General Practitioners and Breast Surgeons in France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK show variable breast cancer risk communication profiles

International audienceBackground: No information is available on the attitudes of General Practitioners (GPs) and Breast Surgeons (BSs) to their delivery of genetic, environmental and lifestyle risk factor information about breast cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the Breast Cancer Risk Communication Behaviours (RCBs) reported by GPs and BSs in four European countries and to determine the relationships between their RCBs and their socio-occupational characteristics. Methods: Self-administered questionnaires assessing breast cancer risk communication behaviours using vignettes were mailed to a sample of Breast Surgeons (BS) and General Practitioners (GP) working in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7292). Their responses to questions about the risk factors were first ordered and compared by specialty and country after making multivariate adjustments. Rather than defining a standard Risk Presentation Format (RPF) a priori, the various RPFs used by the respondents were analyzed using cluster analysis. Results: Family history and hormonal replacement therapy were the risk factors most frequently mentioned by the 2094 respondents included in this study. Lifestyle BC risk factors such as obesity and alcohol were rarely/occasionally mentioned, but this point differed (p < 0.001) depending on the country and the specialty of the providers involved. Five distinct RPF profiles including the numerical/verbal presentation of absolute/relative risks were identified. The most frequently encountered RPF (34.2%) was characterized by the fact that it included no negative framing of the risks, i.e., the probability of not developing cancer was not mentioned. Age, specialty and country of practice were all found to be significant determinants of the RPF clusters. Conclusions: The increasing trend for GPs and BSs to discuss lifestyle risk factors with their patients suggests that this may be a relevant means of improving breast cancer prevention. Physicians' risk communication skills should be improved during their initial and vocational training

Guidance Statement On BRCA1/2 Tumor Testing in Ovarian Cancer Patients

International audienceThe approval, in 2015, of the first poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi; olaparib, Lynparza) for platinum-sensitive relapsed high-grade ovarian cancer with either germline or somatic BRCA1/2 deleterious mutations is changing the way that BRCA1/2 testing services are offered to patients with ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer patients are now being referred for BRCA1/2 genetic testing for treatment decisions, in addition to familial risk estimation, and irrespective of a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Furthermore, testing of tumor samples to identify the estimated 3%-9% of patients with somatic BRCA1/2 mutations who, in addition to germline carriers, could benefit from PARPi therapy is also now being considered. This new testing paradigm poses some challenges, in particular the technical and analytical difficulties of analyzing chemically challenged DNA derived from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens. The current manuscript reviews some of these challenges and technical recommendations to consider when undertaking BRCA1/2 testing in tumor tissue samples to detect both germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutations. Also provided are considerations for incorporating genetic analysis of ovarian tumor samples into the patient pathway and ethical requirements

Progression-free survival and overall survival after BRCA1/2-associated epithelial ovarian cancer:A matched cohort study

INTRODUCTION: Germline BRCA1/2-associated epithelial ovarian cancer has been associated with better progression-free survival and overall survival than sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer, but conclusive data are lacking. METHODS: We matched 389 BRCA1-associated and 123 BRCA2-associated epithelial ovarian cancer patients 1:1 to sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer patients on year of birth, year of diagnosis, and FIGO stage ( = IIB). Germline DNA test was performed before or after epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosis. All patients received chemotherapy. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the associations between mutation status (BRCA1 or BRCA2 versus sporadic) and progression-free survival and overall survival. To investigate whether DNA testing after epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosis resulted in survival bias, we performed additional analyses limited to BRCA1/2-associated epithelial ovarian cancer patients with a DNA test result before cancer diagnosis (n = 73 BRCA1; n = 9 BRCA2) and their matched sporadic controls. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 4.4 years (range 0.1-30.1). During the first three years after epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosis, progression-free survival was better for BRCA1 (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74-1.04) and BRCA2 (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.41-0.81) patients than for sporadic patients. Overall survival was better during the first six years after epithelial ovarian cancer for BRCA1 (HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.58-0.84) and BRCA2 (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.29-0.59) patients. After surviving these years, survival benefits disappeared or were in favor of the sporadic patients. CONCLUSION: For epithelial ovarian cancer patients who received chemotherapy, we confirmed survival benefit for BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline pathogenic variant carriers. This may indicate higher sensitivity to chemotherapy, both in first line treatment and in the recurrent setting. The observed benefit appears to be limited to a relatively short period after epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosis

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

The effectiveness of a graphical presentation in addition to a frequency format in the context of familial breast cancer risk communication:a multicenter controlled trial

