Genomic analysis of inherited breast cancer among Palestinian women: Genetic heterogeneity and a founder mutation in TP53

Breast cancer among Palestinian women has lower incidence than in Europe or North America, yet is very frequently familial. We studied genetic causes of this familial clustering in a consecutive hospital‐based series of 875 Palestinian patients with invasive breast cancer, including 453 women with diagnosis by age 40, or with breast or ovarian cancer in a mother, sister, grandmother or aunt (“discovery series”); and 422 women diagnosed after age 40 and with negative family history (“older‐onset sporadic patient series”). Genomic DNA from women in the discovery series was sequenced for all known breast cancer genes, revealing a pathogenic mutation in 13% (61/453) of patients. These mutations were screened in all patients and in 300 Palestinian female controls, revealing 1.0% (4/422) carriers among older, nonfamilial patients and two carriers among controls. The mutational spectrum was highly heterogeneous, including pathogenic mutations in 11 different genes: BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, ATM, CHEK2, BARD1, BRIP1, PALB2, MRE11A, PTEN and XRCC2. BRCA1 carriers were significantly more likely than other patients to have triple negative tumors (p = 0.03). The single most frequent mutation was TP53 p.R181C, which was significantly enriched in the discovery series compared to controls (p = 0.01) and was responsible for 15% of breast cancers among young onset or familial patients. TP53 p.R181C predisposed specifically to breast cancer with incomplete penetrance, and not to other Li‐Fraumeni cancers. Palestinian women with young onset or familial breast cancer and their families would benefit from genetic analysis and counseling.     

Factors used to select adjuvant therapy of breast cancer in the United States: an overview of age, race, and socioeconomic status.

Age, race, and socioeconomic status all play a role in decisions regarding breast cancer adjuvant therapy. Increasing age remains the major risk factor for breast cancer, while in very young women breast cancer may have a poorer prognosis, even when adjusted for disease stage and other variables. More than half of all new breast cancers in the United States occur in women older than 65 years. Because of the higher frequency of coexisting (comorbid) serious illness in older women, the benefits of adjuvant therapy get smaller as age increases. Adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen and/or chemotherapy can statistically significantly improve survival in older women, but older women are less likely to receive chemotherapy and are less likely to be offered participation in clinical trials. Efforts are now under way to overcome age bias among health care providers and to develop clinical trials focusing on older patients. Breast cancer mortality is higher in African-Americans than in white Americans. Although the biologic characteristics of breast cancer are worse in African-Americans, major differences in survival are related to socioeconomic factors and access to care. When matched for disease stage and other major clinical and biologic variables, African-American and white patients have similar survival rates. Few data are available on the effects of adjuvant treatment on early breast cancer outcomes in Hispanic Americans and Asian-Americans. Poverty and lack of insurance are surrogates for poor outcomes; major efforts are needed to guarantee all Americans high-quality cancer care.     

Breast cancer screening in <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis> and <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> mutation carriers after risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy

Breast cancer screening is offered to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from the age of 25 years because of their increased risk of breast cancer. As ovarian cancer screening is not effective, risk-reducing salpingho-oophorectomy (RRSO) is offered after child bearing age. RRSO before menopause reduces the breast cancer risk as well as breast density. It can be questioned whether after premenopausal RRSO, the intensive breast cancer screening program needs modification. We evaluated the effectiveness of breast cancer screening by clinical breast examination (CBE), mammography, and MRI in a population of 88 BRCA1 and 51 BRCA2 mutation carriers who had RRSO before the age of 52. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each screening modality. During 422 women years, 14 breast cancers were diagnosed; 2 prevalent, 10 screen detected and 2 interval breast cancers (12 in BRCA1 and 2 in BRCA2 mutation carriers). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for the combined screening were 85.7%, 97.6%, 30.0%, and 99.8%, respectively. No tumors were found with CBE, MRI had a sensitivity of 60.0% and mammography of 55.6%. Off all the tumors, 60% were node positive. Effectiveness of CBE and mammography was comparable to earlier findings. MRI screening seemed less effective than earlier findings. After RRSO, the breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is still high enough to justify intensive breast cancer screening with MRI and mammography.     

