Résumé
PURPOSE: There has been an increasing trend in the use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among women diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer or mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 to reduce the occurrence of contralateral breast cancer. This study aimed to examine trends in the CPM rate according to clinicopathologic and socioeconomic status at a single institution in Korea. METHODS: This study included 128 patients with mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Patients were divided into a CPM group (n = 8) and a non-CPM group (n = 120) between May 2013 and March 2016. The main outcome variables, including epidemiology, clinical features, socioeconomic status, and tumor characteristics, were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 8 CPMs were performed among 128 patients. All CPM patients were married. The proportion of professional working women was higher in the CPM group (P = 0.049). Most patients who underwent CPM graduated college, compared to less than a third of the non-CPM group (P = 0.013). The CPM group had a higher rate of visits to the Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) clinic (P = 0.021). The risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) rate was significantly higher in the CPM group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: CPM rates were significantly different according to socioeconomic status. The CPM rate tends to increase in highly educated and professional working women. The socioeconomic status of patients is an important factor in the decision to participate in the HBOC clinic and undergo CPM or RRSO.
Sujets)
Femelle , Humains , Région mammaire , Tumeurs du sein , Épidémiologie , Corée , Mastectomie , Tumeurs de l'ovaire , Classe sociale , Néoplasmes unilatéraux du sein , Femmes qui travaillentRésumé
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical features of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients according to BRCA1/2 mutation status (mutation, variant of uncertain significance [VUS], or wild type). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 116 patients whose BRCA1/2 genetic test results were available for mutation type and clinical features, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and response rate. These characteristics were compared according to BRCA1/2 mutation status. RESULTS: Thirty-seven (37/116, 31.9%) BRCA1/2mutations were identified (BRCA1, 30; BRCA2, 7). Mutation of c.3627_3628insA (p.Leu1209_Glu1210?fs) in BRCA1 was observed in five patients (5/37, 13.5%). Twenty-five patients had BRCA1/2 VUSs (25/116, 21.6%). Personal histories of breast cancer were observed in 48.6% of patients with BRCA1/2 mutation (18/37), 16.0% of patients with BRCA1/2 VUS (4/25), and 7.4% of patients with BRCA wild type (4/54) (p < 0.001). Patients with BRCA1/2 mutation showed longer OS than those with BRCA1/2 wild type (p=0.005). No significant differences were detected in PFS, OS, or response rates between patients with BRCA1/2 VUS and BRCA1/2 mutation (p=0.772, p=0.459, and p=0.898, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patientswith BRCA1/2 mutation had longer OS than thosewith BRCA1/2wild type. Patients with BRCA1/2 mutation and BRCA1/2 VUS displayed similar prognoses.