Prospective study of breast MRI in <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis> and <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> mutation carriers: effect of mutation status on cancer incidence

Annual MRI screening is recommended as an adjunct to mammography for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Prophylactic oophorectomy has been shown to decrease breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Here, we aimed to examine the combined effects of MRI and oophorectomy. For this purpose, 93 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers were screened with yearly mammograms and yearly MRI scans. Study endpoints were defined as date of breast cancer diagnosis, date of prophylactic mastectomy, or date of most recent contact. Of 93 women, with a median age of 47, 80 (86%) had prophylactic oophorectomy. Fifty-one women (55%) had BRCA1 mutations. A total of 283 MRI scans were performed. Eleven breast cancers (9 invasive, 2 ductal carcinoma in situ) were detected in 93 women (12%) with a median follow-up of 3.2 years (incidence 40 per 1,000 person-years). Six cancers were first detected on MRI, three were first detected by mammogram, and two were “interval cancers.” All breast cancers occurred in BRCA1 mutation carriers (incidence 67 per 1,000 person-years). Apart from BRCA1 vs. BRCA2 mutation status, there were no other significant predictors of breast cancer incidence. Most invasive breast cancers were estrogen receptor negative (7 of 9) and lymph node negative (7 of 9). There have been no systemic recurrences with a median follow-up of 19 months after cancer diagnosis. Finally, it was concluded that all breast cancers occurred in BRCA1 mutation carriers, in most cases despite oophorectomy. These data suggest that surveillance and prevention strategies may have different outcomes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.     

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.

     

International variation in rates of uptake of preventive options in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Several options for cancer prevention are available for women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, including prophylactic surgery, chemoprevention and screening. The authors report on preventive practices in women with mutations from 9 countries and examine differences in uptake according to country. Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were contacted after receiving their genetic test result and were questioned regarding their preventive practices. Information was recorded on prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic oophorectomy, use of tamoxifen and screening (MRI and mammography). Two thousand six hundred seventy-seven women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation from 9 countries were included. The follow-up questionnaire was completed a mean of 3.9 years (range 1.5-10.3 years) after genetic testing. One thousand five hundred thirty-one women (57.2%) had a bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy. Of the 1,383 women without breast cancer, 248 (18.0%) had had a prophylactic bilateral mastectomy. Among those who did not have a prophylactic mastectomy, only 76 women (5.5%) took tamoxifen and 40 women (2.9%) took raloxifene for breast cancer prevention. Approximately one-half of the women at risk for breast cancer had taken no preventive option, relying solely on screening. There were large differences in the uptake of the different preventive options by country of residence. Prophylactic oophorectomy is now generally accepted by women and their physicians as a cancer preventive measure. However, only the minority of women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation opt for prophylactic mastectomy or take tamoxifen for the prevention of hereditary breast cancer. Approximately one-half of women at risk for breast cancer rely on screening alone.     

Association between clinical characteristics and risk-reduction interventions in women who underwent BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing: a single-institution study

BACKGROUND: Women who are at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancers, especially BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, face a myriad of risk-reduction options, including increased surveillance, chemoprevention, prophylactic oophorectomy, and prophylactic mastectomy. However, little is known about which clinical, demographic, or cancer-related factors are associated with risk-reduction interventions. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of records for 554 women who had undergone testing at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center between 2000 and 2006 for deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations. Data were collected on the risk-reduction interventions these women adopted after they underwent genetic testing. These data were tested for associations with demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Among the 554 women who underwent genetic testing for BRCA mutation, 78 were found to have a deleterious mutation in the BRCA1 gene, and 54 had a mutation in the BRCA 2 gene. Of the 554 women, 85 underwent prophylactic mastectomy, 30 prophylactic oophorectomy, and 52 both surgeries; 387 women opted for surveillance. Women who had BRCA mutations, a history of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or previous breast biopsies were more likely to have prophylactic surgery. Women with a family history of ovarian cancer were more likely to undergo prophylactic oophorectomy. Women with a personal history of ovarian cancer or advanced breast cancer were more likely to undergo surveillance only. Women with breast cancer who had had a total mastectomy as part of their prior breast cancer treatment underwent prophylactic mastectomy more frequently than women who either had breast-conserving surgery or no history of breast cancer. In multivariate analysis, only positive BRCA mutation carrier status was associated with having had prophylactic surgery. In addition, breast cancer history was significantly associated with prophylactic mastectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Women who were BRCA carriers, women who had a history of breast cancer, DCIS, or breast biopsy, or had a family history of ovarian cancer were more likely to have undergone surgery for cancer risk reduction. Women with ovarian cancer or advanced breast cancer were more likely to have undergone surveillance.     