Familial breast cancer: an investigation into the outcome of treatment for early stage disease

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of treatment in 304 women with familial and sporadic breast cancer to clarify the options for the primary management of familial breast cancer. The majority of women were consecutively ascertained on the basis of either breast cancer diagnosed at age < 40 years or bilateral breast cancer. In addition, known BRCA1 mutation carriers were identified through the genetics services in participating centres. These patients were subdivided into those with a significant family history of breast cancer or known BRCA1 mutation (FH+) and those with no significant family history (FH–). There were no significant differences in age, surgical treatment or adjuvant treatment between the two groups, but there were significantly more women whose nodal status was unknown in the FH+ group. Ipsilateral recurrence occurred in 22.2% of FH+ patients compared with 24.1% of FH– patients (p = 0.774) who underwent breast conserving surgery. There was a striking excess of contralateral breast cancers in the FH+ group (35.9% v 16%, p = 0.0007), with a cumulative risk of contralateral cancer of 36% at 10 years. This was reflected in a non-significant trend toward worse relapse free survival in the FH+ group (p = 0.0563), but no difference was observed in overall survival between the two patient groups (p = 0.142). Similarly, for patients with known BRCA1 mutations, contralateral recurrence occurred more frequently, but other outcomes were not significantly different from the FH– group. Breast conserving treatment is not associated with an increased risk of local recurrence in women with familial breast cancer and the prognosis of these women appears to be similar to that of young women with apparently sporadic breast cancer. However, the risk of contralateral breast cancer is significant in the FH+ group and should be considered in planning primary treatment and follow up.     

Breast cancer risk after age 60 among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Purpose

It is not known whether the risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers after age 60 is high enough to justify intensive screening or prophylactic surgery. Thus, we conducted a prospective analysis of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from age 60 until age 80.

Methods

Subjects had no history of cancer and both breasts intact at age 60 (n?=?699). Women were followed until a breast cancer diagnosis, prophylactic bilateral mastectomy or death. We calculated the annual cancer rate and cumulative incidence of breast cancer (invasive and in situ) from age 60 to age 80. We assessed the associations between hormone replacement therapy, family history of breast cancer and bilateral oophorectomy and breast cancer risk.

Results

Over a mean follow-up of 7.9 years, 61 invasive and 20 in situ breast cancers were diagnosed in the cohort. The mean annual rate of invasive breast cancer was 1.8% for BRCA1 mutation carriers and 1.7% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The cumulative risk of invasive breast cancer from age 60 to 80 was 20.1% for women with a BRCA1 mutation and was 17.3% for women with a BRCA2 mutation. Hormone replacement therapy, family history and oophorectomy were not associated with breast cancer risk.

Conclusions

Findings from this large prospective study indicate that the risk of developing breast cancer remains high after age 60 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. These findings warrant further evaluation of the role of breast cancer screening in older mutation carriers.

     

Is Adjuvant Therapy for Older Patients with Node (+) Early Breast Cancercost-effective?*

Background: Node (+) breast cancer represents over 40% of cases in older women and currently there is a debate whether adjuvant therapy for all older women is cost-effective. Purpose: To evaluate if adjuvant treatment for early-stage (Stage I-IIIa) node (+) breast cancer with hormone therapy, chemotherapy, or combination therapy is cost-effective in older patients. Design: A decision-analysis model for 65, 75, and 85 year-old female breast cancer patients using life tables integrated the cost of treatment in dollars and impact in length and quality of life. Both estrogen receptor (ER) (-) and (+) patients were considered. The primary data sources were meta-analysis from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group and the Red Book Average Wholesale Price for drugs. The cost of treatment in dollars and impact of quality of life was examined. Scenarios were used when treatment benefit was uncertain. The incremental cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies were then compared and mapped graphically. Results: Adjuvant therapy is cost-effective in 65 year-old women with early breast cancer. In a 75 year-old ER (+) patient, hormone therapy is cost-effective, $10,965/quality-adjusted life years (QALY), but chemotherapy was more cost-effective, $27,406/QALY, if one assumed it was as efficacious as in a 65 year-old woman. In a 75 year-old ER (-) patient, chemotherapy was cost-effective at $42,605 with the same assumption. In an 85 year-old ER (+) patient, hormone therapy was cost-effective, $26,463/QALY, if efficacy is not age-sensitive, but chemotherapy was not as cost-effective for either ER (+) or ER (-) patients. Conclusion: Treatment decisions for older breast cancer patients suffer from the lack of sufficient clinical trial data. Decision-analytic models can help policy makers who are faced with decisions about whether to support adjuvant therapy in older breast cancer patients and also outline the important parameters that need to be considered in such a decision. *Adjuvant Therapy in Older Breast Cancer Patients Some of preliminary work and data in this paper were presented as part of a RAND Graduate School dissertation.     

Phenocopy breast cancer rates in Israeli <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis><Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> mutation carrier families: is the risk increased in non-carriers?

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have an increased risk for developing breast (and ovarian) cancer. Non-carriers from within such families (=true negatives) are counseled that their risk for developing breast cancer is similar to that of the average-risk population. Breast cancer diagnosed in a non-carrier from a family with a known mutation is coined phenocopy. The rate of breast cancer phenocopy and the risk for breast cancer in true negatives are unsettled. The rate of phenocopy breast cancer was assessed in non-carriers from Jewish families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, identified at the Sheba medical center. Analysis was performed by t test for comparison of mean age at counseling or breast cancer diagnosis, and by calculating a standardized incidence ratio (SIR). Overall, 1318 females from 884 mutation carrying families (620 with BRCA1 264 with BRCA2 mutations) were genotyped, of whom 307 women from 245 families were assigned a true negative status (mean age at counseling 43.01 ± 13.03 years (range 19.7–92.8 years). Of these true negatives, 20 women (6.51–2.26% of families) developed breast cancer at a mean age of 54.1 ± 12.9 years (range 48.1 –60.1 years). The SIR for breast cancer in true negatives was not significantly different than the expected in the average-risk Israeli population [observed 20-expected 23.8 cases SIR = 0.84, 95% CI (0.51, 1.30)]. The rate of phenocopy breast cancer in non-carriers from Israeli BRCA1 BRCA2 mutation carrier families is 2.26% with no increased breast cancer risk over the average-risk population.     

The Breast Cancer Screening and Timing of Breast MRI—Experience in a Genetic High-Risk Screening Clinic in a Comprehensive Cancer Center

For women with genetic risk of breast cancer, the addition of screening breast MRI to mammography has become a standard. The order and interval of annual imaging can be variable among providers. To evaluate the clinical implications related to the timing, we conducted a chart review on a cohort of women (N = 276) with high-risk (BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PTEN and TP53) and moderate high-risk (ATM and CHEK2) predisposition to breast cancer in a 48-month follow up. The estimated MRI detection rate in the entire group is 1.75% (18 per 1000 MRI tests). For the high-risk group, the estimated rate is 2.98% (30 per 1000 MRI tests). Many women discovered their genetic risk at an age much older (average age of the high-risk group was 48 years) than the age recommended to initiate enhanced screening (age 20 to 25 years). In total, 4 of the 11 primary breast cancers detected were identified by screening MRI within the first month after initial visit, which were not detected by previous mammography, suggesting the benefit of initiating MRI immediately after the discovery of genetic risk. Breast screening findings for women with Lynch syndrome and neurofibromatosis type 1 were also included in this report.     

Smoking and risk of breast cancer in carriers of mutations in <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis> or <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> aged less than 50 years

Background Cigarette smoke contains compounds that may damage DNA, and the repair of damage may be impaired in women with germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. However, the effect of cigarette smoking on breast cancer risk in mutation carriers is the subject of conflicting reports. We have examined the relation between smoking and breast cancer risk in non-Hispanic white women under the age of 50 years who carry a deleterious mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Methods We conducted a case-control study using data from carriers of mutations in BRCA1 (195 cases and 302 controls) and BRCA2 (128 cases and 179 controls). Personal information, including smoking history, was collected using a common structured questionnaire by eight recruitment sites in four countries. Odds-ratios (OR) for breast cancer risk according to smoking were adjusted for age, family history, parity, alcohol use, and recruitment site. Results Compared to non-smokers, the OR for risk of breast cancer for women with five or more pack-years of smoking was 2.3 (95% confidence interval 1.6–3.5) for BRCA1 carriers and 2.6 (1.8–3.9) for BRCA2 carriers. Risk increased 7% per pack-year (p < 0.001) in both groups. Conclusions These results indicate that smoking is associated with increased risk of breast cancer before age 50 years in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. If confirmed, they provide a practical way for carriers to reduce their risks. Previous studies in prevalent mutation carriers have not shown smoking to increase risk of breast cancer, but are subject to bias, because smoking decreases survival after breast cancer. Northern California Family Registry for Breast Cancer: AS Whittemore, Stanford University School of Medicine, EM John, Northern California Cancer Center, A Felberg, Stanford University School of Medicine, V McGuire, Stanford University School of Medicine, DW West, Northern California Cancer Center, A Miron, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, DC Thomas, USC Keck School of Medicine, R Haile, USC Keck School of Medicine and Norris Comprehensive Cancer. Fox Chase Familial Breast Cancer Registry: M Daly, Fox Chase Cancer Center, A Godwin, Fox Chase Cancer Center, E Ross, Fox Chase Cancer Center. Coriell Institute: J Beck. New York Familial Breast Cancer Registry: MB Terry, Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University. Utah Breast Cancer Family Registry: SS Buys, Huntsman Cancer Institute, V Venne, Huntsman Cancer Institute. Australian Breast Cancer Family Study: JL Hopper, The University of Melbourne, GG Giles, The Cancer Council Victoria, MRE McCredie, University of Otago, New Zealand, RL Milne, Spanish National Cancer Centre, MC Southey, The University of Melbourne, MA Jenkins, The University of Melbourne, C Apicella, The University of Melbourne. Kathleen Cuningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab), Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre. Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry: I Andrulis, Cancer Care Ontario, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, NF Boyd, Ontario Cancer Institute, J Knight, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, H Ozcelik, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital. Correspondence to: Dr NF Boyd, Campbell Family Institute for Breast Cancer Research, Room 10-415, Ontario Cancer Institute, 610 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2M9. Boyd@uhnres.utoronto.ca     

BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Ethnic Lebanese Arab Women With High Hereditary Risk Breast Cancer

Purpose.

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in Lebanon and in Arab countries, with 50% of cases presenting before the age of 50 years.

Methods.

Between 2009 and 2012, 250 Lebanese women with breast cancer who were considered to be at high risk of carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations because of presentation at young age and/or positive family history (FH) of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited. Clinical data were analyzed statistically. Coding exons and intron-exon boundaries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 were sequenced from peripheral blood DNA. All patients were tested for BRCA1 rearrangements using multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA). BRCA2 MLPA was done in selected cases.

Results.

Overall, 14 of 250 patients (5.6%) carried a deleterious BRCA mutation (7 BRCA1, 7 BRCA2) and 31 (12.4%) carried a variant of uncertain significance. Eight of 74 patients (10.8%) aged ≤40 years with positive FH and only 1 of 74 patients (1.4%) aged ≤40 years without FH had a mutated BRCA. Four of 75 patients (5.3%) aged 41–50 years with FH had a deleterious mutation. Only 1 of 27 patients aged >50 years at diagnosis had a BRCA mutation. All seven patients with BRCA1 mutations had grade 3 infiltrating ductal carcinoma and triple-negative breast cancer. Nine BRCA1 and 17 BRCA2 common haplotypes were observed.

