Standard psychological consultations and follow up for women at increased risk of hereditary breast cancer considering prophylactic mastectomy

__Background:__ Women at increased (genetic) risk of breast cancer have to weigh the personal pros and cons of prophylactic mastectomy (PM) as an option to reduce their cancer risk. So far, no routine referral to a psychologist has been investigated for women considering PM. Aim of this study was to asses: 1) the acceptance of the offer of a standard psychological consultation as part of pre-surgical decision-making in high-risk women, 2) reasons for PM and reasons for postponing it, 3) the need for additional psychological interventions, and factors associated, and 4) the frequency of psychiatric/psychological treatment history. __Methods:__ During a 30 months period, women at high risk considering PM were offered a psychological consultation. The content of these, and follow-up, consultations were analyzed. __Results:__ Most women (70 out of 73) accepted the psychological consultation, and 81% proceeded with PM. Main reasons for undergoing PM were to reduce anxiety about cancer, and to reduce the cancer risk. Uncertainty about surgery and the need for further information were the reasons given most frequently for postponing PM. Additional psychological support was given to 31% before and 14% after PM. The uptake of additional support was significantly higher in women with a BRCA1/2 mutation. A history of psychiatric/psychological treatment was present in 36%, mainly consisting of depression and grief after death of a mother. __Conclusion:__ The uptake-rate of the standard psychological consultation indicates a high level of acceptability of this service for women deciding about PM. Since anxiety is one of the main reasons for considering PM, and depression and grief were present in a third, a standard consultation with a psychologist for high-risk women considering PM may be indicated. This may help them arrive at an informed decision, to detect and manage psychological distress, and to plan psychological support services

A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: An increased risk of breast cancer for relatives of breast cancer patients has been demonstrated in many studies, and having a relative diagnosed with breast cancer at an early age is an indication for breast cancer screening. This indication has been derived from estimates based on data from cancer-prone families or from BRCA1/2 mutation families, and might be biased because BRCA1/2 mutations explain only a small proportion of the familial clustering of breast cancer. The aim of the current study was to determine the predictive value of a family history of cancer with regard to early onset of female breast cancer in a population based setting. METHODS: An unselected sample of 1,987 women with and without breast cancer was studied with regard to the age of diagnosis of breast cancer. RESULTS: The risk of early-onset breast cancer was increased when there were: (1) at least 2 cases of female breast cancer in first-degree relatives (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.09; 95% CI: 128-7.44), (2) at least 2 cases of female breast cancer in first or second-degree relatives under the age of 50 (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.36; 95% CI: 1.12-10.08), (3) at least 1 case of female breast cancer under the age of 40 in a first- or second-degree relative (yes/no; HR at age 30: 2.06; 95% CI: 0.83-5.12) and (4) any case of bilateral breast cancer (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.47; 95%: 1.33-9.05). The positive predictive value of having 2 or more of these characteristics was 13% for breast cancer before the age of 70, 11% for breast cancer before the age of 50, and 1% for breast cancer before the age of 30. CONCLUSION: Applying family history related criteria in an unselected population could result in the screening of many women who will not develop breast cancer at an early age

A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting-2

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/8/203</p><p>BMC Cancer 2008;8():203-203.</p><p>Published online 23 Jul 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2515321.</p><p></p

A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting-1

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/8/203</p><p>BMC Cancer 2008;8():203-203.</p><p>Published online 23 Jul 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2515321.</p><p></p

A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting-0

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "A family history of breast cancer will not predict female early onset breast cancer in a population-based setting"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/8/203</p><p>BMC Cancer 2008;8():203-203.</p><p>Published online 23 Jul 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2515321.</p><p></p

Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer.

Contains fulltext : 49322.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: The MRISC study is a screening study, in which women with an increased risk of hereditary breast cancer are screened by a yearly mammography and MRI, and half-yearly clinical breast examination. The sensitivity found in this study was 40% for mammography and 71% for MRI and the specificity was 95 and 90%, respectively. In the current subsequent study we investigated whether these results are influenced by age, a BRCA1/2 mutation, menopausal status and breast density. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From November 1999 to October 2003, 1909 eligible women were screened and 50 breast cancers were detected. For the current analysis, data of 4134 screening rounds and 45 detected breast cancers were used. For both imaging modalities, screening parameters, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and uni- and multivariate odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. All analyses were separately performed for age at entry (/=50), mutation status, menopausal status and breast density. RESULTS: Sensitivity of MRI was decreased in women with high breast density (adjusted OR 0.08). False-positive rates of both mammography (OR(adj) 1.67) and MRI (OR(adj) 1.21) were increased by high breast density, that of MRI by pre-menopausal status (OR(adj) 1.70), young age (OR(adj) 1.58 for women 40-49 years versus women >/=50 years) and decreased in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (OR(adj) 0.74). In all investigated subgroups the discriminating capacity (measured by the area under the ROC-curve) was higher for MRI than for mammography, with the largest differences for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (0.237), for women between 40 and 49 years (0.227) and for women with a low breast density (0.237). CONCLUSIONS: This report supports the earlier recommendation that MRI should be a standard screening method for breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers