Extended genetic analysis and tumor characteristics in over 4600 women with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Genetic screening for pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes can affect treatment strategies, risk prediction and preventive measures for patients and families. For decades, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) has been attributed to PVs in the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, and more recently other rare alleles have been firmly established as associated with a high or moderate increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. Here, we assess the genetic variation and tumor characteristics in a large cohort of women with suspected HBOC in a clinical oncogenetic setting. METHODS: Women with suspected HBOC referred from all oncogenetic clinics in Sweden over a six-year inclusion period were screened for PVs in 13 clinically relevant genes. The genetic outcome was compared with tumor characteristics and other clinical data collected from national cancer registries and hospital records. RESULTS: In 4622 women with breast and/or ovarian cancer the overall diagnostic yield (the proportion of women carrying at least one PV) was 16.6%. BRCA1/2 PVs were found in 8.9% of women (BRCA1 5.95% and BRCA2 2.94%) and PVs in the other breast and ovarian cancer predisposition genes in 8.2%: ATM (1.58%), BARD1 (0.45%), BRIP1 (0.43%), CDH1 (0.11%), CHEK2 (3.46%), PALB2 (0.84%), PTEN (0.02%), RAD51C (0.54%), RAD51D (0.15%), STK11 (0) and TP53 (0.56%). Thus, inclusion of the 11 genes in addition to BRCA1/2 increased diagnostic yield by 7.7%. The yield was, as expected, significantly higher in certain subgroups such as younger patients, medullary breast cancer, higher Nottingham Histologic Grade, ER-negative breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer and high grade serous ovarian cancer. Age and tumor subtype distributions differed substantially depending on genetic finding. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to understanding the clinical and genetic landscape of breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. Extending clinical genetic screening from BRCA1 and BRCA2 to 13 established cancer predisposition genes almost doubles the diagnostic yield, which has implications for genetic counseling and clinical guidelines. The very low yield in the syndrome genes CDH1, PTEN and STK11 questions the usefulness of including these genes on routine gene panels.

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

BACKGROUND: The effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is uncertain. Retrospective analyses have suggested a protective effect but may be substantially biased. Prospective studies have had limited power, particularly for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further, previous studies have not considered the effect of RRSO in the context of natural menopause. METHODS: A multi-centre prospective cohort of 2272 BRCA1 and 1605 BRCA2 mutation carriers was followed for a mean of 5.4 and 4.9 years, respectively; 426 women developed incident breast cancer. RRSO was modelled as a time-dependent covariate in Cox regression, and its effect assessed in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. RESULTS: There was no association between RRSO and breast cancer for BRCA1 (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.94-1.61) or BRCA2 (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.62-1.24) mutation carriers. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, HRs were 0.68 (95% CI 0.40-1.15) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64) for RRSO carried out before or after age 45 years, respectively. The HR for BRCA2 mutation carriers decreased with increasing time since RRSO (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.26-0.99 for 5 years or longer after RRSO). Estimates for premenopausal women were similar. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that RRSO reduces breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. A potentially beneficial effect for BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed, particularly after 5 years following RRSO. These results may inform counselling and management of carriers with respect to RRSO.

Correction to: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

After publication of the original article [1], we were notified that columns in Table 2 were erroneously displayed.

Bilateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomies with Implant-Based Reconstructions Followed Long Term: A Consecutive Series of 185 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) is the most effective method to prevent breast cancer in genetically predisposed women and is often performed concomitantly with breast reconstruction. The reconstruction time varies and corrective surgeries are common. METHODS: This study evaluated 185 consecutive cases of BRRM and immediate breast reconstruction with implants with regard to surgical outcome and resource consumption. With an 18-year observation period, it was possible to compare permanent expander implants (PEIs) with permanent fixed volume implants (PIs). RESULTS: A minimum follow-up of 2 years for all participants but one was achieved. Seventy-five percent (n = 138) of the women received PEI and 25% (n = 47) PI. In a multivariate analysis including age, BMI (<25, ≥25), smoking (yes, no), implant type (PEI, PI), incision technique, operation time and specimen weight <350 g, ≥350 g), only BMI ≥25 was associated with an increased risk of an early complication (OR 7.1, 95% CI 2.44-20.4). As expected, there was a significant difference in median reconstruction time between PEI and PI (12.4 vs. 1.0 months, p < 0.001). The cumulative reoperation-free 2-year survival was significantly higher in the PI than in the PEI group (81% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Implant-based reconstruction remains a valid option after BRRM in high-risk women. Whenever possible (low BMI and small breast volume without severe ptosis), permanent fixed volume implants can be safely recommended and are resource saving in comparison with permanent expander implants.