Conclusion.

Prevalence of deleterious BRCA mutations is lower than expected and does not support the hypothesis that BRCA mutations alone cause the observed high percentage of breast cancer in young women of Lebanese and Arab descent. Studies to search for other genetic mutations are recommended.     

BRCA1 germline mutations and tumor characteristics in Chinese women with familial or early-onset breast cancer

The data related to BRCA1 germline mutation in Chinese women with familial breast cancer is increasing. However, little is known the frequency of BRCA1 mutations in Chinese women with familial or early-onset breast cancer from Northern China, and few studies are available to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics of BRCA1 tumors in Chinese women. In this study, we detected germline mutations in BRCA1 in a cohort of 139 breast cancer patients who either have a family history of breast cancer (n = 68) or whose tumors are diagnosed at or before the age of 35 (n = 71) from Northern China. A total of 6 deleterious BRCA1 mutations were identified in this cohort, 4 of which (5587-1 del8, 3887 del AG, IVS21 + 1delG, and 2129 ins TG) are novel and one mutation (3478del5) detected in this study was only reported in Chinese population. The frequency of BRCA1 mutations in women with familial or early-onset breast cancer was 5.9% (4/68) or 2.8% (2/71) in this cohort, respectively; but the mutations were detected in 4 of 16(25.0%) familial breast cancer patients whose tumors were diagnosed before the age of 40. Moreover, BRCA1 mutation tumors tended to be high histological grade, and to be negative for ER, PgR, and Her-2 compared with tumors without BRCA1 mutations. Our study suggests that Chinese women with a family history of breast cancer whose tumors are diagnosed before age of 40 would be a suitable candidate for BRCA1 testing; and BRCA1 tumors in Chinese women exhibit an aggressive phenotype. W. Chen and K. Pan contributed equally to this study.     

Tubal sterilization and risk of breast cancer mortality in US women

Objective: To investigate the hypothesis that tubal sterilization is associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer. Methods: We examined this hypothesis in a large prospective study of US adults. After 14 years of mortality follow-up, 3837 deaths from breast cancer were observed in a cohort of 619,199 women who were cancer-free at study entry in 1982. Results: Cox proportional hazards models (adjusted for multiple breast cancer risk factors) showed a significant inverse association between tubal sterilization and breast cancer mortality (adjusted rate ratio (RR) = 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70–0.96). Women who were sterilized before age 35 had a lower risk (adjusted RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.53–0.88) than women who were sterilized at 35 years of age or older (adjusted RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.75–1.13). Also, sterilizations performed before 1975 resulted in a lower risk (RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.62–0.91) than those performed during or after 1975 (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.74–1.29), possibly reflecting the likelihood of greater tissue damage with earlier procedures. Conclusions: These results suggest that tubal sterilization may lower subsequent risk of breast cancer, especially among women who are sterilized at a relatively young age. Additional studies are needed to confirm or refute these findings.     

BRCA1 mutations and clinicopathological features in a sample of Italian women with early-onset breast cancer

Breast cancer in young women is uncommon and often presents with unfavourable biopathological features. Although early age at onset could suggest a genetic susceptibility to cancer, the appropriateness of BRCA1 testing for women with early-onset breast cancer and modest family history (FH) is controversial. 40 Women diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 35 years or less, unselected for FH, were screened for germ line BRCA1 mutations by automated sequencing of exons 2, 5, 6, 11, 13 and 20. Overall, deleterious mutations were evidenced in 6 (15%) patients. With regard to FH, mutations were detected in 14%, 11% and 29% of women with none, weak and strong FH, respectively. Large tumour size, grade 3, lack of oestrogen receptors and high proliferation rate were significantly more common in mutation carriers (MC). Our data support both the appropriateness of testing young breast cancer patients and the frequency of unfavourable features in BRCA1-related breast cancer. It is hypothesised that BRCA1 mutations partially justify the high rate of aggressive breast cancer in young patients and that combining age and breast cancer phenotype could help to identify probable MC.     

