Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 59
Filtrar
1.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 2021 Jan 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33493488

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers has been shown to decrease with longer duration of oral contraceptive use. Although the effects of using oral contraceptives in the general population are well established (approximately 50% risk reduction in ovarian cancer), the estimated risk reduction in mutation carriers is much less precise because of potential bias and small sample sizes. In addition, only a few studies on oral contraceptive use have examined the associations of duration of use, time since last use, starting age, and calendar year of start with risk of ovarian cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate in more detail the associations of various characteristics of oral contraceptive use and risk of ovarian cancer, to provide healthcare providers and carriers with better risk estimates. STUDY DESIGN: In this international retrospective study, ovarian cancer risk associations were assessed using oral contraceptives data on 3989 BRCA1 and 2445 BRCA2 mutation carriers. Age-dependent-weighted Cox regression analyses were stratified by study and birth cohort and included breast cancer diagnosis as a covariate. To minimize survival bias, analyses were left truncated at 5 years before baseline questionnaire. Separate analyses were conducted for each aspect of oral contraceptive use and in a multivariate analysis, including all these aspects. In addition, the analysis of duration of oral contraceptive use was stratified by recency of use. RESULTS: Oral contraceptives were less often used by mutation carriers who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer (ever use: 58.6% for BRCA1 and 53.5% BRCA2) than by unaffected carriers (ever use: 88.9% for BRCA1 and 80.7% for BRCA2). The median duration of use was 7 years for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers who developed ovarian cancer and 9 and 8 years for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with ovarian cancer, respectively. For BRCA1 mutation carriers, univariate analyses have shown that both a longer duration of oral contraceptive use and more recent oral contraceptive use were associated with a reduction in the risk of ovarian cancer. However, in multivariate analyses, including duration of use, age at first use, and time since last use, duration of oral contraceptive use proved to be the prominent protective factor (compared with <5 years: 5-9 years [hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.12]; >10 years [hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.73]; Ptrend=.008). The inverse association between duration of use and ovarian cancer risk persisted for more than 15 years (duration of ≥10 years; BRCA1 <15 years since last use [hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.43]; BRCA1 >15 years since last use [hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.59]). Univariate results for BRCA2 mutation carriers were similar but were inconclusive because of limited sample size. CONCLUSION: For BRCA1 mutation carriers, longer duration of oral contraceptive use is associated with a greater reduction in ovarian cancer risk, and the protection is long term.

2.
Eur Urol ; 77(4): 508-547, 2020 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32001144

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the results from the APCCC 2019. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Similar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Panellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.

4.
Breast Cancer Res ; 22(1): 8, 2020 01 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31948486

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Mutação , Salpingo-Ooforectomia/métodos , Adulto , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Agências Internacionais , Menopausa , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Comportamento de Redução do Risco
5.
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis ; 23(2): 333-342, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31776447

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The development of prostate cancer can be influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Numerous germline SNPs influence prostate cancer susceptibility. The functional pathways in which these SNPs increase prostate cancer susceptibility are unknown. Finasteride is currently not being used routinely as a chemoprevention agent but the long term outcomes of the PCPT trial are awaited. The outcomes of the SELECT trial have not recommended the use of chemoprevention in preventing prostate cancer. This study investigated whether germline risk SNPs could be used to predict outcomes in the PCPT and SELECT trial. METHODS: Genotyping was performed in European men entered into the PCPT trial (n = 2434) and SELECT (n = 4885). Next generation genotyping was performed using Affymetrix® Eureka™ Genotyping protocols. Logistic regression models were used to test the association of risk scores and the outcomes in the PCPT and SELECT trials. RESULTS: Of the 100 SNPs, 98 designed successfully and genotyping was validated for samples genotyped on other platforms. A number of SNPs predicted for aggressive disease in both trials. Men with a higher polygenic score are more likely to develop prostate cancer in both trials, but the score did not predict for other outcomes in the trial. CONCLUSION: Men with a higher polygenic risk score are more likely to develop prostate cancer. There were no interactions of these germline risk SNPs and the chemoprevention agents in the SELECT and PCPT trials.

6.
PLoS Med ; 16(12): e1002998, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31860675

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force supports individualised decision-making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening in men aged 55-69. Knowing how the potential benefits and harms of screening vary by an individual's risk of developing prostate cancer could inform decision-making about screening at both an individual and population level. This modelling study examined the benefit-harm tradeoffs and the cost-effectiveness of a risk-tailored screening programme compared to age-based and no screening. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A life-table model, projecting age-specific prostate cancer incidence and mortality, was developed of a hypothetical cohort of 4.48 million men in England aged 55 to 69 years with follow-up to age 90. Risk thresholds were based on age and polygenic profile. We compared no screening, age-based screening (quadrennial PSA testing from 55 to 69), and risk-tailored screening (men aged 55 to 69 years with a 10-year absolute risk greater than a threshold receive quadrennial PSA testing from the age they reach the risk threshold). The analysis was undertaken from the health service perspective, including direct costs borne by the health system for risk assessment, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. We used probabilistic sensitivity analyses to account for parameter uncertainty and discounted future costs and benefits at 3.5% per year. Our analysis should be considered cautiously in light of limitations related to our model's cohort-based structure and the uncertainty of input parameters in mathematical models. Compared to no screening over 35 years follow-up, age-based screening prevented the most deaths from prostate cancer (39,272, 95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 16,792-59,685) at the expense of 94,831 (95% UI: 84,827-105,630) overdiagnosed cancers. Age-based screening was the least cost-effective strategy studied. The greatest number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was generated by risk-based screening at a 10-year absolute risk threshold of 4%. At this threshold, risk-based screening led to one-third fewer overdiagnosed cancers (64,384, 95% UI: 57,382-72,050) but averted 6.3% fewer (9,695, 95% UI: 2,853-15,851) deaths from prostate cancer by comparison with age-based screening. Relative to no screening, risk-based screening at a 4% 10-year absolute risk threshold was cost-effective in 48.4% and 57.4% of the simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of GBP£20,000 (US$26,000) and £30,000 ($39,386) per QALY, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of risk-tailored screening improved as the threshold rose. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this modelling study, offering screening to men at higher risk could potentially reduce overdiagnosis and improve the benefit-harm tradeoff and the cost-effectiveness of a prostate cancer screening program. The optimal threshold will depend on societal judgements of the appropriate balance of benefits-harms and cost-effectiveness.


Assuntos
Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Antígeno Prostático Específico/análise , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/epidemiologia , Idoso , Análise Custo-Benefício , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Inglaterra , Humanos , Incidência , Tábuas de Vida , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Medição de Risco
7.
Br J Cancer ; 121(2): 180-192, 2019 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31213659

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Height and body mass index (BMI) are associated with higher ovarian cancer risk in the general population, but whether such associations exist among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown. METHODS: We applied a Mendelian randomisation approach to examine height/BMI with ovarian cancer risk using the Consortium of Investigators for the Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) data set, comprising 14,676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, with 2923 ovarian cancer cases. We created a height genetic score (height-GS) using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score (BMI-GS) using 93 BMI-associated variants. Associations were assessed using weighted Cox models. RESULTS: Observed height was not associated with ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07 per 10-cm increase in height, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.23). Height-GS showed similar results (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85-1.23). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased risk in premenopausal women with HR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.06-1.48) and HR = 1.59 (95% CI: 1.08-2.33) per 5-kg/m2 increase in observed and genetically determined BMI, respectively. No association was found for postmenopausal women. Interaction between menopausal status and BMI was significant (Pinteraction < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our observation of a positive association between BMI and ovarian cancer risk in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is consistent with findings in the general population.


Assuntos
Estatura , Índice de Massa Corporal , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Heterozigoto , Análise da Randomização Mendeliana , Mutação , Neoplasias Ovarianas/etiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Menopausa , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Ovarianas/genética , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais
8.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 111(4): 350-364, 2019 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30312457

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: BRCA1/2 mutations confer high lifetime risk of breast cancer, although other factors may modify this risk. Whether height or body mass index (BMI) modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remains unclear. METHODS: We used Mendelian randomization approaches to evaluate the association of height and BMI on breast cancer risk, using data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 with 14 676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 11 451 cases of breast cancer. We created a height genetic score using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score using 93 BMI-associated variants. We examined both observed and genetically determined height and BMI with breast cancer risk using weighted Cox models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Observed height was positively associated with breast cancer risk (HR = 1.09 per 10 cm increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 1.17; P = 1.17). Height genetic score was positively associated with breast cancer, although this was not statistically significant (per 10 cm increase in genetically predicted height, HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.17; P = .47). Observed BMI was inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m2 increase, HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.90 to 0.98; P = .007). BMI genetic score was also inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m2 increase in genetically predicted BMI, HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76 to 0.98; P = .02). BMI was primarily associated with premenopausal breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Height is associated with overall breast cancer and BMI is associated with premenopausal breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Incorporating height and BMI, particularly genetic score, into risk assessment may improve cancer management.


