Risk-reducing mastectomy and breast cancer mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant: an international analysis.

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) is offered to women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant, however, there are limited data on the impact on breast cancer mortality. METHODS: Participants were identified from a registry of women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants. We used a pseudo-randomised trial design and matched one woman with a RRM to one woman without a RRM on year of birth, gene, and country. We estimated the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dying of breast cancer in the follow-up period. RESULTS: There were 1654 women included; 827 assigned to the RRM arm and 827 assigned to the control arm. After a mean follow-up of 6.3 years, there were 20 incident breast cancers (including 15 occult cancers) and two breast cancer deaths in the RRM arm, and 100 incident breast cancers and 7 breast cancer deaths in the control arm (HR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.05-1.35; p = 0.11). The probability of dying of breast cancer within 15 years after RRM was 0.95%. CONCLUSIONS: In women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant, RRM reduces the risk of breast cancer, and the probability of dying of breast cancer is low.

The risk of skin cancer in women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: It has not been clearly established if skin cancer or melanoma are manifestations of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Estimating the risk of skin cancer is an important step towards developing screening recommendations. METHODS: We report the findings of a prospective cohort study of 6,207 women from North America who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Women were followed from the date of baseline questionnaire to the diagnosis of skin cancer, to age 80 years, death from any cause, or the date of last follow-up. RESULTS: During the mean follow-up period of eight years, 3.7% of women with a BRCA1 mutation (133 of 3,623) and 3.8% of women with a BRCA2 mutation (99 of 2,584) reported a diagnosis of skin cancer (including both keratinocyte carcinomas and melanoma). The cumulative risk of all types of skin cancer from age 20 to 80 years was 14.1% for BRCA1 carriers and 10.7% for BRCA2 carriers. The cumulative risk of melanoma was 2.5% for BRCA1 carriers and 2.3% for BRCA2 carriers, compared to 1.5% for women in the general population in the United States. The strongest risk factor for skin cancer was a prior diagnosis of skin cancer. CONCLUSION: The risk of non-melanoma skin cancer in women who carry a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 is similar to that of non-carrier women. The risk of melanoma appears to be slightly elevated. We suggest that a referral to a dermatologist or primary care provider for BRCA mutation carriers for annual skin examination and counselling regarding limiting UV exposure, the use of sunscreen and recognizing the early signs of melanoma might be warranted, but further studies are necessary.

The risks of cancer in older women with BRCA pathogenic variants: How far have we come?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to estimate the cumulative risks of all cancers in women from 50 to 75 years of age with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant. METHODS: Participants were women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants from 85 centers in 16 countries. Women were eligible if they had no cancer before the age of 50 years. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and follow-up questionnaires every 2 years. Women were followed from age 50 until a diagnosis of cancer, death, age 75, or last follow-up. The risk of all cancers combined from age 50 to 75 was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: There were 2211 women included (1470 BRCA1 and 742 BRCA2). There were 379 cancers diagnosed in the cohort between 50 and 75 years. The actuarial risk of any cancer from age 50 to 75 was 49% for BRCA1 and 43% for BRCA2. Breast (n = 186) and ovarian (n = 45) were the most frequent cancers observed. For women who had both risk-reducing mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy before age 50, the risk of developing any cancer between age 50 and 75 was 9%. CONCLUSION: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant have a high risk of cancer between the ages of 50 and 75 years and should be counselled appropriately.

Three-Year Outcomes Following Permissive Cardiotoxicity in Patients on Trastuzumab.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiotoxicity, manifest by reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), is the most common reason for the premature discontinuation of trastuzumab. While permissive cardiotoxicity (where mild cardiotoxicity is accepted to enable ongoing trastuzumab) has been shown feasible, the longer-term outcomes are unknown. We aimed to study the intermediate-term clinical outcomes of patients who underwent permissive cardiotoxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients referred to the cardio-oncology service at McMaster University from 2016 to 2021 for LV dysfunction following trastuzumab administration. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients underwent permissive cardiotoxicity. The median (25th-75th percentile) follow-up time from cardiotoxicity onset was 3 years (1.3-4 years). Forty-seven (92%) patients completed trastuzumab; 3 (6%) developed severe LV dysfunction or clinical heart failure (HF) while on trastuzumab and prematurely discontinued therapy. One discontinued trastuzumab by patient choice. At final follow-up after therapy completion, 7 (14%) patients still had mild cardiotoxicity, including 2 who had clinical heart failure and stopped trastuzumab early. Among those with recovered LV function, 50% had normalized LVEF or GLS by 6 and 3 months, respectively, after initial cardiotoxicity. There was no difference in characteristics between those who did or did not recover their LV function. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients exposed to permissive trastuzumab cardiotoxicity for HER2-positive breast cancer, 6% were unable to complete planned trastuzumab due to severe LV dysfunction or clinical HF. Although most patients recover their LV function after trastuzumab discontinuation or completion, 14% still have persistent cardiotoxicity by 3-year follow-up.

Tamoxifen and the risk of breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

PURPOSE: Chemoprevention with a selective estrogen receptor modulator (tamoxifen or raloxifene) is a non-surgical option offered to high-risk women to reduce the risk of breast cancer. The evidence for tamoxifen benefit is based on trials conducted among predominantly postmenopausal women from the general population and on studies of contralateral breast cancer in women with a pathogenic variant (mutation hereafter) in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Tamoxifen has not been assessed as a primary prevention agent in women with an inherited BRCA mutation. METHODS: We conducted a prospective analysis of tamoxifen chemoprevention and the risk of breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Data on tamoxifen (and raloxifene) use was collected by questionnaire and updated biennially. Information on incident cancers was collected by self-report and was confirmed by medical record review. In a matched analysis, we estimated the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for developing a first primary breast cancer associated with tamoxifen or raloxifene use, using Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: There were 4578 unaffected women in the cohort, of whom 137 reported tamoxifen use (3%), 83 reported raloxifene use (2%) and 12 used both drugs (0.3%). Women who used tamoxifen or raloxifene were matched 1:3 with women who used neither drug on year of birth, country of residence, year of study entry and gene (BRCA1 or BRCA2). We generated 202 matched pairs. After a mean follow-up of 6.8 years, there were 22 incident breast cancers diagnosed among tamoxifen/raloxifene users (10.9% of users) and 71 cases diagnosed among non-users (14.3% of non-users; HR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.40-1.03; P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Chemoprevention may be an effective risk-reduction option for BRCA mutation carriers, but further studies with longer follow-up are necessary.

Contraceptive use and the risk of ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

Background BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutation carriers face a high lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer. Oral contraceptives are protective in this population; however, the impact of other types of contraception (e.g. intrauterine devices, implants, injections) is unknown. We undertook a matched case-control study to evaluate the relationship between type of contraception and risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. Methods A total of 1733 matched pairs were included in this analysis. Women were matched according to year of birth, date of study entry, country of residence, BRCA mutation type and history of breast cancer. Detailed information on hormonal, reproductive and lifestyle exposures were collected from a routinely administered questionnaire. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with each contraceptive exposure. Results Ever use of any contraceptive was significantly associated with reduced risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.52-0.75; P < 0.0001), which was driven by significant inverse associations with oral contraceptives (OR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.54-0.79; P < 0.0001) and contraceptive implants (OR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.12-0.73; P = 0.008). We observed a similar effect with use of injections (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.10-1.38; P = 0.14), but this did not achieve significance. No significant associations were observed between patterns of intrauterine device use and risk of ovarian cancer. Conclusions These findings support a protective effect of oral contraceptives and implants on risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. The possible protective effect of injections requires further evaluation.