Prevention of breast cancer in women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: a critical review of the literature

The purpose of our study was to review the evidence for the efficacy of surveillance for early detection, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic oophorectomy and chemoprevention in preventing breast cancer and improving survival of BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers. A critical review of journal articles published between 1998 and 2004 identified by searches of MEDLINE, PubMed and references of retrieved articles was undertaken. None of the current evidence is based on randomized studies. The efficacy of surveillance for early detection of breast cancer among BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers is not yet established. Screening with clinical breast examination and mammography showed lower sensitivity in BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers than in the general population. Screening with MRI might offer higher sensitivity rates than mammography. Prophylactic mastectomy was shown to significantly reduce the risk of breast cancer by 89.5-100%. However, of all strategies reviewed, mastectomy was the least acceptable to women at high risk. Tamoxifen use was associated with breast cancer prevention among BRCA2 carriers (RR=0.38, 95%CI: 0.06-1.56). In BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers with breast cancer, tamoxifen use was associated with the prevention of secondary breast cancer (OR= 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.89). Prophylactic oophorectomy was associated with hazard ratios for breast cancer of 0.47 (95%CI:0.29-0.77) and 0.32 (95%CI: 0.08-1.20), in retrospective and short follow-up prospective cohort studies, respectively. There is a pressing need for more studies in order to determine which of the 4 strategies alone, or in combination, is the most effective for the prevention of breast cancer and for the improvement of survival of BRCA mutation carriers.     

The clinical management of <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1</Emphasis> and <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA2</Emphasis> mutation carriers

Mutations in the cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are associated with significantly increased risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Fortunately, effective strategies are available to reduce these risks, including genetic testing, which is an important consideration in determining management of patients with a strong family history of cancer. This article reviews the current evidence for risk-reducing strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and outlines future research directions. In particular, screening controversies and current guidelines are discussed, as are issues related to prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy.     

Cost‐effectiveness of alternating magnetic resonance imaging and digital mammography screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers

BACKGROUND:

Current clinical guidelines recommend earlier, more intensive breast cancer screening with both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography for women with breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutations. Unspecified details of screening schedules are a challenge for implementing guidelines.

METHODS:

A Markov Monte Carlo computer model was used to simulate screening in asymptomatic women who were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Three dual‐modality strategies were compared with digital mammography (DM) alone: 1) DM and MRI alternating at 6‐month intervals beginning at age 25 years (Alt25), 2) annual MRI beginning at age 25 years with alternating DM added at age 30 years (MRI25/Alt30), and 3) DM and MRI alternating at 6‐month intervals beginning at age 30 years (Alt30). Primary outcomes were quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs (in 2010 US dollars), and incremental cost‐effectiveness (dollars per QALY gained). Additional outcomes included potential harms of screening, and lifetime costs stratified into component categories (screening and diagnosis, treatment, mortality, and patient time costs).

RESULTS:

All 3 dual‐modality screening strategies increased QALYs and costs. Alt30 screening had the lowest incremental costs per additional QALY gained (BRCA1, $74,200 per QALY; BRCA2, $215,700 per QALY). False‐positive test results increased substantially with dual‐modality screening and occurred more frequently in BRCA2 carriers. Downstream savings in both breast cancer treatment and mortality costs were outweighed by increases in up‐front screening and diagnosis costs. The results were influenced most by estimates of breast cancer risk and MRI costs.

CONCLUSIONS:

Alternating MRI and DM screening at 6‐month intervals beginning at age 30 years was identified as a clinically effective approach to applying current guidelines, and was more cost‐effective in BRCA1 gene mutation carriers compared with BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Relevance and efficacy of breast cancer screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers above 60 years: A national cohort study

Annual MRI and mammography is recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers to reduce breast cancer mortality. Less intensive screening is advised ≥60 years, although effectiveness is unknown. We identified BRCA1/2 mutation carriers without bilateral mastectomy before age 60 to determine for whom screening ≥60 is relevant, in the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic and HEBON: a nationwide prospective cohort study. Furthermore, we compared tumour stage at breast cancer diagnosis between different screening strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers ≥60. Tumours >2 cm, positive lymph nodes, or distant metastases at detection were defined as “unfavourable.” Of 548 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers ≥60 years in 2012, 395 (72%) did not have bilateral mastectomy before the age of 60. Of these 395, 224 (57%) had a history of breast or other invasive carcinoma. In 136 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, we compared 148 breast cancers (including interval cancers) detected ≥60, of which 84 (57%) were first breast cancers. With biennial mammography 53% (30/57) of carcinomas were detected in unfavourable stage, compared to 21% (12/56) with annual mammography (adjusted odds ratio: 4·07, 95% confidence interval [1.79‐9.28], p = 0.001). With biennial screening 40% of breast cancers were interval cancers, compared to 20% with annual screening (p = 0.016). Results remained significant for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, and first breast cancers separately. Over 70% of 60‐year old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remain at risk for breast cancer, of which half has prior cancers. When life expectancy is good, continuation of annual breast cancer screening of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers ≥60 is worthwhile.     

Effect of prevention strategies on survival and quality-adjusted survival of women with BRCA1/2 mutations: an updated decision analysis.

PURPOSE: This study updates findings regarding the effects of prophylactic surgery, chemoprevention, and surveillance on the survival and quality-adjusted survival of women who test positive for BRCA1/2 mutations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Markov modeling of outcomes was performed in a simulated cohort of 30-year-old women who tested positive for BRCA1/2 mutations. The model incorporated breast and ovarian cancer incidence rates from the literature and mortality rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Quality adjustment of survival estimates were obtained from a survey of women aged 33 to 50 years. Sensitivity analyses were performed of varied assumptions regarding timing and effects of preventive measures on cancer incidence and adverse effects. RESULTS: A 30-year-old woman could prolong her survival beyond that associated with surveillance alone by use of preventive measures: 1.8 years with tamoxifen, 2.6 years with prophylactic oophorectomy, 4.6 years with both tamoxifen and prophylactic oophorectomy, 3.5 years with prophylactic mastectomy, and 4.9 years with both surgeries. She could prolong her quality-adjusted survival by 2.8 years with tamoxifen, 4.4 years with prophylactic oophorectomy, 6.3 years with tamoxifen and oophorectomy, and 2.6 years with mastectomy, or with both surgeries. The benefits of all of these strategies would decrease if they were initiated at later ages. CONCLUSION: Women who test positive for BRCA1/2 mutations may derive greater survival and quality adjusted survival benefits than previously reported from chemoprevention, prophylactic surgery, or a combination. Observational studies and clinical trials are needed to verify the results of this analysis of the long-term benefits of preventive strategies among BRCA1/2-positive women.     

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.     

Long-term outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing: risk reduction and surveillance

BACKGROUND:

For BRCA1/BRCA2 gene testing to benefit public health, mutation carriers must initiate appropriate risk management strategies. There has been little research examining the long‐term use and prospective predictors of the full range of risk management behaviors among women who have undergone BRCA1/2 testing. We evaluated long‐term uptake and predictors of risk‐reducing mastectomy (RRM), risk‐reducing bilateral salpingo‐oophorectomy (RRBSO), chemoprevention, and cancer screening among women at a mean of 5.3 years after testing.