Assuntos
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Estatura , Índice de Massa Corporal , Neoplasias da Mama/etiologia , Análise da Randomização Mendeliana , Mutação , Adulto , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Feminino , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Humanos , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Prognóstico , Fatores de Risco
9.
Genet Med ; 20(12): 1575-1582, 2018 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29565421

RESUMO

PURPOSE: BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives are proven noncarriers of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation that is carried by their relatives. The risk of developing breast cancer (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in these women is uncertain. The study aimed to estimate risks of invasive BC and EOC in a large cohort of BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives. METHODS: We used cohort analysis to estimate incidences, cumulative risks, and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). RESULTS: A total of 1,895 unaffected women were eligible for inclusion in the BC risk analysis and 1,736 in the EOC risk analysis. There were 23 incident invasive BCs and 2 EOCs. The cumulative risk of invasive BC was 9.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-15%) by age 85 years and the corresponding risk of EOC was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.6%). The SIR for invasive BC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.62-1.40) in the overall cohort, 0.85 (95% CI 0.48-1.50) in noncarriers from BRCA1 families, and 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.87) in noncarriers from BRCA2 families. The SIR for EOC was 0.79 (95% CI 0.20-3.17) in the overall cohort. CONCLUSION: Our results did not provide evidence for elevated risks of invasive BC or EOC in BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives.


Assuntos
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Neoplasias Ovarianas/genética , Adulto , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Feminino , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Mutação em Linhagem Germinativa , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Ovarianas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/epidemiologia , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco
10.
Lancet Oncol ; 19(2): 169-180, 2018 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29337092

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies provide conflicting interpretations of the effect of inherited genetic factors on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. The primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation on breast cancer outcomes in patients with young-onset breast cancer. METHODS: We did a prospective cohort study of female patients recruited from 127 hospitals in the UK aged 40 years or younger at first diagnosis (by histological confirmation) of invasive breast cancer. Patients with a previous invasive malignancy (except non-melanomatous skin cancer) were excluded. Patients were identified within 12 months of initial diagnosis. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were identified using blood DNA collected at recruitment. Clinicopathological data, and data regarding treatment and long-term outcomes, including date and site of disease recurrence, were collected from routine medical records at 6 months, 12 months, and then annually until death or loss to follow-up. The primary outcome was overall survival for all BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-positive) versus all non-carriers (BRCA-negative) at 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after diagnosis. A prespecified subgroup analysis of overall survival was done in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Recruitment was completed in 2008, and long-term follow-up is continuing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2000, and Jan 24, 2008, we recruited 2733 women. Genotyping detected a pathogenic BRCA mutation in 338 (12%) patients (201 with BRCA1, 137 with BRCA2). After a median follow-up of 8·2 years (IQR 6·0-9·9), 651 (96%) of 678 deaths were due to breast cancer. There was no significant difference in overall survival between BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative patients in multivariable analyses at any timepoint (at 2 years: 97·0% [95% CI 94·5-98·4] vs 96·6% [95·8-97·3]; at 5 years: 83·8% [79·3-87·5] vs 85·0% [83·5-86·4]; at 10 years: 73·4% [67·4-78·5] vs 70·1% [67·7-72·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·76-1·22]; p=0·76). Of 558 patients with triple-negative breast cancer, BRCA mutation carriers had better overall survival than non-carriers at 2 years (95% [95% CI 89-97] vs 91% [88-94]; HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·047) but not 5 years (81% [73-87] vs 74% [70-78]; HR 1·13 [0·70-1·84]; p=0·62) or 10 years (72% [62-80] vs 69% [63-74]; HR 2·12 [0·82-5·49]; p= 0·12). INTERPRETATION: Patients with young-onset breast cancer who carry a BRCA mutation have similar survival as non-carriers. However, BRCA mutation carriers with triple-negative breast cancer might have a survival advantage during the first few years after diagnosis compared with non-carriers. Decisions about timing of additional surgery aimed at reducing future second primary-cancer risks should take into account patient prognosis associated with the first malignancy and patient preferences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the UK National Cancer Research Network, the Wessex Cancer Trust, Breast Cancer Now, and the PPP Healthcare Medical Trust Grant.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/mortalidade , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Predisposição Genética para Doença/epidemiologia , Mutação em Linhagem Germinativa/genética , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Estudos de Coortes , Terapia Combinada , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Análise Multivariada , Avaliação de Resultados da Assistência ao Paciente , Prognóstico , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Estudos Prospectivos , Análise de Sobrevida , Neoplasias de Mama Triplo Negativas , Reino Unido , Adulto Jovem
11.
JNCI Cancer Spectr ; 2(2): pky023, 2018 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31360853

RESUMO

Background: For BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, the association between oral contraceptive preparation (OCP) use and breast cancer (BC) risk is still unclear. Methods: Breast camcer risk associations were estimated from OCP data on 6030 BRCA1 and 3809 BRCA2 mutation carriers using age-dependent Cox regression, stratified by study and birth cohort. Prospective, left-truncated retrospective and full-cohort retrospective analyses were performed. Results: For BRCA1 mutation carriers, OCP use was not associated with BC risk in prospective analyses (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75 to 1.56), but in the left-truncated and full-cohort retrospective analyses, risks were increased by 26% (95% CI = 6% to 51%) and 39% (95% CI = 23% to 58%), respectively. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, OCP use was associated with BC risk in prospective analyses (HR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.97), but retrospective analyses were inconsistent (left-truncated: HR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.33; full cohort: HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.81). There was evidence of increasing risk with duration of use, especially before the first full-term pregnancy (BRCA1: both retrospective analyses, P < .001 and P = .001, respectively; BRCA2: full retrospective analysis, P = .002). Conclusions: Prospective analyses did not show that past use of OCP is associated with an increased BC risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers in young middle-aged women (40-50 years). For BRCA2 mutation carriers, a causal association is also not likely at those ages. Findings between retrospective and prospective analyses were inconsistent and could be due to survival bias or a true association for younger women who were underrepresented in the prospective cohort. Given the uncertain safety of long-term OCP use for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, indications other than contraception should be avoided and nonhormonal contraceptive methods should be discussed.

12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31517176

RESUMO

Purpose: To describe a snapshot of international genetic testing practices, specifically regarding the use of multigene panels, for hereditary breast/ovarian cancers. We conducted a survey through the Evidence-Based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) consortium, covering questions about 16 non-BRCA1/2 genes. Methods: Data were collected via in-person and paper/electronic surveys. ENIGMA members from around the world were invited to participate. Additional information was collected via country networks in the United Kingdom and in Italy. Results: Responses from 61 cancer genetics practices across 20 countries showed that 16 genes were tested by > 50% of the centers, but only six (PALB2, TP53, PTEN, CHEK2, ATM, and BRIP1) were tested regularly. US centers tested the genes most often, whereas United Kingdom and Italian centers with no direct ENIGMA affiliation at the time of the survey were the least likely to regularly test them. Most centers tested the 16 genes through multigene panels; some centers tested TP53, PTEN, and other cancer syndrome-associated genes individually. Most centers reported (likely) pathogenic variants to patients and would test family members for such variants. Gene-specific guidelines for breast and ovarian cancer risk management were limited and differed among countries, especially with regard to starting age and type of imaging and risk-reducing surgery recommendations. Conclusion: Currently, a small number of genes beyond BRCA1/2 are routinely analyzed worldwide, and management guidelines are limited and largely based on expert opinion. To attain clinical implementation of multigene panel testing through evidence-based management practices, it is paramount that clinicians (and patients) participate in international initiatives that share panel testing data, interpret sequence variants, and collect prospective data to underpin risk estimates and evaluate the outcome of risk intervention strategies.

13.
Eur Urol ; 73(2): 178-211, 2018 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28655541

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. OBJECTIVE: To present the report of APCCC 2017. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. CONCLUSIONS: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. PATIENT SUMMARY: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Humanos , Masculino , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia
14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29101112

RESUMO

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a highly heritable disease, and rapid evolution of sequencing technologies has enabled marked progression of our understanding of its genetic inheritance. A complex polygenic model that involves common low-penetrance susceptibility alleles causing individually small but cumulatively significant risk and rarer genetic variants causing greater risk represent the current most accepted model. Through genome-wide association studies, more than 100 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with PCa risk have been identified. Consistent reports have identified germline mutations in the genes BRCA1, BRCA2, MMR, HOXB13, CHEK2, and NBS1 as conferring moderate risks, with some leading to a more aggressive disease behavior. Considering this knowledge, several research strategies have been developed to determine whether targeted prostate screening using genetic information can overcome the limitations of population-based prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Germline DNA-repair mutations are more frequent in men with metastatic disease than previously thought, and these patients have a more favorable response to therapy with poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Genomic information is a practical tool that has the potential to enable the concept of precision medicine to become a reality in all steps of PCa patient care.


Assuntos
Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Mutação em Linhagem Germinativa , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Neoplasias da Próstata/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Proteínas de Ciclo Celular/genética , Quinase do Ponto de Checagem 2/genética , Neoplasias Colorretais Hereditárias sem Polipose/complicações , Neoplasias Colorretais Hereditárias sem Polipose/genética , Reparo do DNA , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Proteínas de Homeodomínio/genética , Humanos , Masculino , Terapia de Alvo Molecular , Proteínas Nucleares/genética , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Ubiquitina-Proteína Ligases/genética
15.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 99(5): 1234-1242, 2017 12 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28939224

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of dose escalation and hypofractionation of pelvic lymph node intensity modulated radiation therapy (PLN-IMRT) in prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS AND MATERIALS: In a phase 1/2 study, patients with advanced localized PCa were sequentially treated with 70 to 74 Gy to the prostate and dose-escalating PLN-IMRT at doses of 50 Gy (cohort 1), 55 Gy (cohort 2), and 60 Gy (cohort 3) in 35 to 37 fractions. Two hypofractionated cohorts received 60 Gy to the prostate and 47 Gy to PLN in 20 fractions over 4 weeks (cohort 4) and 5 weeks (cohort 5). All patients received long-course androgen deprivation therapy. Primary outcome was late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity at 2 years after radiation therapy for all cohorts. Secondary outcomes were acute and late toxicity using other clinician/patient-reported instruments and treatment efficacy. RESULTS: Between August 9, 2000, and June 9, 2010, 447 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 90 months. The 2-year rates of grade 2+ bowel/bladder toxicity were as follows: cohort 1, 8.3%/4.2% (95% confidence interval 2.2%-29.4%/0.6%-26.1%); cohort 2, 8.9%/5.9% (4.1%-18.7%/2.3%-15.0%); cohort 3, 13.2%/2.9% (8.6%-20.2%/1.1%-7.7%); cohort 4, 16.4%/4.8% (9.2%-28.4%/1.6%-14.3%); cohort 5, 12.2%/7.3% (7.6%-19.5%/3.9%-13.6%). Prevalence of bowel and bladder toxicity seemed to be stable over time. Other scales mirrored these results. The biochemical/clinical failure-free rate was 71% (66%-75%) at 5 years for the whole group, with pelvic lymph node control in 94% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the safety and tolerability of PLN-IMRT. Ongoing and planned phase 3 studies will need to demonstrate an increase in efficacy using PLN-IMRT to offset the small increase in bowel side effects compared with prostate-only IMRT.


Assuntos
Irradiação Linfática/métodos , Neoplasias da Próstata/radioterapia , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos , Idoso , Antagonistas de Androgênios/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Estudos de Viabilidade , Seguimentos , Humanos , Calicreínas/sangue , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pelve , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Hipofracionamento da Dose de Radiação , Fatores de Tempo
16.
JAMA ; 317(23): 2402-2416, 2017 06 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28632866

