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.

The spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic sequence variants in Middle Eastern, North African, and South European countries.

BRCA1 BRCA2 mutational spectrum in the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Europe is not well characterized. The unique history and cultural practices characterizing these regions, often involving consanguinity and inbreeding, plausibly led to the accumulation of population-specific founder pathogenic sequence variants (PSVs). To determine recurring BRCA PSVs in these locales, a search in PUBMED, EMBASE, BIC, and CIMBA was carried out combined with outreach to researchers from the relevant countries for unpublished data. We identified 232 PSVs in BRCA1 and 239 in BRCA2 in 25 of 33 countries surveyed. Common PSVs that were detected in four or more countries were c.5266dup (p.Gln1756Profs), c.181T>G (p.Cys61Gly), c.68_69del (p.Glu23Valfs), c.5030_5033del (p.Thr1677Ilefs), c.4327C>T (p.Arg1443Ter), c.5251C>T (p.Arg1751Ter), c.1016dup (p.Val340Glyfs), c.3700_3704del (p.Val1234Glnfs), c.4065_4068del (p.Asn1355Lysfs), c.1504_1508del (p.Leu502Alafs), c.843_846del (p.Ser282Tyrfs), c.798_799del (p.Ser267Lysfs), and c.3607C>T (p.Arg1203Ter) in BRCA1 and c.2808_2811del (p.Ala938Profs), c.5722_5723del (p.Leu1908Argfs), c.9097dup (p.Thr3033Asnfs), c.1310_1313del (p. p.Lys437Ilefs), and c.5946del (p.Ser1982Argfs) for BRCA2. Notably, some mutations (e.g., p.Asn257Lysfs (c.771_775del)) were observed in unrelated populations. Thus, seemingly genotyping recurring BRCA PSVs in specific populations may provide first pass BRCA genotyping platform.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic sequence variants in women of African origin or ancestry.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) pathogenic sequence variants (PSVs) confer elevated risks of multiple cancers. However, most BRCA1/2 PSVs reports focus on European ancestry individuals. Knowledge of the PSV distribution in African descent individuals is poorly understood. We undertook a systematic review of the published literature and publicly available databases reporting BRCA1/2 PSVs also accessed the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) database to identify African or African descent individuals. Using these data, we inferred which of the BRCA PSVs were likely to be of African continental origin. Of the 43,817 BRCA1/2 PSV carriers in the CIMBA database, 469 (1%) were of African descent. Additional African descent individuals were identified in public databases (n = 291) and the literature (n = 601). We identified 164 unique BRCA1 and 173 unique BRCA2 PSVs in individuals of African ancestry. Of these, 83 BRCA1 and 91 BRCA2 PSVs are of likely or possible African origin. We observed numerous differences in the distribution of PSV type and function in African origin versus non-African origin PSVs. Research in populations of African ancestry with BRCA1/2 PSVs is needed to provide the information needed for clinical management and decision-making in African descent individuals worldwide.

Mutational spectrum in a worldwide study of 29,700 families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

The prevalence and spectrum of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in single populations, with the majority of reports focused on White in Europe and North America. The Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) has assembled data on 18,435 families with BRCA1 mutations and 11,351 families with BRCA2 mutations ascertained from 69 centers in 49 countries on six continents. This study comprehensively describes the characteristics of the 1,650 unique BRCA1 and 1,731 unique BRCA2 deleterious (disease-associated) mutations identified in the CIMBA database. We observed substantial variation in mutation type and frequency by geographical region and race/ethnicity. In addition to known founder mutations, mutations of relatively high frequency were identified in specific racial/ethnic or geographic groups that may reflect founder mutations and which could be used in targeted (panel) first pass genotyping for specific populations. Knowledge of the population-specific mutational spectrum in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could inform efficient strategies for genetic testing and may justify a more broad-based oncogenetic testing in some populations.

Inheritance of deleterious mutations at both BRCA1 and BRCA2 in an international sample of 32,295 women.

BACKGROUND: Most BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers have inherited a single (heterozygous) mutation. Transheterozygotes (TH) who have inherited deleterious mutations in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 are rare, and the consequences of transheterozygosity are poorly understood. METHODS: From 32,295 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, we identified 93 TH (0.3 %). "Cases" were defined as TH, and "controls" were single mutations at BRCA1 (SH1) or BRCA2 (SH2). Matched SH1 "controls" carried a BRCA1 mutation found in the TH "case". Matched SH2 "controls" carried a BRCA2 mutation found in the TH "case". After matching the TH carriers with SH1 or SH2, 91 TH were matched to 9316 SH1, and 89 TH were matched to 3370 SH2. RESULTS: The majority of TH (45.2 %) involved the three common Jewish mutations. TH were more likely than SH1 and SH2 women to have been ever diagnosed with breast cancer (BC; p = 0.002). TH were more likely to be diagnosed with ovarian cancer (OC) than SH2 (p = 0.017), but not SH1. Age at BC diagnosis was the same in TH vs. SH1 (p = 0.231), but was on average 4.5 years younger in TH than in SH2 (p < 0.001). BC in TH was more likely to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive (p = 0.010) or progesterone receptor (PR) positive (p = 0.013) than in SH1, but less likely to be ER positive (p < 0.001) or PR positive (p = 0.012) than SH2. Among 15 tumors from TH patients, there was no clear pattern of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) for BRCA1 or BRCA2 in either BC or OC. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest that clinical TH phenotypes resemble SH1. However, TH breast tumor marker characteristics are phenotypically intermediate to SH1 and SH2.

Uterine Cancer After Risk-Reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy Without Hysterectomy in Women With BRCA Mutations.

IMPORTANCE: The link between BRCA mutations and uterine cancer is unclear. Therefore, although risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is standard treatment among women with BRCA mutations (BRCA+ women), the role of concomitant hysterectomy is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk for uterine cancer and distribution of specific histologic subtypes in BRCA+ women after RRSO without hysterectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 1083 women with a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation identified from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2011, at 9 academic medical centers in the United States and the United Kingdom who underwent RRSO without a prior or concomitant hysterectomy. Of these, 627 participants were BRCA1+; 453, BRCA2+; and 3, both. Participants were prospectively followed up for a median 5.1 (interquartile range [IQR], 3.0-8.4) years after ascertainment, BRCA testing, or RRSO (whichever occurred last). Follow up data available through October 14, 2014, were included in the analyses. Censoring occurred at uterine cancer diagnosis, hysterectomy, last follow-up, or death. New cancers were categorized by histologic subtype, and available tumors were analyzed for loss of the wild-type BRCA gene and/or protein expression. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incidence of uterine corpus cancer in BRCA+ women who underwent RRSO without hysterectomy compared with rates expected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. RESULTS: Among the 1083 women women who underwent RRSO without hysterectomy at a median age 45.6 (IQR: 40.9 - 52.5), 8 incident uterine cancers were observed (4.3 expected; observed to expected [O:E] ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.8-3.7; P = .09). No increased risk for endometrioid endometrial carcinoma or sarcoma was found after stratifying by subtype. Five serous and/or serous-like (serous/serous-like) endometrial carcinomas were observed (4 BRCA1+ and 1 BRCA2+) 7.2 to 12.9 years after RRSO (BRCA1: 0.18 expected [O:E ratio, 22.2; 95% CI, 6.1-56.9; P < .001]; BRCA2: 0.16 expected [O:E ratio, 6.4; 95% CI, 0.2-35.5; P = .15]). Tumor analyses confirmed loss of the wild-type BRCA1 gene and/or protein expression in all 3 available serous/serous-like BRCA1+ tumors. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although the overall risk for uterine cancer after RRSO was not increased, the risk for serous/serous-like endometrial carcinoma was increased in BRCA1+ women. This risk should be considered when discussing the advantages and risks of hysterectomy at the time of RRSO in BRCA1+ women.

Use of risk-reducing surgeries in a prospective cohort of 1,499 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Inherited mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) confer very high risk of breast and ovarian cancers. Genetic testing and counseling can reduce risk and death from these cancers if appropriate preventive strategies are applied, including risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) or risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). However, some women who might benefit from these interventions do not take full advantage of them. We evaluated RRSO and RRM use in a prospective cohort of 1,499 women with inherited BRCA1/2 mutations from 20 centers who enrolled in the study without prior cancer or RRSO or RRM and were followed forward for the occurrence of these events. We estimated the age-specific usage of RRSO/RRM in this cohort using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Use of RRSO was 45% for BRCA1 and 34% for BRCA2 by age 40, and 86% for BRCA1 and 71% for BRCA2 by age 50. RRM usage was estimated to be 46% by age 70 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. BRCA1 mutation carriers underwent RRSO more frequently than BRCA2 mutation carriers overall, but the uptake of RRSO in BRCA2 was similar after mutation testing and in women born since 1960. RRM uptake was similar for both BRCA1 and BRCA2. Childbearing influenced the use of RRSO and RRM in both BRCA1 and BRCA2. Uptake of RRSO is high, but some women are still diagnosed with ovarian cancer before undergoing RRSO. This suggests that research is needed to understand the optimal timing of RRSO to maximize risk reduction and limit potential adverse consequences of RRSO.

Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial variability in cancer risk in women who have inherited a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation. Numerous factors have been hypothesized to modify these risks, but studies are of variable quality, and it remains unclear which of these may be of value in clinical risk assessment. METHODS: PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published through September 2013. Fixed effects meta-analysis was done using the hazard ratios and/or odds ratios to estimate the pooled effect estimates (ES) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify factors that are associated with cancer risk modification in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: We identified 44 nonoverlapping studies that met predefined quality criteria. Sufficient evidence is available to make clinically relevant inferences about a number of cancer risk modifiers. The only variable examined that produced a probable association was late age at first live birth, a meta-analysis showed a decrease in the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers with women aged 30 years or older vs. women younger than 30 years (ES = 0.65; 95% CI =0.42 to 0.99). The same was shown for women aged 25 to 29 years versus those aged less than 25 years (ES = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.99). Breastfeeding and tubal ligation were associated with reduced ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers; oral contraceptives were associated with reduced risk among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Smoking was associated with increased breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers only. CONCLUSIONS: Data assessing many potential risk modifiers are inadequate, and many have not been externally validated. Although additional studies are required to confirm some associations, sufficient information is available for some risk factors to be used in risk counseling or lifestyle modification to minimize cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

Breast and ovarian cancer risk and risk reduction in Jewish BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

PURPOSE: Mutations in BRCA1/2 dramatically increase the risk of both breast and ovarian cancers. Three mutations in these genes (185delAG, 5382insC, and 6174delT) occur at high frequency in Ashkenazi Jews. We evaluated how these common Jewish mutations (CJMs) affect cancer risks and risk reduction. METHODS: Our cohort comprised 4,649 women with disease-associated BRCA1/2 mutations from 22 centers in the Prevention and Observation of Surgical End Points Consortium. Of these women, 969 were self-identified Jewish women. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate breast and ovarian cancer risks, as well as risk reduction from risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), by CJM and self-identified Jewish status. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of Jewish BRCA1/2-positive women carried a CJM. Jewish women were significantly more likely to undergo RRSO than non-Jewish women (54% v 41%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.42). Relative risks of cancer varied by CJM, with the relative risk of breast cancer being significantly lower in 6174delT mutation carriers than in non-CJM BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.69). No significant difference was seen in cancer risk reduction after RRSO among subgroups. CONCLUSION: Consistent with previous results, risks for breast and ovarian cancer varied by CJM in BRCA1/2 carriers. In particular, 6174delT carriers had a lower risk of breast cancer. This finding requires additional confirmation in larger prospective and population-based cohort studies before being integrated into clinical care.

Modification of BRCA1-Associated Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk by BRCA1-Interacting Genes.

Inherited BRCA1 mutations confer elevated cancer risk. Recent studies have identified genes that encode proteins that interact with BRCA1 as modifiers of BRCA1-associated breast cancer. We evaluated a comprehensive set of genes that encode most known BRCA1 interactors to evaluate the role of these genes as modifiers of cancer risk. A cohort of 2,825 BRCA1 mutation carriers was used to evaluate the association of haplotypes at ATM, BRCC36, BRCC45 (BRE), BRIP1 (BACH1/FANCJ), CTIP, ABRA1 (FAM175A), MERIT40, MRE11A, NBS1, PALB2 (FANCN), RAD50, RAD51, RAP80, and TOPBP1, and was associated with time to breast and ovarian cancer diagnosis. Statistically significant false discovery rate (FDR) adjusted P values for overall association of haplotypes (P(FDR)) with breast cancer were identified at ATM (P(FDR) = 0.029), BRCC45 (P(FDR) = 0.019), BRIP1 (P(FDR) = 0.008), CTIP (P(FDR) = 0.017), MERIT40 (P(FDR) = 0.019), NBS1 (P(FDR) = 0.003), RAD50 (P(FDR) = 0.014), and TOPBP1 (P(FDR) = 0.011). Haplotypes at ABRA1 (P(FDR) = 0.007), BRCC45 (P(FDR) = 0.016 and P(FDR) = 0.005 in two haplotype blocks), and RAP80 (P(FDR) < 0.001) were associated with ovarian cancer risk. Overall, the data suggest that genomic variation at multiple loci that encode proteins that interact biologically with BRCA1 are associated with modified breast cancer and ovarian cancer risk in women who carry BRCA1 mutations.

Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality.

CONTEXT: Mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy are widely used by carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations to reduce their risks of breast and ovarian cancer. OBJECTIVE: To estimate risk and mortality reduction stratified by mutation and prior cancer status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, multicenter cohort study of 2482 women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations ascertained between 1974 and 2008. The study was conducted at 22 clinical and research genetics centers in Europe and North America to assess the relationship of risk-reducing mastectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy with cancer outcomes. The women were followed up until the end of 2009. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Breast and ovarian cancer risk, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality. RESULTS: No breast cancers were diagnosed in the 247 women with risk-reducing mastectomy compared with 98 women of 1372 diagnosed with breast cancer who did not have risk-reducing mastectomy. Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, women who underwent salpingo-oophorectomy had a lower risk of ovarian cancer, including those with prior breast cancer (6% vs 1%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.59) and those without prior breast cancer (6% vs 2%; HR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.12-0.69]), and a lower risk of first diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers (20% vs 14%; HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.41-0.96]) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (23% vs 7%; HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16-0.82]). Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, undergoing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality (10% vs 3%; HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.26-0.61]), breast cancer-specific mortality (6% vs 2%; HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26-0.76]), and ovarian cancer-specific mortality (3% vs 0.4%; HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.06-0.80]). CONCLUSIONS: Among a cohort of women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, the use of risk-reducing mastectomy was associated with a lower risk of breast cancer; risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with a lower risk of ovarian cancer, first diagnosis of breast cancer, all-cause mortality, breast cancer-specific mortality, and ovarian cancer-specific mortality.

Occult ovarian cancers identified at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is widely used for cancer risk reduction in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation carriers. Occult ovarian/fallopian tube cancers (OOC) detected at the time of RRSO have been reported in several studies with wide variability in reported prevalence. We estimated the prevalence of OOC in a prospective cohort of 647 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers from 18 centers (PROSE consortium) who underwent RRSO between 2001 and 2008. OOC was detected in 16 of 647 women (2.5%). The mean age at RRSO was 51.7 in those with OOC versus 46.6 in those without OOC (P = 0.017). Twelve of the 16 OOCs (75%) were diagnosed in women with BRCA1 mutations. Thirty-eight percent of women with OOC had stage 1 cancer versus none of the women in the PROSE database diagnosed with ovarian cancer outside of screening. Among 385 women (60%) in whom pathology reports were available for central review, 246 (64%) RRSOs were performed at participating PROSE centers while 139 (36%) were performed at local sites. Ovarian and fallopian tube tissues removed at major genetics referral centers were significantly more likely to have been examined in toto compared to specimens obtained at non-referral centers (75% vs. 30%, P < 0.001). Our results confirm that OOC may be found at the time of RRSO in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and suggest that OOC are of a more favorable stage than cancers found outside RRSO. An unacceptably high proportion of pathologic examinations did not adequately examine ovaries and fallopian tubes obtained at RRSO.

Modification of ovarian cancer risk by BRCA1/2-interacting genes in a multicenter cohort of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Inherited BRCA1/2 mutations confer elevated ovarian cancer risk. Knowledge of factors that can improve ovarian cancer risk assessment in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is important because no effective early detection for ovarian cancers exists. A cohort of 1,575 BRCA1 and 856 BRCA2 mutation carriers was used to evaluate haplotypes at ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CTIP, MRE11, NBS1, RAD50, RAD51, and TOPBP1 in ovarian cancer risk. In BRCA1 carriers, no associations were observed with ATM, BARD1, CTIP, RAD50, RAD51, or TOPBP1. At BRIP1, an association was observed for one haplotype with a multiple testing corrected P (P(corr)) = 0.012, although no individual haplotype was significant. At MRE11, statistically significant associations were observed for one haplotype (P(corr) = 0.007). At NBS1, we observed a P(corr) = 0.024 for haplotypes. In BRCA2 carriers, no associations were observed with CTIP, NBS1, RAD50, or TOPBP1. Rare haplotypes at ATM (P(corr) = 0.044) and BARD1 (P(corr) = 0.012) were associated with ovarian cancer risk. At BRIP1, two common haplotypes were significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (P(corr) = 0.011). At MRE11, we observed a significant haplotype association (P(corr) = 0.012), and at RAD51, one common haplotype was significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (P(corr) = 0.026). Variants in genes that interact biologically withBRCA1 and/or BRCA2 may be associated with modified ovarian cancer risk in women who carry BRCA1/2 mutations.

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study.

PURPOSE: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has been widely adopted as a key component of breast and gynecologic cancer risk-reduction for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Despite 17% to 39% of all BRCA mutation carriers having a mutation in BRCA2, no prospective study to date has evaluated the efficacy of RRSO for the prevention of breast and BRCA-associated gynecologic (ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal) cancer when BRCA2 mutation carriers are analyzed separately from BRCA1 mutation carriers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,079 women 30 years of age and older with ovaries in situ and a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were enrolled onto prospective follow-up studies at one of 11 centers from November 1, 1994 to December 1, 2004. Women self-selected RRSO or observation. Follow-up information through November 30, 2005, was collected by questionnaire and medical record review. The effect of RRSO on time to diagnosis of breast or BRCA-associated gynecologic cancer was analyzed using a Cox proportional-hazards model. RESULTS: During 3-year follow-up, RRSO was associated with an 85% reduction in BRCA1-associated gynecologic cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.56) and a 72% reduction in BRCA2-associated breast cancer risk (HR = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.92). While protection against BRCA1-associated breast cancer (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.22) and BRCA2-associated gynecologic cancer (HR = 0.00; 95% CI, not estimable) was suggested, neither effect reached statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The protection conferred by RRSO against breast and gynecologic cancers may differ between carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Further studies evaluating the efficacy of risk-reduction strategies in BRCA mutation carriers should stratify by the specific gene mutated.

Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Deleterious mutations of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. At least 7 models for estimating the probabilities of having a mutation are used widely in clinical and scientific activities; however, the merits and limitations of these models are not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: To systematically quantify the accuracy of the following publicly available models to predict mutation carrier status: BRCAPRO, family history assessment tool, Finnish, Myriad, National Cancer Institute, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University. DESIGN: Cross-sectional validation study, using model predictions and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status of patients different from those used to develop the models. SETTING: Multicenter study across Cancer Genetics Network participating centers. PATIENTS: 3 population-based samples of participants in research studies and 8 samples from genetic counseling clinics. MEASUREMENTS: Discrimination between individuals testing positive for a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 from those testing negative, as measured by the c-statistic, and sensitivity and specificity of model predictions. RESULTS: The 7 models differ in their predictions. The better-performing models have a c-statistic around 80%. BRCAPRO has the largest c-statistic overall and in all but 2 patient subgroups, although the margin over other models is narrow in many strata. Outside of high-risk populations, all models have high false-negative and false-positive rates across a range of probability thresholds used to refer for mutation testing. LIMITATION: Three recently published models were not included. CONCLUSIONS: All models identify women who probably carry a deleterious mutation of BRCA1 or BRCA2 with adequate discrimination to support individualized genetic counseling, although discrimination varies across models and populations.

Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in a prospective cohort of unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

BACKGROUND: Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations can reduce cancer incidence and mortality by using bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy (BPO) or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM). The availability of these risk-reduction strategies is an important consideration in the decision to undergo genetic testing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the use of BPO and BPM in a prospective sample of 537 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers from 17 centers in North America and Europe. These women were aged > 30 years, had no BPM, BPO, breast cancer, or ovarian cancer before the disclosure of their genetic test results and were followed for > or = 6 months. RESULTS: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is used significantly more frequently than BPM (55% vs. 21%; P < .001). Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy was more common among women age > or = 40 years compared with women aged < 40 years (68% vs. 43%; P < .001) and among parous women compared with nulliparous women (60% vs. 39%; P < .001). There was no difference in BPM (P = .83) or BPO (P = .09) in BRCA1 versus BRCA2 carriers. Multivariate models identified age and parity as a predictor of BPO in BRCA1 carriers; age and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers; parity and ovarian cancer family history as a predictor of BPM in BRCA1 carriers; and smoking and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers. CONCLUSION: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is more commonly used than BPM in unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Parity, age, and family history can also influence BPO and BPM uptake. Consistent with current recommendations, BPO is used by the majority of parous women aged > 40 years.

Mortality after bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Bilateral prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy (BPSO) is used widely used to reduce the risk of breast and ovarian cancer in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. However, the reduction in mortality after this surgery is unclear. We aimed to assess whether BPSO improves overall mortality or cancer-specific mortality in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. METHODS: We identified a prospective cohort of 666 women with disease-associated germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and no previous cancer diagnosis. In our primary analysis, we compared 155 women who had had BPSO and 271 women matched for age at BPSO who had not had BPSO. In our secondary analysis, we compared 188 women who had had BPSO with 478 women who had not. In both analyses, we compared overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality. All analyses were adjusted for centre, mutation (BRCA1 vs BRCA2), and birth year. FINDINGS: In the primary analysis, mean follow-up from BPSO to censoring was 3.1 years [SD 2.4] in the BPSO group and 2.1 years [2.0] in the non-BPSO group. The hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality was 0.24 (95% CI 0.08-0.71), for breast-cancer-specific mortality was 0.10 (0.02-0.71), and for ovarian-cancer-specific mortality was 0.05 (0.01-0.46) for women who had BPSO compared with those who had not. In secondary analysis, BPSO was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.28 [95% CI 0.10-0.74]), but not with breast-cancer-specific mortality (0.15 [0.02-1.18] or ovarian-cancer-specific mortality (0.23 [0.02-1.87]. When regarded as a time-dependent covariate, BPSO was not associated significantly with mortality. INTERPRETATION: If confirmed, the finding that BPSO improves overall survival and cancer-specific survival in women with BRCA mutations will complement our existing knowledge of cancer-risk reduction associated with BPSO. Together, these data could give information to women who are considering genetic testing.

Active recruitment increased enrollment in a hereditary cancer registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Mid-Atlantic Cancer Genetics Network (MACGN) targets individuals from cancer risk assessment clinics for recruitment into a national hereditary cancer registry. We sought to determine whether different recruitment methods used in a high-risk breast and ovarian cancer clinic yielded differences into enrollment into MACGN. METHODS: Two methods of recruitment were compared over an 8-month period. A passive recruitment technique, used during the first 4 months of recruitment, involved distribution of a brochure. An active recruitment method, used during the second 4-month period, required a MACGN recruiter to approach patients and initiate a brief discussion of the registry. RESULTS: During the first 4-month period, 158 eight patients were seen in the clinic and 142 were seen in the second 4-month period. During passive recruitment, 20% of available patients were approached, compared with 63% during active recruitment. Active recruitment also resulted in fourfold increase over passive recruitment in enrollment (from 15.6% to 67.4%). CONCLUSION: Allocating research staff specifically for recruitment and personal contact with potential participants is effective in achieving increased enrollment into a national hereditary cancer research registry.