Prospective blinded surveillance screening of Swedish women with increased hereditary risk of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of different screening modalities in women with a family history of breast cancer. METHODS: Our blinded, prospective, comparative cohort analysis included three types of screening, mammography, ultrasound, and clinical breast examination once per year for 6 years. Eligible patients for this study were healthy women with ≥ 17% lifetime risk of breast cancer or with a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. RESULTS: A total of 632 women were screened between 2002 and 2012 (each for 6 years). During the study, 30 women were diagnosed with breast cancer, with 10 of these diagnoses occurring between screening visits, and six of the 10 diagnosed women were gene carriers. The clinical presentation for the women diagnosed with breast cancer was followed until 2017. No consistent patterns for the diagnostic capacity of the different screening modalities were found, although mammography showed low sensitivity, whereas ultrasound showed better sensitivity in three of the six rounds. The specificity was high in mammography and improved in ultrasound over time. Most importantly, clinical breast examination provided no additional information toward the diagnosis of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Neither mammography nor ultrasound performed yearly were sensitive enough as standalone modalities, although high specificity was confirmed. Our findings indicate that high risk (> 29% life time risk) individuals and gene carriers can be screened biannually, using the same protocol as used in mutation carriers. Our results also suggest that low-risk groups (< 20%) may continue to be referred to population mammography screening program, while clinical breast examination may be omitted in all risk groups, and could be optional in gene carriers.

Individuals with FANCM biallelic mutations do not develop Fanconi anemia, but show risk for breast cancer, chemotherapy toxicity and may display chromosome fragility.

PurposeMonoallelic germ-line mutations in the BRCA1/FANCS, BRCA2/FANCD1 and PALB2/FANCN genes confer high risk of breast cancer. Biallelic mutations in these genes cause Fanconi anemia (FA), characterized by malformations, bone marrow failure, chromosome fragility, and cancer predisposition (BRCA2/FANCD1 and PALB2/FANCN), or an FA-like disease presenting a phenotype similar to FA but without bone marrow failure (BRCA1/FANCS). FANCM monoallelic mutations have been reported as moderate risk factors for breast cancer, but there are no reports of any clinical phenotype observed in carriers of biallelic mutations.MethodsBreast cancer probands were subjected to mutation analysis by sequencing gene panels or testing DNA damage response genes.ResultsFive cases homozygous for FANCM loss-of-function mutations were identified. They show a heterogeneous phenotype including cancer predisposition, toxicity to chemotherapy, early menopause, and possibly chromosome fragility. Phenotype severity might correlate with mutation position in the gene.ConclusionOur data indicate that biallelic FANCM mutations do not cause classical FA, providing proof that FANCM is not a canonical FA gene. Moreover, our observations support previous findings suggesting that FANCM is a breast cancer-predisposing gene. Mutation testing of FANCM might be considered for individuals with the above-described clinical features.

DNA glycosylases involved in base excision repair may be associated with cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in the DNA Base Excision Repair (BER) pathway could be associated with cancer risk in carriers of mutations in the high-penetrance susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, given the relation of synthetic lethality that exists between one of the components of the BER pathway, PARP1 (poly ADP ribose polymerase), and both BRCA1 and BRCA2. In the present study, we have performed a comprehensive analysis of 18 genes involved in BER using a tagging SNP approach in a large series of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. 144 SNPs were analyzed in a two stage study involving 23,463 carriers from the CIMBA consortium (the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2). Eleven SNPs showed evidence of association with breast and/or ovarian cancer at p<0.05 in the combined analysis. Four of the five genes for which strongest evidence of association was observed were DNA glycosylases. The strongest evidence was for rs1466785 in the NEIL2 (endonuclease VIII-like 2) gene (HR: 1.09, 95% CI (1.03-1.16), p = 2.7 × 10(-3)) for association with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and rs2304277 in the OGG1 (8-guanine DNA glycosylase) gene, with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR: 1.12 95%CI: 1.03-1.21, p = 4.8 × 10(-3)). DNA glycosylases involved in the first steps of the BER pathway may be associated with cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and should be more comprehensively studied.