METHODS:

The study participants comprised 465 women who underwent BRCA1/2 testing. Prior to genetic counseling, we measured family/personal cancer history, sociodemographics, perceived risk, cancer‐specific distress, and general distress. We contacted patients at a mean of 5.3 years after testing to measure use of RRM, RRBSO, chemoprevention, and breast and ovarian cancer screening.

RESULTS:

Among participants with intact breasts and/or ovaries at the time of testing, BRCA1/2 carriers were significantly more likely to obtain RRM (37%) and RRBSO (65%) compared with women who received uninformative (RRM, 6.8%; RRBSO, 13.3%) or negative (RRM, 0%; RRBSO, 1.9%) results. Among carriers, precounseling anxiety was associated with subsequent uptake of RRM. RRO was predicted by age. Carriers were also more likely have used breast cancer chemoprevention and have undergone magnetic resonance imaging screening.

CONCLUSION:

This prospective evaluation of the uptake and predictors of long‐term management outcomes provides a clearer picture of decision making in this population. At a mean of 5.3 years after testing, more than 80% of carriers had obtained RRM, RRBSO, or both, suggesting that BRCA1/2 testing is likely to have a favorable effect on breast and ovarian cancer outcomes. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Risk-reduction mastectomy: clinical issues and research needs

Risk-reduction mastectomy (RRM), also known as bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, is a controversial clinical option for women who are at increased risk of breast cancer. High-risk women, including women with a strong family history of breast cancer and BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, have several clinical options: risk-reduction surgery (bilateral mastectomy and bilateral oophorectomy), surveillance (mammography, clinical breast examination, and breast self-examination), and chemoprevention (tamoxifen). We review research in a number of areas central to our understanding of RRM, including recent data on 1) the effectiveness of RRM in reducing breast cancer risk, 2) the perception of RRM among women at increased risk and health-care providers, 3) the decision-making process for follow-up care of women at high risk, and 4) satisfaction and psychological status after surgery. We suggest areas of future research to better guide high-risk women and their health-care providers in the decision-making process.     

Familial breast and ovarian cancers

About 60% of familial breast and ovarian cancers in Japan involve germline mutations of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes. These genes contribute to genetic stability and DNA repair and act as tumor suppressor genes. Mutation analysis of the BRCA1/2 genes has improved our understanding of both common mutation patterns in Japanese patients and the clinicopathological features of BRCA1/2-related cancers. BRCA1-related breast cancers are characterized by poor prognosis, a low rate of estrogen receptor positivity, and histological predominance of solid-tubular carcinoma. BRCA1-related ovarian cancers are associated with a high frequency of serous adenocarcinoma and a good outcome. Further large-scale studies are needed to delineate genotype-phenotype relations and penetrance in BRCA1/2-related breast and ovarian cancers in Japan. The development of systems for clinical genetics in Japan, including genetic counseling, has led to the increased use of genetic testing for the clinical management of BRCA1/2-related cancers. Three options are available for carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations: intensive surveillance, chemoprevention, and prophylactic surgery. Studies done in other countries indicate that prophylactic surgery effectively prevents the development of breast and ovarian cancers in carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. However, prophylactic mastectomy remains controversial in Japan, and now systematic intensive surveillance is generally performed for the prevention of breast cancer in women at high risk. Early detection of ovarian cancer remains challenging, resulting in increased acceptance of the need for prophylactic oophorectomy in women at risk. This review summarizes experimental and clinical findings about familial breast and ovarian cancers, including data on Japanese patients.     

Decision analysis of prophylactic surgery or screening for BRCA1 mutation carriers: a more prominent role for oophorectomy.

PURPOSE: BRCA1 mutation carriers have a high risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. Carriers may opt for prophylactic surgery and screening. Recent data suggesting that prophylactic oophorectomy reduces breast cancer risk have been incorporated in a decision analysis. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to compare LE and QALE following four strategies: (1) prophylactic mastectomy and prophylactic oophorectomy (PMPO), (2) screening for breast cancer and prophylactic oophorectomy (BSPO), (3) prophylactic mastectomy and screening for ovarian cancer (PMOS), and (4) screening for breast and ovarian cancer (BSOS). The analysis was performed for a high (85% breast cancer, 63% ovarian cancer) and medium (56% breast cancer, 16% ovarian cancer) risk level. Utilities for the health states after prophylactic surgery were obtained from mutation carriers. Other model parameter values were obtained from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: When compared with BSOS, the average gain in LE for 30-year-old carriers in the high (medium) risk group was 11.7 (6.6) years for PMPO, 9.5 (5.3) years for BSPO, and 4.9 (4.4) years for PMOS. For 30-year-old carriers, BSPO had a QALE advantage when PO was performed before age 40. In the medium-risk group, there was a stronger advantage for BSPO when QALE was considered. CONCLUSION: PMPO is the most effective strategy to prolong life. However, if patient preferences were taken into account, BSPO tends to be a better strategy in most women at medium risk or in young women at high risk when PO was performed before age 40.     

Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in a prospective cohort of unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND: Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations can reduce cancer incidence and mortality by using bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy (BPO) or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM). The availability of these risk-reduction strategies is an important consideration in the decision to undergo genetic testing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the use of BPO and BPM in a prospective sample of 537 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers from 17 centers in North America and Europe. These women were aged > 30 years, had no BPM, BPO, breast cancer, or ovarian cancer before the disclosure of their genetic test results and were followed for > or = 6 months. RESULTS: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is used significantly more frequently than BPM (55% vs. 21%; P < .001). Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy was more common among women age > or = 40 years compared with women aged < 40 years (68% vs. 43%; P < .001) and among parous women compared with nulliparous women (60% vs. 39%; P < .001). There was no difference in BPM (P = .83) or BPO (P = .09) in BRCA1 versus BRCA2 carriers. Multivariate models identified age and parity as a predictor of BPO in BRCA1 carriers; age and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers; parity and ovarian cancer family history as a predictor of BPM in BRCA1 carriers; and smoking and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers. CONCLUSION: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is more commonly used than BPM in unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Parity, age, and family history can also influence BPO and BPM uptake. Consistent with current recommendations, BPO is used by the majority of parous women aged > 40 years.     

Screening mammography and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a case-control study

BACKGROUND: Screening mammography is associated with a small dose of radiation to the breast, and women with increased genetic risk might be particularly sensitive to the DNA-damaging effects of ionising radiation. We aimed to assess whether exposure to ionising radiation through mammography screening was associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. METHODS: We identified 1600 cases of breast cancer and 1600 controls without breast cancer who were matched for BRCA mutation, date of birth (within 1 year), and country of residence from an international registry of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We used a questionnaire to inquire about whether participants had ever had screening mammography, and, if so, the age at which they first had the procedure. RESULTS: We found no association between ever having screening mammography and risk of breast cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.03 [95% CI 0.85-1.25], adjusted for parity, oral-contraceptive use, ethnic origin, and bilateral oophorectomy). The association was much the same for BRCA1 mutation carriers and BRCA2 mutation carriers (1.04 [0.84-1.29] vs 1.06 [0.67-1.66], respectively, adjusted for parity, oral-contraceptive use, ethnic origin, and bilateral oophorectomy). INTERPRETATION: These findings do not lend support to the idea that exposure to ionising radiation through routine screening mammography contributes substantially to the burden of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the results of this initial report, and, where possible, these studies should assess a more appropriate endpoint of total exposure.     

The impact of a false-positive MRI on the choice for mastectomy in BRCA mutation carriers is limited.

