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

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

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple-negative and Her2 +ve breast cancer: striving for the standard of care.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for triple-negative (TN) and Her2-positive (HER2) breast cancers is supported by international guidelines as it can decrease extent of surgery, provide prognostic information, and allow response-driven adjuvant therapies. Our goal was to describe practice patterns for patients with TN and HER2-positive breast cancer and identify the factors associated with the receipt of NAC versus surgery as initial treatment. METHODS: A retrospective population-based cohort study of adult women diagnosed with stage I-III TN or HER2-positive breast cancer (2012-2020) in Ontario was completed using linked administrative datasets. The primary outcome was NAC as first treatment. The association between NAC and patient, tumor, and practice-related factors was examined using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 14,653 patients included, 23.9% (n = 3500) underwent NAC as first treatment. Patients who underwent NAC were more likely to be younger and have larger tumors, node-positive disease, and stage 3 disease. Of patients who underwent surgery first, 8.8% were seen by a medical oncologist prior to surgery. On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor size (T2 vs T1/T0: 2.75 (2.31-3.28)) and node-positive (N1 vs N0: OR 3.54 (2.92-4.30)) disease were both associated increased odds of receiving NAC. CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of patients with TN and HER2-positive breast cancer do not receive NAC as first treatment. Of those, most were not assessed by both a surgeon and medical oncologist prior to initiating therapy. This points toward potential gaps in multidisciplinary assessment and disparities in receipt of guideline-concordant care.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: final analysis of LUCY.

PURPOSE: The interim analysis of the phase IIIb LUCY trial demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC), with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.11 months, which was similar to that in the olaparib arm of the phase III OlympiAD trial (7.03 months). This prespecified analysis provides final overall survival (OS) and safety data. METHODS: The open-label, single-arm LUCY trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled adults with gBRCAm or somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm), HER2-negative mBC. Patients had previously received a taxane or anthracycline for neoadjuvant/adjuvant or metastatic disease and up to two lines of chemotherapy for mBC. RESULTS: Of 563 patients screened, 256 (gBRCAm, n = 253; sBRCAm, n = 3) were enrolled. In the gBRCAm cohort, median investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint) was 8.18 months and median OS was 24.94 months. Olaparib was clinically effective in all prespecified subgroups: hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapy for mBC, previous platinum-based chemotherapy (including by line of therapy), and previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor use. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nausea (55.3%) and anemia (39.2%). Few patients (6.3%) discontinued olaparib owing to a TEAE. No deaths associated with AEs occurred during the study treatment or 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: The LUCY patient population reflects a real-world population in line with the licensed indication of olaparib in mBC. These findings support the clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration number: NCT03286842.

Incidence of endometrial cancer in BRCA mutation carriers.

OBJECTIVE: Whether or not women who harbor a germline pathogenic variant ('mutation') in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes are at elevated risk of developing endometrial cancer is yet to be determined. METHODS: We conducted a prospective analysis of 4959 BRCA mutation carriers with no prior history of cancer (except for breast or melanoma) and an intact uterus. RESULTS: After a mean of 6.7 years of follow-up there were 38 incident cases of endometrial cancer diagnosed; 30 among BRCA1 carriers and eight among BRCA2 carriers. The mean age at diagnosis was 58.4 years (range 46.8-76.1). The majority were of the endometrioid subtype (n = 16), followed by mixed endometroid and serous (n = 4), serous (n = 3) or clear cell (n = 1) (missing = 13). The cumulative incidence from age 40 to age 70 was 3.4% for BRCA1 carriers and was 1.6% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Prior tamoxifen use was associated with a significant two-fold increased risk (HR = 2.24; 95% CI 1.10-4.55). There was no significant association between exogenous hormone use, oophorectomy, smoking or BMI at age 40 and risk (P ≥ 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the general population, we observed higher rates of endometrial cancer among young BRCA1 mutation carriers; however, lifetime risks were similar. Women with prior tamoxifen exposure were at a significantly increased risk. These findings were based. on a small number of incident cases and require confirmation with additional follow-up of our aging cohort.

Development of a comprehensive approach to adult hereditary cancer testing in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing for hereditary cancer susceptibility has advanced over time due to the discovery of new risk genes, improved technology and decreased cost. In the province of Ontario, testing eligibility criteria were initially developed to include hereditary breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer syndromes. The rapid evolution of genetic technologies has facilitated the ability to interrogate a large number of genes concurrently. This, coupled with new knowledge about risk genes, necessitated a coordinated approach to expanding the scope of genes and indications tested and synchronisation of access and test utilisation across the province as required in a publicly funded universal healthcare system. METHODS: Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario convened expert working groups to develop a standardised and comprehensive cancer gene list for adults and accompanying hereditary cancer testing (HCT) criteria using an evidence-based framework and broad laboratory and clinical genetics engagement. RESULTS: A standardised 76-cancer-gene panel, organised into 13 larger disease site panels and 25 single/small gene panels, was developed and endorsed by the working groups. Provincial genetic testing eligibility criteria were updated to align with the new panels and to guide clinical decision-making. In the first year following the implementation of these changes, 10 564 HCT panels were performed with an overall mutation detection rate of 12.2%. CONCLUSION: Using an evidence framework and broad clinical engagement to develop and endorse an updated guidance document, cancer genetic testing for adults in Ontario is now standardised and coordinated across the province.

A model for the return and referral of all clinically significant secondary findings of genomic sequencing.

Secondary findings (SFs) identified through genomic sequencing (GS) can offer a wide range of health benefits to patients. Resource and capacity constraints pose a challenge to their clinical management; therefore, clinical workflows are needed to optimise the health benefits of SFs. In this paper, we describe a model we created for the return and referral of all clinically significant SFs, beyond medically actionable results, from GS. As part of a randomised controlled trial evaluating the outcomes and costs of disclosing all clinically significant SFs from GS, we consulted genetics and primary care experts to determine a feasible workflow to manage SFs. Consensus was sought to determine appropriate clinical recommendations for each category of SF and which clinician specialist would provide follow-up care. We developed a communication and referral plan for each category of SFs. This involved referrals to specialised clinics, such as an Adult Genetics clinic, for highly penetrant medically actionable findings. Common and non-urgent SFs, such as pharmacogenomics and carrier status results for non-family planning participants, were directed back to the family physician (FP). SF results and recommendations were communicated directly to participants to respect autonomy and to their FPs to support follow-up of SFs. We describe a model for the return and referral of all clinically significant SFs to facilitate the utility of GS and promote the health benefits of SFs. This may serve as a model for others returning GS results transitioning participants from research to clinical settings.

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

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

Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Purpose: Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is known to detect additional cancers that are occult on mammography and ultrasound. There is debate as to whether these additional lesions affect clinical outcomes. The objective of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence on whether additional information on disease extent obtained with preoperative breast MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer affects surgical management, rates of recurrence, survival, re-excision, and early detection of bilateral cancer. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until January 2021 (partial update July 2022) for studies comparing outcomes with versus without pre-operative MRI. Included were both randomized controlled trials and other comparative studies provided MRI and control groups had equivalent disease and patient characteristics or methods such as multivariable analysis or propensity score matching were used to control potential confounders. Results: The search resulted in 26,399 citations, of which 8 randomized control trials, 1 prospective cohort study, and 42 retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria. Use of MRI resulted in decreased rates of reoperations (OR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.85), re-excisions (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.89), and recurrence (HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.65 to 0.90). Increased detection of synchronous contralateral breast cancers led to a reduction in metachronous contralateral breast cancer (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.85). Hazard ratios for recurrence-free and overall survival were 0.77 (95% CI = 0.53 to 1.12) and 0.89 (95% CI = 0.74 to 1.07). Conclusion: This systematic review indicates substantial benefits of pre-operative breast MRI in decreasing reoperations and recurrence.

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

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

Great expectations: patients' preferences for clinically significant results from genomic sequencing.

We aimed to describe patient preferences for a broad range of secondary findings (SF) from genomic sequencing (GS) and factors driving preferences. We assessed preference data within a trial of the Genomics ADvISER, (SF decision aid) among adult cancer patients. Participants could choose from five categories of SF: (1) medically actionable; (2) polygenic risks; (3) rare diseases; (4) early-onset neurological diseases; and (5) carrier status. We analyzed preferences using descriptive statistics and drivers of preferences using multivariable logistic regression models. The 133 participants were predominantly European (74%) or East Asian or mixed ancestry (13%), female (90%), and aged > 50 years old (60%). The majority chose to receive SF. 97% (129/133) chose actionable findings with 36% (48/133) choosing all 5 categories. Despite the lack of medical actionability, participants were interested in receiving SF of polygenic risks (74%), carrier status (75%), rare diseases (59%), and early-onset neurologic diseases (53%). Older participants were more likely to be interested in receiving results for early-onset neurological diseases, while those exhibiting lower decisional conflict were more likely to select all categories. Our results highlight a disconnect between cancer patient preferences and professional guidelines on SF, such as ACMG's recommendations to only return medically actionable secondary findings. In addition to clinical evidence, future guidelines should incorporate patient preferences.