Identification of independent association signals and putative functional variants for breast cancer risk through fine-scale mapping of the 12p11 locus.

BACKGROUND: Multiple recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), rs10771399, at 12p11 that is associated with breast cancer risk. METHOD: We performed a fine-scale mapping study of a 700 kb region including 441 genotyped and more than 1300 imputed genetic variants in 48,155 cases and 43,612 controls of European descent, 6269 cases and 6624 controls of East Asian descent and 1116 cases and 932 controls of African descent in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC; http://bcac.ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/ ), and in 15,252 BRCA1 mutation carriers in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Stepwise regression analyses were performed to identify independent association signals. Data from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements project (ENCODE) and the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were used for functional annotation. RESULTS: Analysis of data from European descendants found evidence for four independent association signals at 12p11, represented by rs7297051 (odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 1.06-1.12; P = 3 × 10(-9)), rs805510 (OR = 1.08, 95 % CI = 1.04-1.12, P = 2 × 10(-5)), and rs1871152 (OR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 1.02-1.06; P = 2 × 10(-4)) identified in the general populations, and rs113824616 (P = 7 × 10(-5)) identified in the meta-analysis of BCAC ER-negative cases and BRCA1 mutation carriers. SNPs rs7297051, rs805510 and rs113824616 were also associated with breast cancer risk at P < 0.05 in East Asians, but none of the associations were statistically significant in African descendants. Multiple candidate functional variants are located in putative enhancer sequences. Chromatin interaction data suggested that PTHLH was the likely target gene of these enhancers. Of the six variants with the strongest evidence of potential functionality, rs11049453 was statistically significantly associated with the expression of PTHLH and its nearby gene CCDC91 at P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: This study identified four independent association signals at 12p11 and revealed potentially functional variants, providing additional insights into the underlying biological mechanism(s) for the association observed between variants at 12p11 and breast cancer risk.

An international survey of surveillance schemes for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Female BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and/or ovarian cancer, and are offered enhanced surveillance including screening from a young age and risk-reducing surgery (RRS)-mastectomy (RRM) and/or salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). While there are established guidelines for early detection of breast cancer in high-risk women who have not undergone RRM, there are less developed guidelines after RRM. We evaluated the schemes offered before and after RRS in internationally diverse high-risk clinics. An e-mailed survey was distributed to high-risk clinics affiliated with CIMBA. Overall, 22 centers from 16 countries responded. Pre RRS surveillance schemes overwhelmingly included breast imaging (primarily MRI) from 18 to 30 years and clinical breast exam (CBE) at 6-12 month intervals. For ovarian cancer, all but 6 centers offered semiannual/annual gynecological exam, transvaginal ultrasound, and CA 125 measurements. Post RRM, most centers offered only annual CBE while 4 centers offered annual MRI, primarily for substantial residual breast tissue. After RRSO only 4 centers offered specific gynecological surveillance. Existing guidelines for breast/ovarian cancer detection in BRCA carriers are being applied pre RRS but are not globally harmonized, and most centers offer no specific surveillance post RRS. From this comprehensive multinational study it is clear that evidence-based, long-term prospective data on the most effective scheme for BRCA carriers post RRS is needed.

No clinical utility of KRAS variant rs61764370 for ovarian or breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical genetic testing is commercially available for rs61764370, an inherited variant residing in a KRAS 3' UTR microRNA binding site, based on suggested associations with increased ovarian and breast cancer risk as well as with survival time. However, prior studies, emphasizing particular subgroups, were relatively small. Therefore, we comprehensively evaluated ovarian and breast cancer risks as well as clinical outcome associated with rs61764370. METHODS: Centralized genotyping and analysis were performed for 140,012 women enrolled in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (15,357 ovarian cancer patients; 30,816 controls), the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (33,530 breast cancer patients; 37,640 controls), and the Consortium of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (14,765 BRCA1 and 7904 BRCA2 mutation carriers). RESULTS: We found no association with risk of ovarian cancer (OR=0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.04, p=0.74) or breast cancer (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01, p=0.19) and results were consistent among mutation carriers (BRCA1, ovarian cancer HR=1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23, p=0.14, breast cancer HR=1.04, 95% CI 0.97-1.12, p=0.27; BRCA2, ovarian cancer HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.13, p=0.34, breast cancer HR=1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19, p=0.35). Null results were also obtained for associations with overall survival following ovarian cancer (HR=0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.07, p=0.38), breast cancer (HR=0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06, p=0.38), and all other previously-reported associations. CONCLUSIONS: rs61764370 is not associated with risk of ovarian or breast cancer nor with clinical outcome for patients with these cancers. Therefore, genotyping this variant has no clinical utility related to the prediction or management of these cancers.

Tumour spectrum in non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer families in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30 % of all breast cancer is at least partly attributed to hereditary factors. Familial breast cancer is often inherited in the context of cancer syndromes. The most commonly mutated genes are BRCA1 and BRCA2 in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. The genetic background in families with hereditary breast cancer without predisposing germ line mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (non-BRCA families) is still to a large extent unclear even though progress has been made. The aim of this study was to compare cancer proportions in familial non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer compared to the general population in search of putative new breast cancer syndromes. METHODS: Pedigrees from 334 non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer families in the county of Stockholm, Sweden, were investigated and the distribution of cancer diagnoses other than breast cancer was compared with the distribution of cancer diagnoses in the general Swedish population in two reference years, 1970 and 2010. A cancer diagnosis was regarded as overrepresented in the non-BRCA families if the confidence interval was above both population reference values. RESULTS: We found that endometrial cancer was overrepresented in the non-BRCA families with a 6.36 % proportion (CI 4.67-8.2) compared to the proportion in the general population in the reference years 1970 (3.07 %) and 2010 (2.64 %). Moreover tumours of the ovary, liver, pancreas and prostate were overrepresented. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we found an overrepresentation of endometrial cancer in our cohort of hereditary non-BRCA families. Our result supports previous inconsistent reports of a putative breast and endometrial cancer syndrome. An association has been suggested in studies of families with several cases of breast cancer in close relatives or bilateral breast cancer. To clarify this issue we suggest further studies on a breast and endometrial cancer syndrome in cohorts with a strong pattern of hereditary breast cancer. Identifying new breast cancer syndromes is of importance to improve genetic counselling for women at risk and a first step towards detection of new susceptibility genes.

Preoperative MRI of the breast (POMB) influences primary treatment in breast cancer: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown high sensitivity in determining tumor extent, multifocality, and occult contralateral breast cancer. Low specificity, unnecessary mastectomies, and costs are arguments against MRI. The purpose of this study was to determine whether preoperative breast MRI would affect primary surgical management, reduce reexcision/reoperation procedures, and influence the choice of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, multicenter study included 440 breast cancer patients younger than aged 56 years from three, Swedish, large-volume breast units. Patients were randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to either preoperative staging with breast MRI (n = 220) or no breast MRI (n = 220) (control group). Treatment planning of all patients was discussed at multidisciplinary team conferences. RESULTS: In patients randomized to the MRI group, who had an observed higher percentage of planned breast-conserving surgery (BCS) compared with the control group, a change from suggested breast conservation to mastectomy occurred in 23 of 153 (15 %) patients. Breast MRI provided additional information in 83 of 220 (38 %) patients, which caused a change in treatment plan in 40 (18 %). The breast reoperation rate was significantly lower in the MRI group: 11 of 220 (5 %) versus 33 of 220 (15 %) in the control group (p < 0.001). The number of mastectomies, axillary reoperations, and the number of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy after definitive treatment did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative staging with breast MRI in women younger than age 56 years altered the treatment plan in 18 % of the patients. Although a higher MRI-related conversion rate from breast conservation to mastectomy was found, the final numbers of mastectomies did not differ between the two groups. The breast reoperation rate in the MRI group was significantly reduced.

Common alleles at 6q25.1 and 1p11.2 are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Two single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at 6q25.1, near the ESR1 gene, have been implicated in the susceptibility to breast cancer for Asian (rs2046210) and European women (rs9397435). A genome-wide association study in Europeans identified two further breast cancer susceptibility variants: rs11249433 at 1p11.2 and rs999737 in RAD51L1 at 14q24.1. Although previously identified breast cancer susceptibility variants have been shown to be associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, the involvement of these SNPs to breast cancer susceptibility in mutation carriers is currently unknown. To address this, we genotyped these SNPs in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from 42 studies from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. In the analysis of 14 123 BRCA1 and 8053 BRCA2 mutation carriers of European ancestry, the 6q25.1 SNPs (r(2) = 0.14) were independently associated with the risk of breast cancer for BRCA1 mutation carriers [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.23, P-trend = 4.5 × 10(-9) for rs2046210; HR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.18-1.40, P-trend = 1.3 × 10(-8) for rs9397435], but only rs9397435 was associated with the risk for BRCA2 carriers (HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.01-1.28, P-trend = 0.031). SNP rs11249433 (1p11.2) was associated with the risk of breast cancer for BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02-1.17, P-trend = 0.015), but was not associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.92-1.02, P-trend = 0.20). SNP rs999737 (RAD51L1) was not associated with breast cancer risk for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers (P-trend = 0.27 and 0.30, respectively). The identification of SNPs at 6q25.1 associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers will lead to a better understanding of the biology of tumour development in these women.

Clinical assessment of breast symmetry and aesthetic outcome: can 3D imaging be the gold standard?

There is a lack of an accurate standardised objective method to assess aesthetic outcome after breast surgery. In this methodological study, we investigated the intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of breast symmetry and volume assessed using three-dimensional surface imaging (3D-SI), evaluated the reproducibility depending on imaging posture, and proposed a new combined volume-shape-symmetry (VSS) parameter. Images were acquired using the VECTRA XT 3D imaging system, and analysed by two observers using VECTRA Analysis Module. Breast symmetry was measured through the root mean square distance. All women had undergone bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. The reproducibility and correlations of breast symmetry and volume measurements were compared using Bland-Altman's plots and tested with Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. 3D surface images of 58 women were analysed (348 symmetry measurements, 696 volume measurements). The intra-observer reproducibility of breast symmetry measurements was substantial-excellent, the inter-observer reproducibility was substantial, and the inter-posture reproducibility was substantial. For measurements of breast volumes, the intra-observer reproducibility was excellent, the inter-observer reproducibility was moderate-substantial, and the inter-posture reproducibility was substantial-excellent. The intra-observer reproducibility of VSS was excellent while the inter-observer reproducibility was substantial for both observers, independent of posture. There were no statistically strong correlations between breast symmetry and volume differences. The intra-observer reproducibility was found to be substantial-excellent for several 3D-SI measurements independent of imaging posture. However, the inter-observer reproducibility was lower than the intra-observer reproducibility, indicating that 3D-SI in its present form is not a great assessment for symmetry.

Common variants at 12p11, 12q24, 9p21, 9q31.2 and in ZNF365 are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers.

INTRODUCTION: Several common alleles have been shown to be associated with breast and/or ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Recent genome-wide association studies of breast cancer have identified eight additional breast cancer susceptibility loci: rs1011970 (9p21, CDKN2A/B), rs10995190 (ZNF365), rs704010 (ZMIZ1), rs2380205 (10p15), rs614367 (11q13), rs1292011 (12q24), rs10771399 (12p11 near PTHLH) and rs865686 (9q31.2). METHODS: To evaluate whether these single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, we genotyped these SNPs in 12,599 BRCA1 and 7,132 BRCA2 mutation carriers and analysed the associations with breast cancer risk within a retrospective likelihood framework. RESULTS: Only SNP rs10771399 near PTHLH was associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.94, P-trend = 3 × 10-4). The association was restricted to mutations proven or predicted to lead to absence of protein expression (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.90, P-trend = 3.1 × 10-5, P-difference = 0.03). Four SNPs were associated with the risk of breast cancer for BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs10995190, P-trend = 0.015; rs1011970, P-trend = 0.048; rs865686, 2df-P = 0.007; rs1292011 2df-P = 0.03. rs10771399 (PTHLH) was predominantly associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer for BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.90, P-trend = 4 × 10-5) and there was marginal evidence of association with ER-negative breast cancer for BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.00, P-trend = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: The present findings, in combination with previously identified modifiers of risk, will ultimately lead to more accurate risk prediction and an improved understanding of the disease etiology in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Breast reconstruction in patients with personal and family history of breast cancer undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, a 10-year experience.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical course of breast reconstruction in patients with personal and family history of breast cancer undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and elucidate the association between reoperation risk and adjuvant treatment. METHODS: A descriptive retrospective study of a consecutive series of breast cancer patients who underwent CPM with breast reconstruction at Karolinska University Hospital between 1998 and 2008 was performed. Reoperation was chosen as an outcome variable assessing morbidity and thus documented for each patient and for each reconstructed breast. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the risk of reoperation after bilateral breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients underwent CPM during the study period. Their mean age at CPM was 45.3 years (SD =9.4). No contralateral breast cancer was diagnosed after CPM during the median follow-up period of 3.9 years. All women, but two, received an implant based breast reconstruction. The majority (n =75, 82%) underwent CPM with concurrent bilateral breast reconstruction. Overall, after bilateral breast reconstruction 45/75 (60%) required at least one reoperation on the CPM side (n =2, 3%), therapeutic mastectomy (TM) side (n =17, 23%) or both sides (n =26, 33%). In the paired analyses, the probability of reoperation was significantly higher after TM reconstruction as compared to CPM (0.57 vs. 0.37, p =0.001). The mean number of reoperations required for completion of TM and CPM reconstruction was 0.84 and 0.49, respectively (p =0.003). Among all potential risk factors, only radiotherapy was associated with reoperation after bilateral breast reconstruction (odds ratio [OR]: 4.2, 95% CI, 1.3 to 13.6, p =0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Breast reconstruction in patients with personal and family history of breast cancer is a complex operation. This study found that the clinical course after bilateral breast reconstruction was predominantly affected by reoperations on the TM side and given radiotherapy was associated with reoperation. Further studies are necessary to examine the possible predictors of unanticipated reoperations in candidates for CPM with breast reconstruction.

Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in Swedish women at high risk of breast cancer: a national survey.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: This study attempted a national inventory of all bilateral prophylactic mastectomies performed in Sweden between 1995 and 2005 in high-risk women without a previous breast malignancy. The primary aim was to investigate the breast cancer incidence after surgery. Secondary aims were to describe the preoperative risk assessment, operation techniques, complications, histopathological findings, and regional differences. METHODS: Geneticists, oncologists and surgeons performing prophylactic breast surgery were asked to identify all women eligible for inclusion in their region. The medical records were reviewed in each region and the data were analyzed centrally. The BOADICEA risk assessment model was used to calculate the number of expected/prevented breast cancers during the follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 223 women operated on in 8 hospitals were identified. During a mean follow-up of 6.6 years, no primary breast cancer was observed compared with 12 expected cases. However, 1 woman succumbed 9 years post mastectomy to widespread adenocarcinoma of uncertain origin. Median age at operation was 40 years. A total of 58% were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. All but 3 women underwent breast reconstruction, 208 with implants and 12 with autologous tissue. Four small, unifocal, invasive cancers and 4 ductal carcinoma in situ were found in the mastectomy specimens. The incidence of nonbreast related complications was low (3%). Implant loss due to infection/necrosis occurred in 21 women (10%) but a majority received a new implant later. In total, 64% of the women underwent at least 1unanticipated secondary operation. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy is safe and efficacious in reducing future breast cancer in asymptomatic women at high risk. Unanticipated reoperations are common. Given the small number of patients centralization seems justified.

Patient-reported Outcomes and 3-dimensional Surface Imaging after Risk-reducing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

The cosmetic results after risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) are intended to be long-lasting. Long-term follow-up of the cosmetic outcome can be evaluated subjectively by the women themselves through patient-reported outcome measures such as questionnaires, or by using data from three-dimensional surface imaging (3D-SI) to calculate the volume, shape, and symmetry of the reconstructed breasts as a more objective cosmetic evaluation. The study aim was to evaluate the correspondence between patient-reported measures and 3D-SI measurements. METHODS: Questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-BRECON23 and BIS) were sent to women on average 13 [7-20] years after RRM and IBR. Items were preselected for comparison with 3D measurements of women imaged using the VECTRA XT 3D-imaging system at the long-term follow-up. RESULTS: Questionnaire responses and 3D images of 58 women, 36 without and 22 with previous breast cancer (where 15 also received radiotherapy) before RRM and IBR, were analyzed. Median age at follow-up was 57 [41-73] years. Patient-reported satisfaction with the cosmetic outcome was positive for both groups. 3D measurements indicated more symmetrical cosmetic results for women without previous breast cancer. No statistically significant associations between patient-reported satisfaction and 3D measurements were found. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with the long-term cosmetic outcome after RRM and IBR was, in general, positive when evaluated by the women. 3D-SI could be used as a more objective approach to assess the cosmetic outcome in terms of volume and shape-symmetry; however, it does not directly translate to the patient-reported satisfaction.

A search for modifying genetic factors in CHEK2:c.1100delC breast cancer patients.

The risk of breast cancer associated with CHEK2:c.1100delC is 2-threefold but higher in carriers with a family history of breast cancer than without, suggesting that other genetic loci in combination with CHEK2:c.1100delC confer an increased risk in a polygenic model. Part of the excess familial risk has been associated with common low-penetrance variants. This study aimed to identify genetic loci that modify CHEK2:c.1100delC-associated breast cancer risk by searching for candidate risk alleles that are overrepresented in CHEK2:c.1100delC carriers with breast cancer compared with controls. We performed whole-exome sequencing in 28 breast cancer cases with germline CHEK2:c.1100delC, 28 familial breast cancer cases and 70 controls. Candidate alleles were selected for validation in larger cohorts. One recessive synonymous variant, rs16897117, was suggested, but no overrepresentation of homozygous CHEK2:c.1100delC carriers was found in the following validation. Furthermore, 11 non-synonymous candidate alleles were suggested for further testing, but no significant difference in allele frequency could be detected in the validation in CHEK2:c.1100delC cases compared with familial breast cancer, sporadic breast cancer and controls. With this method, we found no support for a CHEK2:c.1100delC-specific genetic modifier. Further studies of CHEK2:c.1100delC genetic modifiers are warranted to improve risk assessment in clinical practice.

Association of Genomic Domains in BRCA1 and BRCA2 with Prostate Cancer Risk and Aggressiveness.

Pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. We evaluated whether PSVs in BRCA1/2 were associated with risk of overall prostate cancer or high grade (Gleason 8+) prostate cancer using an international sample of 65 BRCA1 and 171 BRCA2 male PSV carriers with prostate cancer, and 3,388 BRCA1 and 2,880 BRCA2 male PSV carriers without prostate cancer. PSVs in the 3' region of BRCA2 (c.7914+) were significantly associated with elevated risk of prostate cancer compared with reference bin c.1001-c.7913 [HR = 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25-2.52; P = 0.001], as well as elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.63-5.95; P = 0.001). c.756-c.1000 was also associated with elevated prostate cancer risk (HR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.71-4.68; P = 0.00004) and elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 4.95; 95% CI, 2.12-11.54; P = 0.0002). No genotype-phenotype associations were detected for PSVs in BRCA1. These results demonstrate that specific BRCA2 PSVs may be associated with elevated risk of developing aggressive prostate cancer. SIGNIFICANCE: Aggressive prostate cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers may vary according to the specific BRCA2 mutation inherited by the at-risk individual.