PURPOSE: To assess the false-positive rate of breast cancer surveillance by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in BRCA mutation carriers and the impact of an abnormal mammography or breast MRI on the patients' decision for prophylactic mastectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 196 BRCA mutation carriers were included with a median follow-up of 2 years (range 1-9) with annual mammography and MRI. Preference for prophylactic mastectomy was registered at first surveillance after the mutation carriership was revealed. RESULTS: In all, 41% (81 of 196) of the women had at least one positive MRI or mammography. Malignancy was detected in 17 women: 11 at surveillance, 4 at an intended prophylactic mastectomy and 2 had an interval cancer. Imaging by mammography and MRI had a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 90%. The probability that a positive MRI result is false positive was 83%. In the group with a prior preference for mastectomy with and without a false-positive imaging, prophylactic mastectomy was carried out in 89% and 66%, respectively (P = 0.06), in the group with prior preference for surveillance these percentages were 15% and 11%, respectively (P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: Although the rate of false-positive MRI results is high, the impact on the choice for prophylactic mastectomy is limited and is determined by the woman's preference before the establishment of a BRCA mutation.     

Contribution of mammography to MRI screening in BRCA mutation carriers by BRCA status and age: individual patient data meta-analysis

Background:

We investigated the additional contribution of mammography to screening accuracy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers screened with MRI at different ages using individual patient data from six high-risk screening trials.

Methods:

Sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography and the combination of these tests were compared stratified for BRCA mutation and age using generalised linear mixed models with random effect for studies. Number of screens needed (NSN) for additional mammography-only detected cancer was estimated.

Results:

In BRCA1/2 mutation carriers of all ages (BRCA1=1219 and BRCA2=732), adding mammography to MRI did not significantly increase screening sensitivity (increased by 3.9% in BRCA1 and 12.6% in BRCA2 mutation carriers, P>0.05). However, in women with BRCA2 mutation younger than 40 years, one-third of breast cancers were detected by mammography only. Number of screens needed for mammography to detect one breast cancer not detected by MRI was much higher for BRCA1 compared with BRCA2 mutation carriers at initial and repeat screening.

Conclusions:

Additional screening sensitivity from mammography above that from MRI is limited in BRCA1 mutation carriers, whereas mammography contributes to screening sensitivity in BRCA2 mutation carriers, especially those ⩽40 years. The evidence from our work highlights that a differential screening schedule by BRCA status is worth considering.     

Update on hereditary breast cancer

Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are at substantial risk for breast and ovarian cancer. This review describes recent developments in the approach to hereditary breast cancer. Risk-reducing surgeries remain the most effective means of preventing breast cancer in mutation carriers. For women with breast tissue at risk, magnetic resonance imaging is rapidly becoming incorporated into screening programs. For affected women, management does not currently differ from that of women with sporadic breast cancer, although women may choose to undergo bilateral mastectomy. Preclinical data suggest that BRCA mutation-associated breast cancers may benefit from specific targeted therapeutic approaches.     

Significant differences among physician specialties in management recommendations of BRCA1 mutation carriers

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has published guidelines for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOCS) management. Little data exist on compliance with these guidelines among different physician specialties. We performed an on-line case-based survey by randomly sampling physicians from five specialties, Family Medicine (FM), Obstetrics and Gynecology (OG), General Surgery (GS), Internal Medicine (IM), and Hematology and Oncology (HO). The physicians (n = 225) were asked to provide HBOCS management of healthy women ages 40–42 in the presence of a familial BRCA1 mutation. For women negative for the BRCA1 mutation, 59% of the physicians recommended appropriate surveillance although with significant differences among specialties; P = 0.01. Using an aggregate screening intensity score, physicians clearly recommended more intense screening for mutation positive than negative women (P < 0.0001), but only 16% of physicians followed NCCN guidelines for BRCA1-positive women. Seventy-six percent of all physicians recommended breast MRI with significant variation among specialties ranging from 62% of FM to 89% of OG (P = 0.0020). Similarly, 63% of physicians recommended prophylactic oophorectomy, with 76 and 78% of GS and OG compared to 38% of IM (P < 0.0001) and 57% recommended prophylactic mastectomy ranging from 84% of HO to 32% of FM (P < 0.0001). Independent of specialty, respondents with BRCA testing experience recommended more intense management than those without; P = 0.021. Management recommendations of BRCA1 mutation carriers are not consistent with NCCN guidelines and vary by medical specialty and genetic testing experience. Targeted education of physicians by specialty is needed, so that optimal management is offered to these high-risk women.