An evaluation of memory and attention in BRCA mutation carriers using an online cognitive assessment tool.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of various surgical, hormonal, and lifestyle factors on memory and attention in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: BRCA mutation carriers enrolled in a longitudinal study were invited to complete an online brain health assessment tool designed to screen for cognitive deficits. Four measures of memory and executive attention were assessed individually, and an overall score was compiled adjusting for age. Exposures, including preventive surgery, hormone use, and lifestyle factors, were captured by questionnaire. Performance on each of the 5 subtasks was analyzed according to various exposures. Analysis of covariance was used to compare overall scores. RESULTS: In total, 880 women completed the online cognitive assessment. The average age of the participants was 54 years (range, 23-86 years). The mean overall test score was 54.4 (range, 0-93). The individual subtask scores declined with age at test completion (P < .0001) and increased with level of education (P ≤ .01). Women who underwent a preventive oophorectomy had a significantly higher overall score compared with women who did not undergo this surgery (55.5 vs 50.5; P = .01). Reconstructive breast surgery was also associated with a higher overall score (56.5 vs 52.3; P = .005). Chemotherapy and hormone-replacement therapy were not predictive of the overall score. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are reassuring to high-risk women who undergo early surgical menopause for their cancer predisposition. Further studies are needed to evaluate cognitive function over time when memory deficits become more prevalent.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the BREAST-Q Animation Deformity Scale for Women Undergoing an Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of animation deformity on health-related quality of life, a content-specific, valid, and reliable patient-reported outcome measure is needed. This report describes the development and validation of the BREAST-Q Animation Deformity scale. METHODS: Women with breast cancer who had an implant-based reconstruction provided data. In phase 1 (January 2017 and December 2018), qualitive and cognitive patient interviews and expert input were used to develop and refine scale content. In phase 2 (March to June 2019), a field test study with members of the Love Research Army (LRA) was conducted. Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine psychometric properties. RESULTS: In phase 1 of the study, qualitative (n = 11) and cognitive (n = 4) interview data and expert input (n = 9) led to the development of a 12-item scale measuring animation deformity. In phase 2, 651 LRA members provided data and 349 participated in a test-retest study. In the RMT analysis, the data fit the Rasch model (X2(96) = 104.06; p = 0.27). The scale's reliability was high, with person separation index and Cronbach alpha values with/without extremes of ≥ 0.84 and ≥ 0.92 respectively, and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.94). Mean scores on the Animation Deformity scale varied as predicted across subgroups of participants who reported differing amounts of change in breast appearance when their arms were lifted overhead or when they lifted something heavy, and for increasing happiness with the overall outcome of their breast reconstruction. CONCLUSION: The 12-item Animation Deformity scale forms a new scale in the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module that can be used in comparative effectiveness research or to inform clinical care.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the BREAST-Q Sensation Module for Women Undergoing Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Reconstructive techniques for restoring sensation to the breast after mastectomy continue to evolve. The BREAST-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure that can be used to evaluate outcomes of breast cancer treatments; however, it previously lacked scales to measure breast sensation. This paper outlines the development and validation of the BREAST-Q Sensation Module. METHODS: Phase 1 (January 2017 through December 2018) involved qualitative and cognitive interviews with women who had undergone breast reconstruction, as well as expert input, to develop and refine the scales. In phase 2 (March through June 2019), Love Research Army (LRA) members completed the scales, and Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was performed to examine the reliability and validity of the scales. RESULTS: In this study, 36 qualitative and 7 cognitive interviews were conducted, and input from 18 experts was obtained. Three scales were developed to measure breast Symptoms (e.g., throbbing, burning, tingling), Sensation (e.g., feeling with light touch, through clothing, sexually), and Quality of Life impact of sensation loss. In phase 2, 1204 LRA members completed the scales. Data for each scale fit the RMT model. Reliability was high, with Person Separation Index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values of 0.81 or higher (with and without extremes) for all three scales. Mean scores were higher (better) on the Symptoms and Quality of Life impact scales for the participants with unilateral (vs. bilateral) and autologous (vs. alloplastic) reconstruction, and for the participants who were farther out from their reconstruction. CONCLUSION: The BREAST-Q Sensation Module can be used alone or in conjunction with other BREAST-Q scales to inform clinical care and to evaluate outcomes of new surgical approaches to restoration of breast sensation.

Development and Psychometric Validation of BREAST-Q Scales Measuring Cancer Worry, Fatigue, and Impact on Work.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure for women with breast cancer. The aim of this study was to develop new BREAST-Q scales to measure Cancer Worry, Fatigue and Impact on Work. METHODS: Data were collected between January 2017 and November 2019. Phase 1 (qualitative) included participants from Canada and the USA, pre/post any type of breast cancer treatment (surgery, adjuvant, neoadjuvant). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded line-by-line. New scales were drafted and refined through cognitive interviews and expert input. Phase 2 (field-test study) involved USA members of the Love Research Army (LRA). Rasch measurement theory analysis was used to examine reliability and validity. RESULTS: In phase 1, 57 women were interviewed. Three concepts were identified as important to the breast cancer experience that are not currently covered in the BREAST-Q and developed into scales, i.e., Cancer Worry, Fatigue and Impact on Work. Feedback from nine women and 23 experts was used to establish content validity. The scales were field-tested in the LRA sample (n = 1680), of whom 1006 completed a test-retest. Reliability was > 0.81 for the person separation index, > 0.89 for Cronbach's alpha and > 0.83 for interclass correlation coefficients. Lower scores on all three scales were significantly associated with being closer in time to diagnosis and having a higher cancer stage at diagnosis (p < 0.001 on ANOVA). CONCLUSION: These new scales expand the BREAST-Q measurement system and provide a means to evaluate additional important outcomes for breast cancer patients in clinical care and research.

An international mixed methods study to develop a new preference-based measure for women with breast cancer: the BREAST-Q Utility module.

BACKGROUND: Generic preference-based measures (PBM), though commonly used, may not be optimal for use in economic evaluations of breast cancer interventions. No breast cancer-specific PBM currently exists, and the generic PBMs fail to capture the unique concerns of women with breast cancer (e.g., body image, appearance, treatment-specific adverse effects). Hence, the objective of this study was to develop a breast cancer-specific PBM, the BREAST-Q Utility module. METHODS: Women diagnosed with breast cancer (stage 0-4, any treatment) were recruited from two tertiary hospitals in Canada and one in the US. The study followed an exploratory sequential mixed methods approach, whereby semi-structured interviews were conducted and at the end of the interview, participants were asked to list their top five health-related quality of life (HRQOL) concerns and to rate the importance of each item on the BREAST-Q. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded. Constant comparison was used to refine the codes and develop a conceptual framework. Qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated to develop the content of the Utility module  that was refined through 2 rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews with women diagnosed with breast cancer and feedback from experts. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 57 women aged 55 ± 10 years. A conceptual framework was developed from 3948 unique codes specific to breasts, arms, abdomen, and cancer experience. Five top-level domains were HRQOL (i.e., physical, psychological, social, and sexual well-being) and appearance. Data from the interviews, top 5 HRQOL concerns, and BREAST-Q item ratings were used to inform dimensions for inclusion in the Utility module. Feedback from women with breast cancer (N = 9) and a multidisciplinary group of experts (N = 27) was used to refine the module. The field-test version of the HSCS consists of 10 unique dimensions. Each dimension is measured with 1 or 2 candidate items that have 4-5 response levels each. CONCLUSION: The field-test version of the BREAST-Q Utility module was derived from extensive patient and expert input. This comprehensive approach ensured that the content of the Utility module is relevant, comprehensive, and includes concerns that matter the most to women with breast cancer.

Breastfeeding and the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

OBJECTIVE: BRCA mutation carriers face a high lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer. The strong inverse association between breastfeeding and the risk of ovarian cancer is established in the general population but is less well studied among women with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHOD: Thus, we conducted a matched case-control analysis to evaluate the association between breastfeeding history and the risk of developing ovarian cancer. After matching for year of birth, country of residence, BRCA gene and personal history of breast cancer, a total of 1650 cases and 2702 controls were included in the analysis. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with various breastfeeding exposures. RESULTS: A history of ever-breastfeeding was associated with a 23% reduction in risk (OR = 0.77; 95%CI 0.66-0.90; P = 0.001). The protective effect increased with breastfeeding from one month to seven months after which the association was relatively stable. Compared to women who never breastfed, breastfeeding for seven or more months was associated with a 32% reduction in risk (OR = 0.68; 95%CI 0.57-0.81; P < 0.0001) and did not vary by BRCA gene or age at diagnosis. The combination of breastfeeding and oral contraceptive use was strongly protective (0.47; 95%CI 0.37-0.58; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support a protective effect of breastfeeding for at least seven months among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, that is independent of oral contraceptive use.

International trends in the uptake of cancer risk reduction strategies in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation face high risks of breast and ovarian cancer. In the current study, we report on uptake of cancer screening and risk-reduction options in a cohort of BRCA mutation carriers from ten countries over two time periods (1995 to 2008 and 2009 to 2017). METHODS: Eligible subjects were identified from an international database of female BRCA mutation carriers and included women from 59 centres from ten countries. Subjects completed a questionnaire at the time of genetic testing, which included past use of cancer prevention options and screening tests. Biennial follow-up questionnaires were administered. RESULTS: Six-thousand two-hundred and twenty-three women were followed for a mean of 7.5 years. The mean age at last follow-up was 52.1 years (27-96 years) and 42.3% of the women had a prior diagnosis of breast cancer. In all, 27.8% had a prophylactic bilateral mastectomy and  64.7% had a BSO. Screening with breast MRI increased from 70% before 2009 to 81% at or after 2009. There were significant differences in uptake of all options by country. CONCLUSION: For women who received genetic testing more recently, uptake of prophylactic mastectomy and breast MRI is significantly higher than those who received genetic testing more than 10 years ago. However, uptake of both BSO and breast MRI is not optimal, and interventions to increase uptake are needed.

The incidence of leukaemia in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: an International Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase the susceptibility to develop breast and ovarian cancers as well as increase the risk of some other cancers. Primary objective was to estimate the risk of leukaemia in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. METHODS: We followed 7243 women with a BRCA1 or a BRCA2 mutation for incident cases of leukaemia. We used the standardised incidence ratio (SIR) to estimate the relative risk of leukaemia, according to mutation and history of breast cancer. RESULTS: We identified five incident cases of leukaemia (two BRCA1, three BRCA2). All five women had a prior history of breast cancer and four had received chemotherapy. The mean time from breast cancer diagnosis to the development of leukaemia was 10.2 years (range 3-18 years). The SIR for BRCA1 carriers was 0.66 (95% CI: 0.11-2.19, P=0.61) and the SIR for BRCA2 carriers was 2.42 (95% CI: 0.61-6.58, P=0.17). The SIR was significantly higher than expected for women with a BRCA2 mutation and breast cancer (SIR=4.76, 95% CI:1.21-12.96, P=0.03), in particular for women who received chemotherapy (SIR=8.11, 2.06-22.07, P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increased risk of leukaemia in women with a BRCA2 mutation who receive chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Iterative qualitative approach to establishing content validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for arm lymphedema: the LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity Module.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BRCL) is one of the most common causes of upper extremity (UE) lymphedema in developed nations and substantially impacts health-related quality of life. To advance our understanding of the epidemiology and treatment of BRCL, rigorously developed and validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are needed. This study aimed to demonstrate the iterative content validity of a modular UE lymphedema-specific PROM called the LYMPH-Q UE module. METHODS: A multi-step iterative qualitative approach was used. Semi-structured interview data from in-depth qualitative interviews with adult women (18 years and older) with BCRL were used to develop the first set of the LYMPH-Q UE scales. The content validity of these scales was demonstrated with patient and clinician feedback. Over the course of cognitive debriefing interviews, additional concepts of lymphedema worry and impact on work were identified as missing from the LYMPH-Q UE module. Subsequently, two new qualitative studies (a focus group and in-depth concept elicitation interviews with patients) were conducted, and two new scales were developed to measure lymphedema worry and impact on work life and their content validity was demonstrated. RESULTS: Qualitative data from in-depth and cognitive interviews with 15 (age 40-74 years) and 16 (age 38-74 years) women with BRCL, respectively, and feedback from 12 clinical experts, were used to develop and demonstrate the content validity of six LYMPH-Q UE scales measuring symptoms, function, appearance, psychological, information, and arm sleeve. Additionally, data from in-depth interviews with 12 (age 35-72 years) women with UE lymphedema and four focus groups (n = 16 women; age 35-74 years) was used to develop and assess the content validity of two new LYMPH-Q UE scales measuring lymphedema worry and impact on work life. The content validity of the previously established six scales was also demonstrated in these subsequent qualitative studies. CONCLUSION: The LYMPH-Q UE is a modular PROM developed using international guidelines for PROM development and can be used in clinical practice, research, and quality improvement to enhance patient-centered shared decision-making. This study's innovative and iterative approach to content validation demonstrates that the LYMPH-Q UE is a comprehensive measure that includes important concepts relevant to patients with UE lymphedema.

Bilateral Oophorectomy and All-Cause Mortality in Women With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Sequence Variations.

Importance: Preventive bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is offered to women at high risk of ovarian cancer who carry a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2; however, the association of oophorectomy with all-cause mortality has not been clearly defined. Objective: To evaluate the association between bilateral oophorectomy and all-cause mortality among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this international, longitudinal cohort study of women with BRCA sequence variations, information on bilateral oophorectomy was obtained via biennial questionnaire. Participants were women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation, no prior history of cancer, and at least 1 follow-up questionnaire completed. Women were followed up from age 35 to 75 years for incident cancers and deaths. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for all-cause mortality associated with a bilateral oophorectomy (time dependent). Data analysis was performed from January 1 to June 1, 2023. Exposures: Self-reported bilateral oophorectomy (with or without salpingectomy). Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality, breast cancer-specific mortality, and ovarian cancer-specific mortality. Results: There were 4332 women (mean age, 42.6 years) enrolled in the cohort, of whom 2932 (67.8%) chose to undergo a preventive oophorectomy at a mean (range) age of 45.4 (23.0-77.0) years. After a mean follow-up of 9.0 years, 851 women had developed cancer and 228 had died; 57 died of ovarian or fallopian tube cancer, 58 died of breast cancer, 16 died of peritoneal cancer, and 97 died of other causes. The age-adjusted HR for all-cause mortality associated with oophorectomy was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.24-0.42; P < .001). The age-adjusted HR was 0.28 (95% CI, 0.20-0.38; P < .001) and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.22-0.90; P = .03) for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 sequence variations, respectively. For women with BRCA1 sequence variations, the estimated cumulative all-cause mortality to age 75 years for women who had an oophorectomy at age 35 years was 25%, compared to 62% for women who did not have an oophorectomy. For women with BRCA2 sequence variations, the estimated cumulative all-cause mortality to age 75 years was 14% for women who had an oophorectomy at age 35 years compared to 28% for women who did not have an oophorectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation, oophorectomy was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality.

MRI Surveillance and Breast Cancer Mortality in Women With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Sequence Variations.

Importance: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance is offered to women with a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene who face a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. Surveillance with MRI is effective in downstaging breast cancers, but the association of MRI surveillance with mortality risk has not been well defined. Objective: To compare breast cancer mortality rates in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation who entered an MRI surveillance program with those who did not. Design, Setting, and Participants: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 sequence variation were identified from 59 participating centers in 11 countries. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire between 1995 and 2015 and a follow-up questionnaire every 2 years to document screening histories, incident cancers, and vital status. Women who had breast cancer, a screening MRI examination, or bilateral mastectomy prior to enrollment were excluded. Participants were followed up from age 30 years (or the date of the baseline questionnaire, whichever was later) until age 75 years, the last follow-up, or death from breast cancer. Data were analyzed from January 1 to July 31, 2023. Exposures: Entrance into an MRI surveillance program. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for breast cancer mortality associated with MRI surveillance compared with no MRI surveillance using a time-dependent analysis. Results: A total of 2488 women (mean [range] age at study entry 41.2 [30-69] years), with a sequence variation in the BRCA1 (n = 2004) or BRCA2 (n = 484) genes were included in the analysis. Of these participants, 1756 (70.6%) had at least 1 screening MRI examination and 732 women (29.4%) did not. After a mean follow-up of 9.2 years, 344 women (13.8%) developed breast cancer and 35 women (1.4%) died of breast cancer. The age-adjusted HRs for breast cancer mortality associated with entering an MRI surveillance program were 0.20 (95% CI, 0.10-0.43; P < .001) for women with BRCA1 sequence variations and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.10-17.25; P = .93) for women with BRCA2 sequence variations. Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that among women with a BRCA1 sequence variation, MRI surveillance was associated with a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality compared with no MRI surveillance. Further studies of women with BRCA2 sequence variations are needed to ascertain these women obtain the same benefits associated with MRI surveillance.

Bone density and structure in healthy postmenopausal women treated with exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer: a nested substudy of the MAP.3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exemestane can prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Because of potential widespread use, we examined the safety of exemestane on bone health. METHODS: In this nested safety substudy of the MAP.3 trial (a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of exemestane 25 mg a day for the primary prevention of breast cancer), we included postmenopausal women from five centres who were eligible to participate in MAP.3, not osteoporotic, not receiving drugs for bone-related disorders, with baseline lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck T-scores above -2·0. The primary endpoint was percent change from baseline to 2 years in total volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) at the distal radius by high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT. The primary analysis was per protocol using a non-inferiority margin. This analysis was done earlier than originally planned because of the impending announcement of MAP.3 results and subsequent unmasking of patients to treatment assignment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01144468, and has been extended to 5 years of unmasked follow-up. FINDINGS: 351 women (176 given exemestane, 175 given placebo; median age 61·3 years [IQR 59·2-64·9]) met our inclusion criteria and completed baseline assessment. At the time of clinical cutoff, 242 women had completed 2-year follow-up (124 given exemestane, 118 given placebo). From baseline to 2 years, the mean percent change in total volumetric BMD at the distal radius was -6·1% (95% CI -7·0 to -5·2) in the exemestane group and -1·8% (-2·4 to -1·2) in the placebo group (difference -4·3%, 95% CI -5·3 to -3·2; p<0·0001). The lower limit of the 95% CI was lower than our non-inferiority margin of negative 4% (one-sided test for non-inferiority p=0·70), meaning the hypothesis that exemestane was inferior could not be rejected. At the distal tibia, the mean percent change in total volumetric BMD from baseline to 2 years was -5·0% (95% CI -5·5 to -4·4) in the exemestane group and -1·3% (-1·7 to -1·0) in the placebo group (difference -3·7%, 95% CI -4·3 to -3·0; p<0·0001). The mean percent change in cortical thickness was -7·9% (SD 7·3) in the exemestane group and -1·1% (5·7) in the placebo group at the distal radius (difference -6·8%, 95% CI -8·5 to -5·0; p<0·0001) and -7·6% (SD 5·9) in the exemestane group and -0·7% (4·9) in the placebo group at the distal tibia (difference -6·9%, -8·4 to -5·5; p<0·0001). Decline in areal BMD, as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, in the exemestane group compared with the placebo group occurred at the lumbar spine (-2·4% [95% CI -3·1 to -1·7] exemestane vs -0·5% [-1·1 to 0·2] placebo; difference -1·9%, 95% CI -2·9 to -1·0; p<0·0001), total hip (-1·8% [-2·3 to -1·2] exemestane vs -0·6% [-1·1 to -0·1] placebo; difference -1·2%, -1·9 to -0·4; p=0·004), and femoral neck (-2·4% [-3·2 to -1·7] exemestane vs -0·8% [-1·5 to 0·1] placebo; difference -1·6%, -2·7 to -0·6; p=0·002). INTERPRETATION: 2 years of treatment with exemestane worsens age-related bone loss in postmenopausal women despite calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Women considering exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer should weigh their individual risks and benefits. For women taking exemestane, regular bone monitoring plus adequate calcium and vitamin D supplementation are important. To assess the effect of our findings on fracture risk, long-term follow-up is needed. FUNDING: Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance (Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Canadian Cancer Society).

Re-examining content validity of the BREAST-Q more than a decade later to determine relevance and comprehensiveness.

PURPOSE: The BREAST-Q is the most used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in breast cancer surgery. The purposes of this study were to re-examine the content validity of BREAST-Q cancer modules (mastectomy, lumpectomy and reconstruction) and to determine the need for new scales. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer (Stage 0-4, any treatment), and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Deductive (based on original BREAST-Q conceptual framework) and inductive (new codes from the data) content analysis approaches were used to analyze the data. The number of codes that mapped to BREAST-Q were recorded. RESULTS: Dataset included 3948 codes from 58 participants. Most of the breast (n = 659, 96%) and all psychosocial (n = 127, 100%), sexual (n = 179, 100%) and radiation-related (n = 79, 100%) codes mapped to BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breast, Psychosocial Wellbeing, Sexual Wellbeing and Adverse Effects of Radiation scales, respectively. For the physical wellbeing codes (n = 939) for breast/chest and arm, 34% (n = 321) mapped to the Physical Wellbeing-Chest scale. Most of the abdomen codes (n = 311) mapped to Satisfaction with Abdomen (n = 90, 76%) and Physical Wellbeing-Abdomen (n = 171, 89%) scales. Codes that did not map (n = 697, 30%) covered breast sensation and lymphedema. Concerns related to fatigue, cancer worry, and work impact were most reported and did not map to BREAST-Q. CONCLUSION: The BREAST-Q, which was developed using extensive patient input more than a decade ago, is still relevant. To ensure the BREAST-Q remains comprehensive, new scales for upper extremity lymphedema, breast sensation, fatigue, cancer worry, and work impact were developed.