. Recall of the letter did not seem to be associated with uptake of GC (P = .49, Fisher’s exact test). The results highlight key areas for improvement that may help increase the impact of the letter. Half of the women in this sample believed that the letter was sent to all breast cancer patients, rather than those with specific risk factors. Few women mentioned any implications for the information obtained during GC or testing regarding their current breast cancer diagnosis or treatment. Of the women who did not attend, many perceived that dealing with the GC and testing process in the midst of a cancer diagnosis and treatment was overwhelming. Among the women who had chosen not to attend GC, most stated they would reconsider after completing their treatment. Conclusions  Patient recall of a surgeon referral letter does not seem to increase the number of high-risk women who attend GC after a breast cancer diagnosis. The letter approach in its current format does not seem to be a wholly effective means of communicating with some patients who may be overwhelmed by their cancer diagnosis or unaware that GC and testing may have implications for their current treatment decisions, possibly resulting in a missed opportunity to engage in informed decision making.     

The Effects of Type of Surgery and Time on Psychological Adjustment in Women After Breast Cancer Treatment

Background: The aim of the present study was to examine whether type of surgery, age, and time since surgery influenced psychological distress and quality of life (QOL) in women treated for breast cancer.Methods: We surveyed 183 women who had undergone surgery for breast cancer. Psychological distress was measured with the Mental Health Inventory and QOL was measured with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire.Results: After controlling for stage of disease, radiation treatment, and age, there was a statistically significant interaction between type of surgery and time since surgery for the Mental Health Inventory total score, and a marginal interaction between type of surgery and time since surgery for the Global health status/QOL score. Women who had breast conservation surgery experienced significantly greater levels of psychological distress and marginally worse QOL from 40 months after surgery onward than did women who received a mastectomy.Conclusions: The effects of different surgical treatments for breast cancer on psychological distress and QOL become apparent only after a period of several years. Women, therefore, need counseling on the potentially positive and negative psychological implications of different surgical treatments for breast cancer.     

Clinical options for women at high risk for breast cancer

Women at hereditary risk of breast cancer face a difficult clinical decision. Each of the options available to them has unique advantages and disadvantages that are summarized in Table 9. Many components enter a high-risk woman's decision: her objective risk of breast cancer; clinical features, such as the consistency of breast tissue and resultant ease of examination; breast density on mammography; personal characteristics, including her experience with cancer within her family; her role and [table: see text] responsibilities within her own nuclear family; her values and goals; her experiences with the medical system; and her subjective assessment of risk. It is generally believed that women significantly overestimate their risk of breast cancer. Thus, it is vital that a woman at risk have access to a genetic counselor who can provide accurate assessment of her risk. Women should be encouraged to take time to understand their risk level and the advantages and disadvantages of the options before them.     

Effect of multidisciplinary team care on the risk of recurrence in breast cancer patients: A national matched cohort study

BackgroundCancer has been the leading cause of death in the past decade in Taiwan, with breast cancer being the most common type of cancer in females. Very few studies looked at the risk of recurrence in patients who received multidisciplinary team (MDT) care. We analyzed the influence of MDT on the risk of recurrence and death in breast cancer patients.MethodIn this retrospective study, we included newly diagnosed patients from 2004 to 2010. The study included 9,266 breast cancer patients who were enrolled in MDT care and 9,266 patients who were not. The study used log-rank test to analyze patients’ characteristics, hospital characteristics, cancer staging, and treatment methods to compare the recurrence rates in MDT care and non-MDT care participants. We used Cox proportional hazards model to examine the effect of MDT and associated factors on the risk of recurrence and mortality of breast cancer patients.ResultsRelative risk of recurrence was lower for patients who received MDT care than for patients who did not (HR, 0.84; 95%CI: 0.70–0.99) after matching. The mortality risk for breast cancer patients with relapse was 8.48 times (95%CI: 7.53–9.54) than that for patients without relapse.ConclusionsThe relative risk of recurrence and death was significantly lower for breast cancer patients who received MDT care than for those who did not. We suggest that MDT care be implanted in the National Health Policy settings of breast cancer patients.     

Patient and medical barriers preclude uptake of tamoxifen preventative therapy in women with a strong family history

AimsTo assess the eligibility, uptake and impediments to tamoxifen use in high-risk women attending a risk management clinic due to family history.Patients and methodsAll patients with a germline mutation in a cancer predisposing gene or at high genetic risk (based on family history) attending a Breast and Ovarian cancer risk management clinic from February 2014 to May 2015 received both verbal and written evidence-based information on preventive therapy and were recommended to consider endocrine prevention if not contraindicated. Endocrine therapy initiation, use and cessation were captured. Patient eligibility was analysed and reasons for declining, ceasing or contraindications for medication use were recorded.ResultsDuring the study period, 237 women were seen over 305 consultations for breast surveillance and preventative therapy discussion. They comprised 38 BRCA1 and 42 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 4 with Peutz-Jegher syndrome, 153 with a strong family history. Their median age was 39.4 years. Endocrine preventative was considered and discussed with all but 19 women. Of the remaining 218, 34 chose bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, while endocrine preventative was not recommended in 50 women due to contraindications and 25 women declined treatment due to their intention to fall pregnant. In 118 patients who remained eligible, 18.6% (22) tried prevention and 9.4% (14) remained on therapy.ConclusionsPhysician-reluctance is not a dominant reason for poor uptake of endocrine prevention even by high-risk premenopausal women in a specialised risk management clinic. Many women are not eligible, and most elect for alternative options.     

Identifying cost-effective treatment with raloxifene in postmenopausal women using risk algorithms for fractures and invasive breast cancer

IntroductionThe National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) recommends considering treatment in women with a 20% or higher 10-year probability of a major fracture. However, raloxifene reduces both the risk of vertebral fractures and invasive breast cancer so that raloxifene treatment may be clinically appropriate and cost-effective in women who do not meet a 20% threshold risk. The aim of this study was to identify cost-effective scenarios of raloxifene treatment compared to no treatment in younger postmenopausal women at increased risk of invasive breast cancer and fracture risks below 20%.MethodA micro-simulation model populated with data specific to American Caucasian women was used to quantify the costs and benefits of 5-year raloxifene treatment. The population evaluated was selected based on 10-year major fracture probability as estimated with FRAX® being below 20% and 5-year invasive breast cancer risk as estimated with the Gail risk model ranging from 1% to 5%.ResultsThe cost per QALY gained ranged from US $22,000 in women age 55 with 5% invasive breast cancer risk and 15–19.9% fracture probability, to $110,000 in women age 55 with 1% invasive breast cancer risk and 5–9.9% fracture probability. Raloxifene was progressively cost-effective with increasing fracture risk and invasive breast cancer risk for a given age cohort. At lower fracture risk in combination with lower invasive breast cancer risk or when no preventive raloxifene effect on invasive breast cancer was assumed, the cost-effectiveness of raloxifene worsened markedly and was not cost-effective given a willingness-to-pay of US $50,000. At fracture risk of 15–19.9% raloxifene was cost-effective also in women at lower invasive breast cancer risk.ConclusionsRaloxifene is potentially cost-effective in cohorts of young postmenopausal women, who do not meet the suggested NOF 10-year fracture risk threshold. The cost-effectiveness is contingent on their 5-year invasive breast cancer risk. The result highlights the importance of considering a woman's full risk profile when considering anti-osteoporosis treatment.