The psychosocial impact of prostate cancer screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers.

OBJECTIVES: To report the long-term outcomes from a longitudinal psychosocial study that forms part of the 'Identification of Men with a genetic predisposition to ProstAte Cancer: Targeted Screening in men at higher genetic risk and controls' (IMPACT) study. The IMPACT study is a multi-national study of targeted prostate cancer (PrCa) screening in individuals with a known germline pathogenic variant (GPV) in either the BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1) or the BReast CAncer gene 2 (BRCA2). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Participants enrolled in the IMPACT study were invited to complete a psychosocial questionnaire prior to each annual screening visit for a minimum of 5 years. The questionnaire included questions on sociodemographics and the following measures: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Impact of Event Scale, 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, Memorial Anxiety Scale for PrCa, Cancer Worry Scale, risk perception and knowledge. RESULTS: A total of 760 participants completed questionnaires: 207 participants with GPV in BRCA1, 265 with GPV in BRCA2 and 288 controls (non-carriers from families with a known GPV). We found no evidence of clinically concerning levels of general or cancer-specific distress or poor health-related quality of life in the cohort as a whole. Individuals in the control group had significantly less worry about PrCa compared with the carriers; however, all mean scores were low and within reported general population norms, where available. BRCA2 carriers with previously high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels experience a small but significant increase in PrCa anxiety (P = 0.01) and PSA-specific anxiety (P < 0.001). Cancer risk perceptions reflected information provided during genetic counselling and participants had good levels of knowledge, although this declined over time. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to report the longitudinal psychosocial impact of a targeted PrCa screening programme for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. The results reassure that an annual PSA-based screening programme does not have an adverse impact on psychosocial health or health-related quality of life in these higher-risk individuals. These results are important as more PrCa screening is targeted to higher-risk groups.

Psychosocial impact of undergoing prostate cancer screening for men with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

OBJECTIVES: To report the baseline results of a longitudinal psychosocial study that forms part of the IMPACT study, a multi-national investigation of targeted prostate cancer (PCa) screening among men with a known pathogenic germline mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. PARTICPANTS AND METHODS: Men enrolled in the IMPACT study were invited to complete a questionnaire at collaborating sites prior to each annual screening visit. The questionnaire included sociodemographic characteristics and the following measures: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Impact of Event Scale (IES), 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer, Cancer Worry Scale-Revised, risk perception and knowledge. The results of the baseline questionnaire are presented. RESULTS: A total of 432 men completed questionnaires: 98 and 160 had mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, respectively, and 174 were controls (familial mutation negative). Participants' perception of PCa risk was influenced by genetic status. Knowledge levels were high and unrelated to genetic status. Mean scores for the HADS and SF-36 were within reported general population norms and mean IES scores were within normal range. IES mean intrusion and avoidance scores were significantly higher in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers than in controls and were higher in men with increased PCa risk perception. At the multivariate level, risk perception contributed more significantly to variance in IES scores than genetic status. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to report the psychosocial profile of men with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations undergoing PCa screening. No clinically concerning levels of general or cancer-specific distress or poor quality of life were detected in the cohort as a whole. A small subset of participants reported higher levels of distress, suggesting the need for healthcare professionals offering PCa screening to identify these risk factors and offer additional information and support to men seeking PCa screening.

A cohort analysis of men with a family history of BRCA1/2 and Lynch mutations for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PC) is a major health concern for men worldwide, with an estimated lifetime risk of ~14 %. A recent comprehensive analysis of mutational processes revealed ageing and mismatch repair as the only altered processes in PC. We wish to test if a cohort of men with inherited risk of mismatch repair defect through BRCA1/2 or Lynch Syndrome mutations represents a target population for prostate cancer testing. METHODS: Fifty-eight men (aged 40-69 years) from families with a history of BRCA1/2 or HNPCC/Lynch mutations were invited to take part. Men with PSA >3.0 ng/ml were recommended to have transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies. RESULTS: Overall 1 of 7 (14 %) and 1 of 20 (5 %) men with BRCA1/2 mutations were positive for a diagnosis of prostate cancer. In men with Lynch syndrome, 1 of 4 (25 %) was diagnosed to have prostate cancer. The index case with Lynch syndrome harbours a heterozygous mutation in the mismatch repair MSH6 gene. Near to complete loss of MSH6 immunoreactivity in the prostate tumour supports silencing of the remaining MSH6 allele during prostate carcinogenesis. CONCLUSION: The finding of near-to-complete loss of MSH6 expression in affected men with a family history of Lynch Syndrome supports its mechanistic involvement during prostate carcinogenesis. This work therefore contributes to the argument that, in certain male populations, Lynch Syndrome mutations are biologically implicated in men with prostate cancer.

Predicting breast cancer risk: implications of a "weak" family history.

Published guidelines adopted in many countries recommend that women whose family history of breast cancer places them at a risk>or=1.7 times that of the age-matched general population, should be considered for inclusion in special surveillance programmes. However validation of risk assessment models has been called for as a matter of urgency. The databases of the four Scottish Familial Breast Cancer clinics and the Scottish Cancer Registry have been searched to identify breast cancers occurring among 1,125 women aged 40-56, with family histories placing them below the "moderate" level of genetic risk. The observed incidence over 6 years was compared with age-specific data for the Scottish population. Our findings confirm that when there are two affected relatives (one first degree) the relative risk (RR) exceeds 1.7 regardless of their ages at diagnosis. When only one (first degree) relative was affected at any age from 40 to 55, the RR does not reach 1.7 if that relative was a mother but exceeds it if the relative was a sister. The probable explanation is that sisters are more likely than mother/daughter pairs to share homozygosity for a risk allele. Surveillance programmes might therefore accommodate sisters of women affected before age 55. Evidence that "low penetrance" alleles contributing to breast cancer risk may be recessive should be taken into account in strategies for identifying them.