The use of preventive measures among healthy women who carry a <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">BRCA1</Emphasis> or <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">BRCA2</Emphasis> mutation

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess women’s knowledge about tamoxifen, to examine the frequency of tamoxifen usage and other preventive measures in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, and to document women’s concerns about taking tamoxifen for chemoprevention.Methods: One hundred and twenty five women with known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and with no prior diagnosis of breast or ovarian cancer were identified through the records of two large cancer genetics clinics. These women had been counseled about their cancer risk and various preventive options were discussed. At a time from two to 110 months following disclosure session, a questionnaire was sent by mail. Women were asked about their current and past use of tamoxifen, their knowledge of risks and benefits, their desire for additional information, and their experience with other preventive measures.Results: Eighty-one of 125 eligible women returned the questionnaire (64.8%). Ten women (12.3%) had used tamoxifen and eight women had used raloxifene (9.9%). Twenty-two women (27.2%) had undergone prophylactic mastectomy and 54 women (66.7%) had had an oophorectomy. Twelve women (14.8%) did not recall discussing tamoxifen. Thirty-five women (58.3%) said that their doctors had not provided them with sufficient information about tamoxifen to consider its use. Fear of side-effects was the most common reason for not taking tamoxifen.Conclusion: Although tamoxifen appears to be effective in preventing breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, few women now take the drug compared to those who choose other preventive measures including surgery. Health care providers should provide accurate information about the risks and benefits of tamoxifen to allow women to make informed decisions.     

Reproductive factors in hereditary breast cancer

Background: An early age at menarche, a short menstrual cycle length, and a high age at first full term pregnancy or nulliparity are known risk factors for breast cancer. These risk factors have previously been reported to differ between breast cancer patients with and without a family history of breast cancer and also between breast cancer patients and controls. Methods: Self-administered questionnaires were filled out by 95 women belonging to 24 families with known BRCA1 mutations, 16 women belonging to nine families with known BRCA2 mutations, and 95 women belonging to 65 families with hereditary breast cancer where no BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations could be detected. Thirty-nine women were BRCA1 mutation carriers and 56 women were BRCA1 negative, 11 women were BRCA2 carriers and five BRCA2 negative. All women were born between 1905 and 1979. Results: Age at menarche, physiological menstrual cycle length at age 30 or at current age in younger women (when not using oral contraceptives), age at first full term pregnancy, and nulliparity did not significantly differ between BRCA1 mutation carriers and BRCA1 negative women. Too few women were BRCA2 negative to serve as a control group. BRCA2 mutation carriers were therefore compared with BRCA1 negative and BRCA2 negative women. None of the above reproductive factors did significantly differ between BRCA2 mutation carriers and from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families. Women from non-BRCA1/BRCA2 hereditary breast cancer families had a higher age at menarche, but this was no longer significant after adjustment for other factors in a multivariate model. Conclusion: Our results suggest that reproductive risk factors of breast cancer are not related to BRCA1 or BRCA2 carrier status. There was also no indication that these factors differ in carriers of unknown susceptibility genes compared with non-carriers from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families.     

Age at first birth and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

An early age at first full-term birth is associated with a reduction in the subsequent development of breast cancer among women in the general population. A similar effect has not yet been reported among women who carry an inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. We conducted a matched case–control study on 1816 pairs of women with a BRCA1 (n = 1405) or BRCA2 (n = 411) mutation in an attempt to elucidate the relationship between age at first full-term pregnancy and the risk of developing breast cancer. Information about the age at first childbirth and other pregnancy-related variables was derived from a questionnaire administered to women during the course of genetic counselling. There was no difference in the mean age at first full-term birth in the cases and controls (24.9 years vs. 24.8 years; P = 0.81, respectively). Compared to women whose first child was born at or before 18 years of age, a later age at first full-term birth did not influence the risk of developing breast cancer (OR = 1.00 per year; 95% CI 0.98–1.03; P-trend = 0.67). Stratification by mutation status did not affect the results. These findings suggest that an early first full-term birth does not confer protection against breast cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. Nonetheless, BRCA mutation carriers opting for a prophylactic oophorectomy as a breast and/or ovarian cancer risk-reducing strategy should complete childbearing prior to age 40 when this prevention modality is most effective. Other members of the Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group—J. Garber, Dana Farber Cancer Center, D. Gilchrist, University of Alberta, M. Osborne, Strang Cancer Prevention Centre, New York, NY, USA, D. Fishman, Northwestern University, E. Warner, Toronto-Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Center, Toronto, ON, Canada, J. McLennan, University of San Francisco, W. McKinnon, University of Vermont, S. Merajver, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, H. Olsson, Jubileum Institute, Department of Oncology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden, D. Provencher, University of Montreal, B. Pasche, Northwestern Medical Facility, Chicago, IL, USA, G. Evans, Regional Genetics Service, St. Mary’s Hospital, Manchester, UK, WS Meschino, North York General, North York, ON, Canada, E. Lemire, Division of Medical Genetics, Royal University Hospital and the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, A. Chudley, Children’s Hospital, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, D. Rayson, Queen Elizabeth Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada and C. Bellati, Dipartimento di Genetica, Biologia e Biochimica, Università di Torino, Italy.     

No association of TGFB1 L10P genotypes and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a multi-center cohort study

Background The transforming growth factor β-1 gene (TGFB1) is a plausible candidate for breast cancer susceptibility. The L10P variant of TGFB1 is associated with higher circulating levels and secretion of TGF-β, and recent large-scale studies suggest strongly that this variant is associated with breast cancer risk in the general population. Methods To evaluate whether TGFB1 L10P also modifies the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, we undertook a multi-center study of 3,442 BRCA1 and 2,095 BRCA2 mutation carriers. Results We found no evidence of association between TGFB1 L10P and breast cancer risk in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. The per-allele HR for the L10P variant was 1.01 (95%CI: 0.92–1.11) in BRCA1 carriers and 0.92 (95%CI: 0.81–1.04) in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Conclusions These results do not support the hypothesis that TGFB1 L10P genotypes modify the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers.     

Reproductive factors and ovarian cancer risk in Jewish BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (United States)

Objective: To determine whether oral contraceptive (OC) use, childbearing, breastfeeding and tubal ligation differ between ovarian cancer cases with and without a BRCA1/2 mutation. Methods: A case-only study of 242 Jewish women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. Women were genotyped for three Ashkenazi founder mutations (185delAG and 5382insC in BRCA1 and 6174delT in BRCA2). We obtained data on OC use, childbearing, breastfeeding, gynecologic surgeries and other reproductive factors from each woman. We compared the frequencies of these risk factors in carriers and non-carriers using unconditional logistic-regression, controlling for other covariates. Results: Among the 242 cases, 64 (26.4%) carried one of the BRCA1 founder mutations, and 31 (12.8%) carried the BRCA2 mutation. Although there were no differences in the percent of nulliparous women between carriers and non-carriers, parous BRCA1 carriers reported fewer live births than non-carriers (average of 2.1 versus 2.5 live births, OR = 0.61, 95%CI = 0.39–0.95, adjusted for age at diagnosis, tubal ligation and duration of OC use). Carriers and non-carriers did not differ in their history of breastfeeding, or in their lifetime use of OCs. BRCA1 carriers were more likely than non-carriers to have had a tubal ligation (25.0 versus 10.2%, OR = 3.67, 95%CI = 1.55–8.70, adjusted for age at diagnosis, number of live births and OC duration). Conclusions: In general, OC use, childbearing and breastfeeding do not differ between BRCA1/2 carriers and non-carriers with ovarian cancer. However, the effects of tubal ligation may differ between BRCA1 carriers and non-carriers.     

BRCA2, but not BRCA1, mutations account for familial ovarian cancer in Iceland: a population-based study

A single founder mutation in each of the BRCA genes has been identified in Iceland. The frequency of the BRCA1 G5193A and BRCA2 999del5 mutations in all ovarian cancer patients diagnosed over the period 1991–2000 was determined. Mutation status was correlated with family history, tumour morphology and age at diagnosis. Samples from 86% of cases (179 carcinomas and 74 borderline tumours) were available. In the carcinomas, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were present in 1.2% and 6% of cases, respectively. No BRCA mutations were found in the borderline tumours. Odds Ratio (OR) of developing ovarian cancer was 20.65 for BRCA2 carriers. Family history of breast/ovarian cancer was present for 70% of BRCA2 carriers and approximately 14% for non-carriers with carcinoma. In conclusion, BRCA2 999del5 is present in 6% of ovarian cancer cases in Iceland and is associated with a 20-fold increase in the risk of the disease. The BRCA1 G5193A mutation is too rare to contribute significantly to ovarian cancer in Iceland.     

Primary node negative breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers has a poor outcome

Background:The association between BRCA1 germ-linemutations and breast cancer prognosis is controversial. A historical cohortstudy was designed to determine the prognosis for women with axillary lymphnode negative hereditary breast cancer. Patients and methods:We tested pathology blocks from 118Ashkenazi Jewish women with axillary lymph node negative breast cancer for thepresence of the two common BRCA1 founder mutations, 185delAG and5382insC. Patients were followed up for a median of 76 months. SomaticTP53mutations were screened for by immunohistochemistry, and directsequencing was performed in the BRCA1-positive tumours. Results:Sixteen breast cancer blocks (13.6%) carried aBRCA1 mutation. Young age of onset, high nuclear grade, negativeestrogen receptor status and over-expression of p53 were highly associatedwith BRCA1-positive status (P-values all <0.01).BRCA1 mutation carriers had a higher mortality than non-carriers(five-year overall survival, 50% and 89.6%, respectively,P = 0.0001). Young age of onset, estrogen receptor negative status,nuclear grade 3, and over-expression of p53 also predicted a poor outcome. Coxmultivariate analyses showed that only germ-line BRCA1 mutationstatus was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P= 0.01). Among nuclear grade 3 tumours, the BRCA1 mutation carrierstatus was a significant prognostic factor of death (risk ratio 5.8,95% confidence interval: 1.5–22, P = 0.009). Sequencingof BRCA1-related breast cancers revealed one TP53missensemutation not previously reported in breast cancer. Conclusions:Using a historical cohort approach, we haveidentified BRCA1 mutation status as an independent prognostic factorfor node negative breast cancer among the Ashkenazi Jewish women. Thosemanaging women carrying a BRCA1 mutation may need take these findingsinto consideration. Additionally, our preliminary results, taken together withthe work of others suggest a different carcinogenic pathway inBRCA1-related breast cancer, compared to non-hereditary cases.     

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry: an open resource for collaborative research

The Breast Cancer Family Registry is a resource for interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer. This resource is available to researchers worldwide for collaborative studies. Herein, we report the results of testing for germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. We have tested 4,531 probands for mutations in BRCA1 and 4,084 in BRCA2. Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were identified for 9.8% of probands tested [233/4,531 (5.1%) for BRCA1 and 193/4,084 (4.7%) for BRCA2]. Of 1,385 Ashkenazi Jewish women tested for only the three founder mutations, 17.4% carried a deleterious mutation. In total, from the proband and subsequent family testing, 1,360 female mutation carriers (788 in BRCA1, 566 in BRCA2, 6 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2) have been identified. The value of the resource has been greatly enhanced by determining the germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation statuses of nearly 6,000 probands.     

A prior diagnosis of breast cancer is a risk factor for breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers

Background

The risk of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is influenced by factors other than the genetic mutation itself. Modifying factors include a woman’s reproductive history and family history of cancer. Risk factors are more likely to be present in women with breast cancer than in women without breast cancer, and therefore the risk of cancer in the two breasts should not be independent. It is not clear to what extent modifying factors influence the risk of a first primary or a contralateral breast cancer in BRCA carriers.

Methods

We conducted a matched case–control study of breast cancer among 3920 BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We asked whether a past history of breast cancer in the contralateral breast was a risk factor for breast cancer.

Results

After adjustment for age, country of residence, and cancer treatment, a previous cancer of the right breast was found to be a significant risk factor for cancer of the left breast among BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers (relative risk: 2.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.4 to 3.0; p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

In a woman with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who is diagnosed with breast cancer, the risk of cancer in the contralateral breast depends on the first diagnosis. That observation supports the hypothesis that there are important genetic or non-genetic modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA carriers. Discovering risk modifiers might lead to greater personalization of risk assessment and management recommendations for BRCA-positive patients.     

Use of total abdominal hysterectomy and hormone replacement therapy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy

Introduction Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) reduces the risk of developing ovarian and breast cancer in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 (BRCA1/2) mutation carriers. The short-term use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after RRSO may relieve menopausal symptoms and does not appear to affect the breast cancer risk reduction gained by RRSO. Multiple factors may influence decisions regarding whether or not total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) is done at the time of RRSO, whether HRT is elected after surgery, and if so, which type of HRT is selected. Our investigation has been to examine factors associated with TAH and HRT use and to determine if the choice of TAH at the time of RRSO and the type of HRT that was chosen has changed since the report of data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002, which showed that the relative risk for breast cancer is higher in subjects who used combined estrogen–progestin HRT compared with those who used estrogen alone. Methods We identified 73 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who were known to have undergone RRSO between 1/1972 and 11/2005 who had no history of breast or ovarian cancer at the time of the surgery. Information regarding whether or not TAH was done in addition to RRSO, the type of HRT, and the subsequent diagnosis of breast cancer was collected. Results Of 73 unaffected BRCA1/2 carriers known to have had RRSO, 40 (40/73, 55%) also underwent TAH. Thirty-three of 73 (33/73, 45%) began HRT following RRSO. Of 33 HRT users, 17 (17/33, 52%) used estrogen only and 14 (14/33, 42%) used combined hormonal therapy. There was no difference in use of HRT in women with TAH (17/40, 43%) vs. those without (16/33, 48%) (P = 0.6). There was no difference in the proportion of women who underwent TAH before and after the WHI report in 2002. Use of HRT, most notably combined estrogen–progestin HRT, appears to have declined since 2002, although this result did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion In this single institution study, the majority of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers undergoing RRSO also underwent TAH, and a substantial number took HRT. TAH did not increase the likelihood of taking HRT compared to RRSO alone.     

Association of the C677T polymorphism in the MTHFR gene with breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in Jewish women

The C677T mutation in the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene is associated with reduced enzyme activity, hyperhomocysteinaemia and increased risk for atherosclerosis in homozygotes. We examined the frequency of this mutation and its association with disease pattern in 491 Jewish women with either sporadic (n=355; 72%) or hereditary (n=136; 28%) breast and/or ovarian cancer and in 69 asymptomatic BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, genotyped for the three predominant Jewish founder BRCA1/2 mutations (185delAG, 5382insC and 6174delT). 677T homozygotes were equally distributed among women with sporadic breast and/or ovarian cancer (71/355; 20.0%) and among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (43/205; 21.0%) (P=non-significant). 677T homozygotes were equally distributed among women diagnosed with breast cancer prior to (22/122; 18.0%) and after 42 years of age (42/243; 17.3%). Among BRCA1/2 carriers, the rate of 677T homozygotes in manifesting cancer (32/136; 23.5%) and asymptomatic individuals (11/69; 15.9%) was not significantly different. The rate of 677T homozygotes (24/72; 33.3%) was higher (P=0.0026) among women with bilateral breast cancer and those with both breast and ovarian carcinoma than among those with unilateral breast cancer (64/365; 17.5%). Differences in morbidity (one versus multiple breast/ovarian tumours) are mainly attributed to 677T homozygosity and partly to BRCA1/2 mutations. Confirmation of these data, namely, that the 677T allele is significantly more common in cases of bilateral breast cancer or combined breast and ovarian cancer would have important clinical implications.     

Greek BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation spectrum: two BRCA1 mutations account for half the carriers found among high-risk breast/ovarian cancer patients

127 Greek breast/ovarian cancer families were screened for germline BRCA1/2 mutations by dHPLC followed by direct sequencing. Our results indicated 16 and 5 breast/ovarian cancer families bearing deleterious mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, respectively. Two novel BRCA2 germline mutations (G4X and 3783del10) are reported here for the first time. Subsequent compilation of our present findings with previously reported mutation data reveals that in a total of 287 Greek breast/ovarian cancer families, 46 and 13 carry a deleterious mutation in BRCA1 and BRCA2, respectively. It should be noted that two BRCA1 mutations, 5382insC and G1738R, both located in exon 20, account for 46% of the families found to carry a mutation. Based on our mutation analysis results, we propose here a hierarchical, cost-effective BRCA1/2 mutation screening protocol for individuals of Greek ethnic origin. The suggested protocol can impact on the clinical management of breast-ovarian cancer families on a national healthcare system level. Irene Konstantopoulou and Theodore Rampias equally contributed to this work.     

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.     

Effect of pregnancy as a risk factor for breast cancer in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers

Early age at first birth and multiparity have been associated with a decrease in the risk of breast cancer in women in the general population. We examined whether this relationship is also present in women at high risk of breast cancer due to the presence of a mutation in either of the 2 breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 or BRCA2. We performed a matched case-control study of 1,260 pairs of women with known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, recruited from North America, Europe and Israel. Women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer were matched with unaffected control subjects for year of birth, country of residence, and mutation (BRCA1 or BRCA2). Study subjects completed a questionnaire detailing their reproductive histories. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived by conditional logistic regression. Among BRCA1 carriers, parity per se was not associated with the risk of breast cancer (OR for parous vs. nulliparous = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.75-1.19; p = 0.62). However, women with a BRCA1 mutation and 4 or more children had a 38% decrease in breast cancer risk compared to nulliparous women (OR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.41-0.94). In contrast, among BRCA2 carriers, increasing parity was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer; women with 2 or more children were at approximately 1.5 times the risk of breast cancer as nulliparous women (OR = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.01-2.32; p = 0.05). Among women with BRCA2 mutations and who were younger than age 50, the (adjusted) risk of breast cancer increased by 17% with each additional birth (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.01-1.36; p = 0.03). There was no significant increase in the risk of breast cancer among BRCA2 carriers older than 50 (OR for each additional birth = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.58-1.53; p = 0.92). In the 2-year period following a birth, the risk of breast cancer in a BRCA2 carrier was increased by 70% compared to nulliparous controls (OR = 1.70; 95% CI = 0.97-3.0). There was a much smaller increase in breast cancer risk among BRCA2 carriers whose last birth was 5 or more years in the past (OR = 1.24; 95% CI = 0.79-1.95). A modest reduction in risk of breast cancer was observed among BRCA1 carriers with 4 or more births. Among BRCA2 carriers, increasing parity was associated with a significant increase in the risk of breast cancer before age 50 and this increase was greatest in the 2-year period following a pregnancy.     

A high frequency of germline <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1/2</Emphasis> mutations in western Sweden detected with complementary screening techniques

Dominant inheritance is presumed in 6–10% of breast and ovarian cancers. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are the most commonly identified causative genes in such families. The frequency of mutation carriers with breast/ovarian cancer depends on the population studied, and display considerable variation that coincides with ethnic and geographical diversity. Mutation analyses were performed in 143 families registered at the Cancer Genetic Counseling Clinic of western Sweden. In a thorough mutation screening procedure, the entire BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes were analyzed using a combination of complementary mutation detection techniques. Mutations in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 were detected in 36% (52 out of 143) of all screened families. All families were clinically evaluated regarding age at diagnosis, type of cancer and number of cancer cases in the family. Among high-risk families, the mutation detection rate was 39% (46 out of 117). The detection rate observed among families with cases of ovarian cancer (42 out of 62, 68%), was substantially higher than in families with only breast cancer (10 out of 81, 12%). Age at ovarian cancer did not seem to have an effect on the detection rate. The analyses revealed 11 frameshift mutations, 4 nonsense mutations and 2 large deletions. Notably, the BRCA1 c.3171ins5 mutation accounted for 34 of 52 (65%) identified mutations. Seven mutations are novel: BRCA1c.409_410del; c.1912T>G; c.2228_2229del; c.3029delA; c.3433delA, a large deletion covering exons 1–3 of BRCA1and one BRCA2 mutation; BRCA2c.6287_6290del. We have shown that the founder mutation BRCA1 c.3171ins5 has a great influence on western Swedish breast/ovarian cancer families along with a high number of mutations unique for the region. In order to achieve a high mutation detection rate we suggest a combination of several detection techniques.     

Novel germline mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1, BRCA2 and p53 gene in breast cancer patients from India

Mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for more than 80% of hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. p53 tumor suppressor gene that controls cellular growth and differentiation is also known to be mutated in more than 50% of human cancers including breast cancer. We have carried out a study on BRCA1 and BRCA2 along with p53 gene mutations in both sporadic as well as familial breast cancer patients from India where breast cancer is fast emerging as a major cancer among premenopausal urban women. We examined 124 untreated primary breast cancer patients comprising 100 sporadic and 24 familial cases including 56 age-matched healthy controls for the presence of BRCA1, BRCA2 and the p53 gene mutations using PCR-SSCP and direct nucleotide sequencing. Certain frequently mutated exons such as 2, 5, 11, 13 and 20 of BRCA1, exons 2, 9, 11 (for 6174delT), 18 and 20 of BRCA2 and 4–9 exons of p53 gene were analyzed in sporadic breast cancer while all 22 coding exons of BRCA1 including its flanking intronic regions along with above mentioned exons of BRCA2 and p53 gene were analyzed in familial breast cancer patients. We identified six patients (25%) with BRCA1 mutation of which three were found to be of novel type one in exon 16 (4956insG) and two in exon 7 (Lys110Thr) (Ser114Pro) out of 24 familial breast cancer patients studied from two different geographic regions/populations of India. Two sisters from a single family (12.5%) out of eight families from Goa with Portuguese colonial origin showed presence of founder Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1 mutation (185delAG) along with (IVS7 561–34T>C; IVS18 527166G>A). While from New Delhi, four (25%) of 16 breast cancer families showed BRCA1 mutations; a frame shift protein truncating (4956insG), a transition nonsense (Gln1395Stop) and two amino acid substitutions (Lys110Thr) and (Ser114Pro). Only one (4%) p53 mutation (Val97Ile) in its exon 4 along with BRCA1 mutation (4956insG) could be detected. No major sequence variation in BRCA2 gene was observed except for G203A at 5 UTR of exon 2, a common population polymorphism in two Goan patients who also showed silent nucleotide change for amino acid serine at codon 1436 of BRCA1 gene. None of the 100 sporadic breast cancer patients revealed any protein truncating or deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation. Interestingly, three (3%) p53 mutations in its exon 5 were detected in sporadic breast cancer patients. Although three novel BRCA1 mutations including a founder Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1 mutation were recorded in Indian women with familial breast cancer, the overall prevalence of BRCA gene mutations in Indian women with a family history of breast cancer appears to be low.     

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.     

Tamoxifen and contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers: an update

Women with a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 face a lifetime risk of breast cancer of approximately 80%, and following the first diagnosis the 10-year risk of contralateral breast cancer is approximately 30%. It has been shown that both tamoxifen and oophorectomy prevent contralateral breast cancer, but it is not clear whether there is a benefit in giving tamoxifen to women who have previously undergone an oophorectomy. Furthermore, the relative degree of protection in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers has not been well evaluated. We studied 285 women with bilateral breast cancer and a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, and 751 control women with unilateral breast cancer and a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation in a matched case-control study. Control women were of similar age and had a similar age of diagnosis of breast cancer and had been followed for as long as the case for a second primary breast cancer. The history of tamoxifen use for treating the first breast cancer was compared between bilateral and unilateral cases. The multivariate odds ratio for contralateral breast cancer associated with tamoxifen use was 0.50 for carriers of BRCA1 mutations (95% CI, 0.30-0.85) and was 0.42 for carriers of BRCA2 mutations (95% CI, 0.17-1.02). The protective effect of tamoxifen was not seen among women who had undergone an oophorectomy (OR = 0.83; 95%CI, 0.24-2.89) but this subgroup was small. In contrast, a strong protective effect of tamoxifen was apparent among women who were premenopausal or who had undergone natural menopause (OR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.65).     

The incidence of pancreatic cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background:

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose to pancreatic cancer. We estimated the incidence of pancreatic cancer in a cohort of female carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation. We also estimated survival rates in pancreatic cancer cases from families with a BRCA mutation.

Methods:

We followed 5149 women with a mutation for new cases of pancreatic cancer. The standardised incidence ratios (SIR) for pancreatic cancer were calculated based on age group and country of residence. We also reviewed the pedigrees of 8140 pedigrees with a BRCA1 or a BRCA2 mutation for those with a case of pancreatic cancer. We recorded the year of diagnosis and the year of death for 351 identified cases.

Results:

Eight incident pancreatic cancer cases were identified among all mutation carriers. The SIR for BRCA1 carriers was 2.55 (95% CI=1.03–5.31, P=0.04) and for BRCA2 carriers was 2.13 (95% CI=0.36–7.03, P=0.3). The 5-year survival rate was 5% for cases from a BRCA1 family and 4% for cases from a BRCA2 family.

Conclusion:

The risk of pancreatic cancer is approximately doubled in female BRCA carriers. The poor survival in familial pancreatic cancer underscores the need for novel anti-tumoural strategies.     

Diabetes and breast cancer among women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations

BACKGROUND:

Hyperinsulinemia and the metabolic syndrome are both risk factors for breast cancer. It is not clear if diabetes is associated with the risk of breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

METHODS:

The authors reviewed the medical histories of 6052 women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, half of whom had been diagnosed with breast cancer. They estimated the odds ratio for breast cancer, given a self‐report of diabetes. They then estimated the hazard ratio for a new diagnosis of diabetes associated with a history of breast cancer.

RESULTS:

There was no excess of diabetes in the period before the diagnosis of breast cancer, compared with controls with no diagnosis of breast cancer. The risk of diabetes was doubled among BRCA carriers in the 15‐year period after the diagnosis of breast cancer (relative risk, 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4‐2.8; P = .0001), compared with carriers without cancer. The risk was particularly high for women with a body mass index (BMI) >25.0 kg/m² (odds ratio, 5.8; 95% CI, 4.0‐8.6; P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

After a diagnosis of breast cancer, women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation face a 2‐fold increase in the risk of diabetes, which is exacerbated by a high BMI. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.