Prevalence and characterization of <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis> and <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> germline mutations in Chinese women with familial breast cancer

Although there are some studies to investigate germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes in Chinese women with familial breast cancer, many of them suffer relatively small sample size. In this study, we screened germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes in a cohort of 409 Chinese women with familial breast cancer from north China by using a PCR-sequencing assay. A total of 43 deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2 genes were identified in this cohort, including 17 novel mutations and 6 recurrent mutations. The frequencies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were 3.9% (16/409) and 6.6% (27/409), respectively; the mutation rate of BRCA2 was 1.7-fold higher than that of BRCA1. The entire mutation rate of BRCA1/2 was 10.5% in this cohort; however, the mutation rate of BRCA1/2 genes was 23.0% in 78 familial breast cancer patients whose tumors were diagnosed at or before the age of 40. The mean age at diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA1 carriers (42.8 years) and BRCA2 carriers (45.1 years) was younger than non-carriers (51.0 years) in this cohort (P = 0.005; P = 0.01, respectively). In addition, both BRCA1 carriers and BRCA2 carriers were more likely to exhibit triple-negative breast cancer (ER-, PgR-, and HER2-) than non-carriers (BRCA1 carriers vs. non-carriers, 69.2 vs. 23.0%, P = 0.001; BRCA2 carriers vs. non-carriers, 45.8 vs. 23.0%, P = 0.01). Our study suggested that the spectrum and characteristics of BRCA1/2 mutations in Chinese familial breast cancer exhibit some unique features, and Chinese women with familial breast cancer whose tumors are diagnosed at or before the age of 40 are good candidates for BRCA1/2 testing.     

Can genetic testing guide treatment in breast cancer?

In the last 15 years, our understanding of genes that predispose to breast cancer has increased enormously. Germline alleles have been identified that have a modest effect on the risk of breast cancer, but there remain only a handful of genes in which mutation substantially elevates the risk of breast cancer. These include BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53 and PTEN. Whilst breast cancer occurring in patients in Li-Fraumeni and Cowden’s syndrome families is of great importance, the more frequent scenario is that of women, or indeed of men, presenting with breast cancer with an underlying germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Should these individuals be treated differently because they have had a breast cancer or are at risk of the disease because of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation?In this review, we consider whether BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation influences the choice of breast screening and breast cancer prevention strategies. Furthermore, for women with an established breast cancer whether their mutation directly influences (1) baseline prognosis, (2) the results of local surgical and radiation therapy, (3) the benefits from adjuvant systemic therapy and finally (4) whether selection or avoidance of particular systemic agents is guided by the presence of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation?     

Survival of young and older breast cancer patients in Geneva from 1990 to 2001

The effect of age on breast cancer survival is still a matter of controversy. Breast cancer in young women is thought to be more aggressive and to have worse prognosis but results from clinical research have been neither consistent nor definitive. In this study, we have assessed the impact of young age at diagnosis on tumor characteristics, treatment and survival of breast cancer. The study included 82 very young (< or = 35 years), 790 young (36-49), and 2125 older (50-69) women recorded between 1990 and 2001 at the Geneva Cancer Registry. Very young and young patients had more often stage II cancers (P = 0.009), poorly differentiated (P < 0.001) and estrogen receptor negative (P < 0.001) tumors. They were also more likely to receive chemotherapy (P < 0.001) and less likely to receive hormonal therapy (P < 0.001). Specific five-year survival was not different in the three groups (91%, 90%, and 89% for very young, young and older, respectively). When adjusting for all prognostic variables, age was not significantly related to mortality from breast cancer with a hazard ratio of 0.8 (95% CI: 0.3-2.0) for very young and 1.1 (95% CI: 0.8-1.4) for young patients compared to older women. Tumor stage, differentiation, estrogen receptor status, surgery, and radiotherapy were all independent determinants of breast cancer prognosis. We conclude that age is not an independent prognostic factor when accounting for breast tumor characteristics and treatment.     