RESUMO

Importance: The clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers requires accurate, prospective cancer risk estimates. Objectives: To estimate age-specific risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for mutation carriers and to evaluate risk modification by family cancer history and mutation location. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of 6036 BRCA1 and 3820 BRCA2 female carriers (5046 unaffected and 4810 with breast or ovarian cancer or both at baseline) recruited in 1997-2011 through the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study, the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, with ascertainment through family clinics (94%) and population-based studies (6%). The majority were from large national studies in the United Kingdom (EMBRACE), the Netherlands (HEBON), and France (GENEPSO). Follow-up ended December 2013; median follow-up was 5 years. Exposures: BRCA1/2 mutations, family cancer history, and mutation location. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual incidences, standardized incidence ratios, and cumulative risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer. Results: Among 3886 women (median age, 38 years; interquartile range [IQR], 30-46 years) eligible for the breast cancer analysis, 5066 women (median age, 38 years; IQR, 31-47 years) eligible for the ovarian cancer analysis, and 2213 women (median age, 47 years; IQR, 40-55 years) eligible for the contralateral breast cancer analysis, 426 were diagnosed with breast cancer, 109 with ovarian cancer, and 245 with contralateral breast cancer during follow-up. The cumulative breast cancer risk to age 80 years was 72% (95% CI, 65%-79%) for BRCA1 and 69% (95% CI, 61%-77%) for BRCA2 carriers. Breast cancer incidences increased rapidly in early adulthood until ages 30 to 40 years for BRCA1 and until ages 40 to 50 years for BRCA2 carriers, then remained at a similar, constant incidence (20-30 per 1000 person-years) until age 80 years. The cumulative ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years was 44% (95% CI, 36%-53%) for BRCA1 and 17% (95% CI, 11%-25%) for BRCA2 carriers. For contralateral breast cancer, the cumulative risk 20 years after breast cancer diagnosis was 40% (95% CI, 35%-45%) for BRCA1 and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) for BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] for comparing BRCA2 vs BRCA1, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P=.001 for difference). Breast cancer risk increased with increasing number of first- and second-degree relatives diagnosed as having breast cancer for both BRCA1 (HR for ≥2 vs 0 affected relatives, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.41-2.82; P<.001 for trend) and BRCA2 carriers (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.08-3.37; P=.02 for trend). Breast cancer risk was higher if mutations were located outside vs within the regions bounded by positions c.2282-c.4071 in BRCA1 (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P=.007) and c.2831-c.6401 in BRCA2 (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.36-2.74; P<.001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Mutação , Segunda Neoplasia Primária/genética , Neoplasias Ovarianas/genética , Adulto , Distribuição por Idade , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Família , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Segunda Neoplasia Primária/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Ovarianas/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Tempo
17.
Fam Cancer ; 16(3): 423-432, 2017 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28124295

RESUMO

Germline TP53 mutation carriers are at high risk of developing a range of cancers. Effective cancer risk management is an important issue for these individuals. We assessed the psychosocial impact in TP53 mutation carriers of WB-MRI screening as part of the Surveillance in Multi-Organ Cancer (SMOC+) protocol, measuring their unmet needs, anxiety and depression levels as well as cancer worry using psychological questionnaires and in-depth interviews about their experiences of screening. We present preliminary psychosocial findings from 17 participants during their first 12 months on the trial. We found a significant reduction in participants' mean anxiety from baseline to two weeks post WB-MRI (1.2, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.23 p = 0.025), indicative of some benefit. Emerging qualitative themes show most participants are emotionally supported and contained by the screening program and are motivated by their immediate concern about staying alive, despite being informed about the current lack of evidence around efficacy of screening for people with TP53 mutations in terms of cancer morbidity or mortality. For those that do gain emotional reassurance from participating in the screening study, feelings of abandonment by the research team are a risk when the study ends. For others, screening was seen as a burden, consistent with the relentless nature of cancer risk associated with Li-Fraumeni syndrome, though these patients still declared they wished to participate due to their concern with staying alive. Families with TP53 mutations need ongoing support due to the impact on the whole family system. These findings suggest a comprehensive multi-organ screening program for people with TP53 mutations provides psychological benefit independent of an impact on cancer morbidity and mortality associated with the syndrome. The benefits of a multi-organ screening program will be greater still if the screening tests additionally reduce the cancer morbidity and mortality associated with the syndrome. These findings may also inform the care of individuals and families with other multi-organ cancer predisposition syndromes.


Assuntos
Programas de Rastreamento/psicologia , Proteína Supressora de Tumor p53/genética , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Predisposição Genética para Doença/genética , Heterozigoto , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mutação , Adulto Jovem
18.
Breast Cancer Res Treat ; 161(1): 117-134, 2017 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27796716

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Cis-acting regulatory SNPs resulting in differential allelic expression (DAE) may, in part, explain the underlying phenotypic variation associated with many complex diseases. To investigate whether common variants associated with DAE were involved in breast cancer susceptibility among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, a list of 175 genes was developed based of their involvement in cancer-related pathways. METHODS: Using data from a genome-wide map of SNPs associated with allelic expression, we assessed the association of ~320 SNPs located in the vicinity of these genes with breast and ovarian cancer risks in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained from 54 studies participating in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. RESULTS: We identified a region on 11q22.3 that is significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (most significant SNP rs228595 p = 7 × 10-6). This association was absent in BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.57). The 11q22.3 region notably encompasses genes such as ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. Expression quantitative trait loci associations were observed in both normal breast and tumors across this region, namely for ACAT1, ATM, and other genes. In silico analysis revealed some overlap between top risk-associated SNPs and relevant biological features in mammary cell data, which suggests potential functional significance. CONCLUSION: We identified 11q22.3 as a new modifier locus in BRCA1 carriers. Replication in larger studies using estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk.


Assuntos
Alelos , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/etiologia , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Heterozigoto , Mutação , Biomarcadores Tumorais , Cromossomos Humanos Par 11 , Feminino , Expressão Gênica , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Variação Genética , Humanos , Locos de Características Quantitativas , Risco
19.
PLoS One ; 11(7): e0158801, 2016.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27463617

RESUMO

Population-based genome wide association studies have identified a locus at 9p22.2 associated with ovarian cancer risk, which also modifies ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We conducted fine-scale mapping at 9p22.2 to identify potential causal variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Genotype data were available for 15,252 (2,462 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA1 and 8,211 (631 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following genotype imputation, ovarian cancer associations were assessed for 4,873 and 5,020 SNPs in BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers respectively, within a retrospective cohort analytical framework. In BRCA1 mutation carriers one set of eight correlated candidate causal variants for ovarian cancer risk modification was identified (top SNP rs10124837, HR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.68 to 0.79, p-value 2× 10-16). These variants were located up to 20 kb upstream of BNC2. In BRCA2 mutation carriers one region, up to 45 kb upstream of BNC2, and containing 100 correlated SNPs was identified as candidate causal (top SNP rs62543585, HR: 0.69, 95%CI: 0.59 to 0.80, p-value 1.0 × 10-6). The candidate causal in BRCA1 mutation carriers did not include the strongest associated variant at this locus in the general population. In sum, we identified a set of candidate causal variants in a region that encompasses the BNC2 transcription start site. The ovarian cancer association at 9p22.2 may be mediated by different variants in BRCA1 mutation carriers and in the general population. Thus, potentially different mechanisms may underlie ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers and the general population.


Assuntos
Cromossomos Humanos Par 9 , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Triagem de Portadores Genéticos , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Neoplasias Ovarianas/genética , Mapeamento Cromossômico , Feminino , Humanos , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único
20.
Br J Cancer ; 114(10): 1165-74, 2016 05 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27070714

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Numerous germline single-nucleotide polymorphisms increase susceptibility to prostate cancer, some lying near genes involved in cellular radiation response. This study investigated whether prostate cancer patients with a high genetic risk have increased toxicity following radiotherapy. METHODS: The study included 1560 prostate cancer patients from four radiotherapy cohorts: RAPPER (n=533), RADIOGEN (n=597), GenePARE (n=290) and CCI (n=150). Data from genome-wide association studies were imputed with the 1000 Genomes reference panel. Individuals were genetically similar with a European ancestry based on principal component analysis. Genetic risks were quantified using polygenic risk scores. Regression models tested associations between risk scores and 2-year toxicity (overall, urinary frequency, decreased stream, rectal bleeding). Results were combined across studies using standard inverse-variance fixed effects meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: A total of 75 variants were genotyped/imputed successfully. Neither non-weighted nor weighted polygenic risk scores were associated with late radiation toxicity in individual studies (P>0.11) or after meta-analysis (P>0.24). No individual variant was associated with 2-year toxicity. CONCLUSION: Patients with a high polygenic susceptibility for prostate cancer have no increased risk for developing late radiotherapy toxicity. These findings suggest that patients with a genetic predisposition for prostate cancer, inferred by common variants, can be safely treated using current standard radiotherapy regimens.


Assuntos
Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Neoplasias da Próstata/genética , Neoplasias da Próstata/radioterapia , Lesões por Radiação/epidemiologia , Idoso , Grupo com Ancestrais do Continente Europeu/genética , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Mutação em Linhagem Germinativa , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise de Componente Principal , Neoplasias da Próstata/etnologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA