Early Onset Breast Cancer in a Registry‐based Sample of African‐American Women: BRCA Mutation Prevalence,and Other Personal and System‐level Clinical Characteristics

Young Black women are disproportionately afflicted with breast cancer, a proportion of which may be due to BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) gene mutations. In a sample of Black women with early onset breast cancer, we evaluated BRCA mutations and explored personal and system‐level clinical characteristics. Black women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer (age ≤50) were recruited through the state cancer registry. Participants completed a questionnaire, genetic counseling and BRCA testing. Of the 48 women who consented to study participation, 46 provided a usable biologic specimen for BRCA testing. The overall prevalence of BRCA mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in participants was 6.5% and 34.8%, respectively. Of these, only 14 were referred for genetic counseling prior to study enrollment. Overall, those participants who chose to undergo bilateral mastectomy had a higher number of relatives with breast and ovarian cancer (p = 0.024) and a higher household income (p = 0.009). BRCA mutation prevalence and the high prevalence of VUS in participants are consistent with prior studies. Furthermore, clinical factors such as family history and financial means may influence type of surgery recommended and chosen, at both the provider and patient level, respectively. Finally, the limited number of patients referred for genetic counseling prior to surgical treatment for breast cancer may represent a missed clinical opportunity to inform surgical decisions.     

Complexities of genetic screening and testing in hereditary colorectal cancer

It is becoming increasingly important to identify patients at risk for hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) given the opportunity to impact medical management and reduce morbidity and mortality among patients and their family members once inherited CRC predisposition is confirmed. Methods by which patients are identified are evolving as genetic testing costs have plummeted, resulting in many more genetic screening and testing options. Opportunities and challenges with newer approaches to genetic testing and screening for hereditary CRC are reviewed along with benefits and limitations of each approach. Regardless of how methods evolve for identifying patients with hereditary cancer risk, the need for patient education, family history taking, appropriate risk counseling, and enhancing sharing across family members will remain critical for optimal patient care.     

Uptake of risk‐reducing surgery in BRCA gene carriers in Wales,UK

Women who inherit a mutated copy of the BRCA gene have a higher lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. No large epidemiological studies exist looking at BRCA mutation carriers in UK populations. All patients with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation identified between 1995 and 2015 were included. Individuals were identified from a prospectively gathered data base. Genetics case‐notes were obtained and retrospective analysis performed. 581 female BRCA mutation carriers were identified with a median age of 34 (18‐81) at the time of testing. Of the 301 women who underwent diagnostic testing (symptomatic) 246 had been diagnosed with breast cancer, 89 with ovarian cancer and 37 had both at time of testing. Median age at diagnostic test was 51 (25‐81). 33% of women underwent risk‐reducing mastectomies (RRM); median age at surgery 45. This compares with 37% of women in this diagnostic group who underwent Risk‐reducing bilateral salpingo‐oopherectomies (RRBSO) at a median age of 46. Two hundred and eighty women underwent predictive testing (family history, asymptomatic), median age 36 (18‐81). 34% of women in this predictive group underwent RRM, median age 37. There was a 29% uptake of RRBSO (median age 44 years). Fifteen women (5%) developed breast cancer after being tested; none of these had undergone RRS. This unique study of all BRCA mutation carriers in Wales shows considerable variation in uptake of RRS. The decision to undergo RRS is complex and involves a number of factors, including a woman's age and life stage. As BRCA testing becomes more frequent and more gene mutation carriers are identified there will be significant implications for service allocation, screening demands, and provision of risk‐reducing surgery for this high‐risk patient group.     

The genetic basis of breast cancer and its clinical implications

While it has long been recognized that a proportion of breast cancer cases are the result of an inherited familial predisposition, precise knowledge of the underlying genetic processes has been lacking. Recent advances in molecular biology, however, have shown that hereditary breast cancer may eventuate as a result of mutations on several specific gene loci including BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM gene, PTEN and p53. Several other less frequently occurring predisposition genes such as the androgen receptor gene (AR), the HNPCC genes and the oestrogen receptor gene may also be involved, but to a lesser extent. Overall, approximately 5-10% of all breast cancers are thought to involve one of these inherited predisposition genes, with BRCA1 and BRCA2 being responsible for as much as 90% of this group. Because of the complex nature of genetic testing, mutation analysis is not presently routinely available outside genetic counselling clinics. In this review the current knowledge and role of each predisposition gene is outlined and the management implications of genetic testing for members of breast cancer families for both affected and non-affected members are discussed. The need to provide comprehensive counselling for women with an inherited predisposition to breast cancer has seen the evolution of the familial cancer clinic, involving a multidisciplinary specialist team approach. Familial cancer clinics will provide individuals with information about their risk of developing breast cancer and offer advice regarding further management strategies. It is important that surgeons, who have traditionally played a key role in breast cancer treatment, remain cognizant of these advances in genetic molecular biology, and in so doing continue to remain key participants in the conduct of breast cancer management.     

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.     

Asesoramiento genético en cáncer de próstata: ¿cómo implementarlo en la práctica clínica diaria?

Prostate cancer plays an undeniably prominent role in public health in our days and health systems. Its epidemiological impact is quantitatively very close to that of other tumors such as colon cancer and breast cancer, in which genetic counseling is part of their routine clinical practice, both in the initial evaluation and in the selection of therapeutic strategies. Hereditary cancer syndromes, breast/ovarian and Lynch syndrome are part of genetic counseling in these tumors. Currently, we also know that they can be associated to prostate cancer.The time has come to implement genetic counseling in prostate cancer from the earliest stages of its approach, from initial suspicion to the most advanced tumors. We present an updated review carried out by our interdisciplinary working group on scientific literature, clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents, aimed at the creation and drafting of a’Protocol for genetic counseling in prostate cancer’ for the study of germline, with easy application in different healthcare settings. This protocol is currently being implemented in our routine practice and provides answers to 3 specific questions: Who should receive genetic counseling for prostate cancer? Which gene panel should be analyzed? How should counseling be done according to the results obtained? Other aspects about who should perform genetic counseling, ethical considerations and regulations are also collected.     

Benchmarking of a checklist for the identification of familial risk for breast and ovarian cancers in a prospective cohort

The detection of deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 considerably influences the clinical management of healthy and diseased carriers. Therefore, the identification of persons at risk who could uptake genetic counseling and testing is pivotal. We developed a checklist with validated criteria to improve the identification, and prospectively evaluate the incidence, of familial cancer history in 5091 breast cancer patients. The rate of 30.4% of patients at high genetic risk underpins the demand for care in risk identification and counseling. The easy‐to‐use instrument promotes the implementation and dissemination of risk counseling by physicians.     

Importance of family history and indications for genetic testing

Family history is an important cancer risk assessment tool, and it is easy to use. The family history is integral in identifying an individual's risk for primary cancer and assists in the assessment of risk for a second primary cancer. For oncology providers, the critical family history is defined as including first‐ and second‐degree family history, maternal and paternal history, type of primary cancer, and age at diagnosis and ethnicity. Family history should be taken at diagnosis and updated periodically. Despite the importance of family history to patient care, there are significant barriers to taking a family history. We review the impact of collecting complete family history data with respect to calculation of cancer risk, recommendations for screening, and prevention strategies and referral for genetic testing.     

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. ▪     

The contemporary landscape of genetic testing and breast cancer: Emerging issues

The landscape of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility has transformed dramatically over the last decade and a half. Traditionally, the process of genetic testing resided fully within a medical infrastructure, from identification of appropriate testing candidates to gene selection to risk mitigation recommendations. More recently, decreasing costs, advancing technology, and a growing understanding of therapeutic implications of certain genetic test results have led to more widespread uptake of testing that increasingly involves broad multigene panels. Germline genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility can now be obtained through one of three approaches: through clinical care; a direct‐to‐consumer (DTC) approach that is entirely consumer‐driven; or a hybrid, patient‐initiated, provider‐mediated model. Increased access to testing has led to extensive dialogue about the best way to conduct testing and act on results. Points of discussion include: selection of appropriate candidates for genetic testing; optimal composition of genes on panels; informed consent; safe return of results; privacy; and legal protections for those found to have relevant pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. As more individuals undergo genetic testing, a growing population of individuals with inherited breast cancer predisposition informs optimal management of cancer risk and also highlights unanswered questions. This article aims to review the current state of genetic testing for inherited breast cancer susceptibility including testing approaches, the legal, ethical and social landscape, and selected contemporary management issues.     

The Impact of Mental Illness on Uptake of Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast Cancer and Ovarian Cancer in a Multiethnic Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients

We evaluated whether mental illness is a barrier to genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in multiethnic breast cancer patients. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 308 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer and eligible for HBOC genetic testing seen in the breast clinic of an academic, urban medical center from 2007 to 2015. Uptake of genetic services and history of mental health disorder (MHD), defined as a psychiatric diagnosis or treatment with an antidepressant, mood stabilizer, anxiolytic, or antipsychotic medication, were ascertained by medical chart review. The mean age at breast cancer diagnosis was 56 years, with 44% non‐Hispanic whites, 37% Hispanics, and 15% non‐Hispanic blacks. Ninety‐nine (32%) women met study criteria for MHD, 73% had a genetics referral, 57% had genetic counseling, and 54% completed BRCA testing. Uptake of genetic counseling services did not differ by race/ethnicity or presence of MHD. In multivariable analysis, younger age at diagnosis, Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, and family history of breast cancer were associated with HBOC genetic counseling. A relatively high proportion of breast cancer patients eligible for HBOC genetic testing were referred to a genetic counselor and referral status did not vary by MHD or race/ethnicity.     

Risk for breast cancer and management of unaffected individuals with non‐BRCA hereditary breast cancer

About 5%‐10% of breast cancer is hereditary with BRCA1 and BRCA2 being the most common genes associated with hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Several additional genes have recently been associated with HBC. These genes can be classified as highly or moderately penetrant genes with lifetime risk >30% or 17%‐30%, respectively. Highly penetrant genes associated with HBC include TP53, PTEN, CDH1, STK11, and PALB2. While, moderately penetrant genes include CHEK2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, NBN, NF1, RAD51D, and MSH6. Breast cancer risk and recommendations for screening and risk‐reduction vary by gene. In general, screening breast MRI is recommended for women at >20% lifetime risk, which includes women with mutations in highly penetrant genes and the majority (but not all) moderately penetrant genes. Consideration of chemoprevention is recommended for women with mutations in high and moderately penetrant genes. Risk‐reducing mastectomy does reduce the risk of breast cancer to the greatest extent and can be considered for women with highly penetrant genes. However, this procedure is associated with significant morbidities that should be considered, especially given the benefit of using screening breast MRI for high‐risk women. BSO is only recommended for women with mutations in genes associate with increased risk for ovarian cancer and not as a breast cancer risk‐reducing strategy. As more women undergo testing, additional genes may be identified and risk estimates for current genes and management recommendations may be modified.     

Utilization of genetic testing in breast cancer treatment after implementation of comprehensive multi‐disciplinary care

To evaluate the utilization of genetic testing after implementing a comprehensive multi‐disciplinary care (cMDC) program for breast cancer and to assess for racial disparities. This retrospective study included patients newly diagnosed with invasive breast cancer 1 year before and 1 year after implementing a cMDC program to assess the rate of genetic referrals. Appropriate genetic referrals were defined by age, family history, triple‐negative status, and personal history based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Secondary outcomes included rates of recommended testing, actual testing, compliance, and equity in genetic referrals across demographics (race, insurance type, and hospital site). Statistical analyses used the Fisher exact test or chi‐square test. The 431 patients identified included 116 non‐cMDC and 315 cMDC patients. Following implementation of cMDC, a significant increase occurred not only in appropriate genetic referrals (35.3%‐55.5%) but also in inappropriate referrals (1.7%‐15.5%) (P = .001). Overall attendance increased among both cohorts, Caucasians were more compliant with attending their genetic appointment compared to their African American counterparts (non‐cMDC P = .025, cMDC P = .004). In the cMDC group, African Americans demonstrated a 6% increase in attendance compared to a 2% decrease among Caucasians. More appropriate genetic referrals were made to those with private insurance following implementation of cMDC. Utilizing a cMDC approach to breast cancer care may help increase appropriate utilization of genetics.     

Controversies in Communication of Genetic Risk for Hereditary Breast Cancer

Abstract:  Increased availability and heightened consumer awareness of "cancer genes" has increased consumer interest in, and demand for breast cancer risk assessment, and thus a pressing need for providers to identify effective, efficient methods of communicating complicated genetic information to consumers and their potentially at-risk relatives. With increasing direct-to-consumer and -physician marketing of predictive genetic tests, there has been considerable growth in web- and telephone-based genetic services. There is urgent need to further evaluate the psychosocial and behavioral outcomes (i.e., risks and benefits) of telephone and web-based methods of delivery before they become fully incorporated into clinical care models. Given the implications of genetic test results for family members, and the inherent conflicts in health care providers' dual responsibilities to protect patient privacy and to "warn" those at-risk, new models for communicating risk to at-risk relatives are emerging. Additional controversies arise when the at-risk relative is a minor. Research evaluating the impact of communicating genetic risk to offspring is necessary to inform optimal communication of genetic risk for breast cancer across the lifespan. Better understanding the risks and benefits associated with each of these controversial areas in cancer risk communication are crucial to optimizing adherence to recommended breast cancer risk management strategies and ensuring psycho-social well-being in the clinical delivery of genetic services for breast cancer susceptibility.     

Breast cancer in women at high risk: The role of rapid genetic testing for BRCA1 and -2 mutations and the consequences for treatment strategies

Specific clinical questions rise when patients, who are diagnosed with breast cancer, are at risk of carrying a mutation in BRCA1 and -2 gene due to a strong family history or young age at diagnosis. These questions concern topics such as 1. Timing of genetic counseling and testing, 2. Choices to be made for BRCA1 or -2 mutation carriers in local treatment, contralateral treatment, (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy, and 3. The psychological effects of rapid testing. The knowledge of the genetic status might have several advantages for the patient in treatment planning, such as the choice whether or not to undergo mastectomy and/or prophylactic contralateral mastectomy. The increased risk of developing a second breast cancer in the ipsilateral breast in mutation carriers, is only slightly higher after primary cancer treatment, than in the general population. Prophylactic contralateral mastectomy provides a substantial reduction of contralateral breast cancer, although only a small breast cancer specific survival benefit. Patients should be enrolled in clinical trials to investigate (neo)-adjuvant drug regimens, that based on preclinical and early clinical evidence might be targeting the homologous recombination defect, such as platinum compounds and PARP inhibitors. If rapid testing is performed, the patient can make a well-balanced decision. Although rapid genetic counseling and testing might cause some distress, most women reported this approach to be worthwhile. In this review the literature regarding these topics is evaluated. Answers and suggestions, useful in clinical practice are discussed.     

Towards population-based genetic screenings for breast and ovarian cancer: A comprehensive review from economic evaluations to patient perspectives

Genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer following genetic counseling is based on guidelines that take into account particular features of the personal and family history, and clinical criteria conferring a probability of having a BRCA mutation greater than 10% as a threshold for accessing the test. However, besides reducing mortality and social impact, the extension of screening programs also for healthy family members would allow a huge saving of the rising costs associated with these pathologies, supporting the choice of the “Test” strategy versus a “No Test” one. Analyses of different health care systems show that by applying the “Test” strategy on patients and their families, a decrease in breast and ovarian cancer cases is achieved, as well as a substantial decrease in costs of economic resources, including the costs of the clinical management of early detected tumors.In this review, we analyzed the most recent papers published on this topic and we summarized the findings on the economic evaluations related to breast and ovarian cancer population screenings. These results proved and validated that the population-wide testing approach is a more accurate screening and preventive intervention than traditional guidelines based on personal/family history and clinical criteria to reduce breast and ovarian cancer risk.     

Practical aspects of genetic counseling in breast cancer: Lights and shadows

In unselected populations, less than 10% of breast cancers are associated with germline mutations in predisposing genes. Breast cancer type 1 and 2 (BRCA1 and BRCA2) susceptibility genes are the most common involved genes and confer a 10–30 times higher risk of developing the disease compared to the general population. A personal or family history suggestive of inherited breast cancer syndrome may be further evaluated to assess the risk of genetic predisposition and the presence of a genetic mutation. Breast cancer genetic counseling should include a careful risk assessment with associated psychosocial evaluation and support, possible molecular testing, personalized discussion of results. Knowledge of BRCA status can influence individualized cancer risk-reduction strategies. i.e. active surveillance, prophylactic surgery and/or pharmacoprevention.     

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.     

Factors associated with breast MRI use among women with a family history of breast cancer

Although annual breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended for women at high risk for breast cancer as an adjunct to screening mammography, breast MRI use remains low. We examined factors associated with breast MRI use in a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer but no personal cancer history. Study participants came from the Sister Study cohort, a nationwide, prospective study of women with at least 1 sister who had been diagnosed with breast cancer but who themselves had not ever had breast cancer (n = 17 894). Participants were surveyed on breast cancer beliefs, cancer worry, breast MRI use, provider communication, and genetic counseling and testing. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with having a breast MRI overall and for those at high risk. Breast MRI was reported by 16.1% and was more common among younger women and those with higher incomes. After adjustment for demographics, ever use of breast MRI was associated with actual and perceived risk. Odds ratios (OR) were 12.29 (95% CI, 8.85‐17.06), 2.48 (95% CI, 2.27‐2.71), and 2.50 (95% CI, 2.09‐2.99) for positive BRCA1/2 test, lifetime breast cancer risk ≥ 20%, and being told by a health care provider of higher risk, respectively. Women who believed they had much higher risk than others or had higher level of worry were twice as likely to have had breast MRI; OR = 2.23 (95% CI, 1.82‐2.75) and OR = 1.76 (95% CI, 1.52‐2.04). Patterns were similar among women at high risk. Breast cancer risk, provider communication, and personal beliefs were determinants of breast MRI use. To support shared decisions about the use of breast MRI, women could benefit from improved understanding of the chances of getting breast cancer and increased quality of provider communications.