Expression of estrogen receptor beta in the breast carcinoma of BRCA1 mutation carriers

Background  

Breast cancers (BC) in women carrying mutations in BRCA1 gene are more frequently estrogen receptor negative than the nonhereditary BC. Nevertheless, tamoxifen has been found to have a protective effect in preventing contralateral tumors in BRCA1 mutation carriers. The identification of the second human estrogen receptor, ERβ, raised a question of its role in hereditary breast cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the frequency of ERα, ERβ, PgR (progesterone receptor) and HER-2 expression in breast cancer patients with mutated BRCA1 gene and in the control group.     

Survival benefit in women with BRCA1 mutation or familial risk in the MRI screening study (MRISC)

Adding MRI to annual mammography screening improves early breast cancer detection in women with familial risk or BRCA1/2 mutation, but breast cancer specific metastasis free survival (MFS) remains unknown. We compared MFS of patients from the largest prospective MRI Screening Study (MRISC) with 1:1 matched controls. Controls, unscreened if<50 years, and screened with biennial mammography if ≥50 years, were matched on risk category (BRCA1, BRCA2, familial risk), year and age of diagnosis. Of 2,308 MRISC participants, breast cancer was detected in 93 (97 breast cancers), who received MRI <2 years before breast cancer diagnosis; 33 BRCA1 mutation carriers, 18 BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 42 with familial risk. MRISC patients had smaller (87% vs. 52% <T2, p < 0.001), more often node negative (69% vs. 44%, p = 0.001) tumors and received less chemotherapy (39% vs. 77%, p < 0.001) and hormonal therapy (14% vs. 47%, p < 0.001) than controls. Median follow‐up time was 9 years (range 0–14). Breast cancer metastasized in 9% (8/93) of MRISC patients and in 23% (21/93) of controls (p = 0.009). MFS was better in MRISC patients overall (log‐rank p = 0.008, HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16–0.80), with familial risk (log‐rank p = 0.024, HR: 0.21, 95% CI 0.04–0.95), and in BRCA1 mutation carriers (log‐rank p = 0.055, HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08–1.13). MFS remained better in MRISC patients after lead time correction (log‐rank p = 0.020, HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18–0.90). Overall survival was non‐significantly better in MRISC patients (log‐rank p = 0.064, HR 0.51, CI 0.24–1.06). Annual screening with MRI and mammography improves metastasis free survival in women with BRCA1 mutation or familial predisposition.     

Predictors of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Purpose:

The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers; and measure the extent to which host, family history, and cancer treatment-related factors modify the risk.

Patients and methods:

Patients were 810 women, with stage I or II breast cancer, for whom a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation had been identified in the family. Patients were followed from the initial diagnosis of cancer until contralateral mastectomy, contralateral breast cancer, death, or last follow-up.

Results:

Overall, 149 subjects (18.4%) developed a contralateral breast cancer. The 15-year actuarial risk of contralateral breast cancer was 36.1% for women with a BRCA1 mutation and was 28.5% for women with a BRCA2 mutation. Women younger than 50 years of age at the time of breast cancer diagnosis were significantly more likely to develop a contralateral breast cancer at 15 years, compared with those older than 50 years (37.6 vs 16.8% P=0.003). Women aged <50 years with two or more first-degree relatives with early-onset breast cancer were at high risk of contralateral breast cancer, compared with women with fewer, or no first-degree relatives with breast cancer (50 vs 36% P=0.005). The risk of contralateral breast cancer was reduced with oophorectomy (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.30–0.76; P=0.002).

Conclusion:

The risk of contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers declines with the age of diagnosis and increases with the number of first-degree relatives affected with breast cancer. Oophorectomy reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer in young women with a BRCA mutation.