Background: Inadequate understanding of risk among counselees is a common problem in familial cancer clinics. It has been suggested that graphical displays can help counselees understand cancer risks and subsequent decision-making. We evaluated the effects of a graphical presentation in addition to a frequency format on counselees' understanding, psychological well-being, and preventive intentions. Design: Multicenter controlled trial. Setting: Three familial cancer clinics in the Netherlands. Methods: Participants: Unaffected women with a breast cancer family history (first-time attendees). Intervention: Immediately after standard genetic counseling, an additional consultation by a trained risk counselor took place where women were presented with their lifetime breast cancer risk in frequency format (X out of 100) (n = 63) or frequency format plus graphical display (10 x 10 human icons) (n = 91). Main outcome measures: understanding of risk (risk accuracy, risk perception), psychological well-being, and intentions regarding cancer prevention. Measurements were assessed using questionnaires at baseline, 2-week and 6-month follow-up. Results: Baseline participant characteristics did not differ between the two groups. In both groups there was an increase in women's risk accuracy from baseline to follow-up. No significant differences were found between women who received the frequency format and those who received an additional graphical display in terms of understanding, psychological well-being and intentions regarding cancer prevention. The groups did not differ in their evaluation of the process of counseling. Conclusion: Women's personal risk estimation accuracy was generally high at baseline and the results suggest that an additional graphical display does not lead to a significant benefit in terms of increasing understanding of risk, psychological well-being and preventive intentions

Genomewide high-density SNP linkage analysis of non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families identifies various candidate regions and has greater power than microsatellite studies

Background: The recent development of new high-throughput technologies for SNP genotyping has opened the possibility of taking a genome-wide linkage approach to the search for new candidate genes involved in heredity diseases. The two major breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in 30% of hereditary breast cancer cases, but the discovery of additional breast cancer predisposition genes for the non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families has so far been unsuccessful. Results: In order to evaluate the power improvement provided by using SNP markers in a real situation, we have performed a whole genome screen of 19 non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families using 4720 genomewide SNPs with Illumina technology (Illumina's Linkage III Panel), with an average distance of 615 Kb/SNP. We identified six regions on chromosomes 2, 3, 4, 7, 11 and 14 as candidates to contain genes involved in breast cancer susceptibility, and additional fine mapping genotyping using microsatellite markers around linkage peaks confirmed five of them, excluding the region on chromosome 3. These results were consistent in analyses that excluded SNPs in high linkage disequilibrium. The results were compared with those obtained previously using a 10 cM microsatellite scan (STR-GWS) and we found lower or not significant linkage signals with STR-GWS data compared to SNP data in all cases. Conclusion: Our results show the power increase that SNPs can supply in linkage studies

Effects of chemotherapy on contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers:A nationwide cohort study

AIM: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with primary breast cancer (PBC) are at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). In a nationwide cohort, we investigated the effects of chemotherapeutic agents given for PBC on CBC risk separately in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with an invasive PBC diagnosis from 1990 to 2017 were selected from a Dutch cohort. We estimated cumulative CBC incidence using competing risks analysis. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and different chemotherapeutic agents on CBC risk were estimated using Cox regression. RESULTS: We included 1090 BRCA1 and 568 BRCA2 mutation carriers; median follow-up was 8.9 and 8.4 years, respectively. Ten-year cumulative CBC incidence for treatment with and without chemotherapy was 6.7% [95%CI: 5.1–8.6] and 16.7% [95%CI: 10.8–23.7] in BRCA1 and 4.8% [95%CI: 2.7–7.8] and 16.0% [95%CI: 9.3–24.4] in BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. Chemotherapy was associated with reduced CBC risk in BRCA1 (multivariable HR: 0.46, 95%CI: 0.29–0.74); a similar trend was observed in BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.29–1.39). In BRCA1, risk reduction was most pronounced in the first 5 years (HR: 0.32, 95%CI: 0.17–0.61). Anthracyclines and the combination of anthracyclines with taxanes were associated with substantial CBC risk reduction in BRCA1 carriers (HR: 0.34, 95%CI: 0.17–0.68 and HR: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.08–0.62, respectively). CONCLUSION: Risk-reducing effects of chemotherapy are substantial for at least 5 years and may be used in personalised CBC risk prediction in any case for BRCA1 mutation carriers

A simple method for co-segregation analysis to evaluate the pathogenicity of unclassified variants; BRCA1 and BRCA2 as an example

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the clinical significance of unclassified variants (UVs) identified in BRCA1 and BRCA2 is very important for genetic counselling. The analysis of co-segregation of the variant with the disease in families is a powerful tool for the classification of these variants. Statistical methods have been described in literature but these methods are not always easy to apply in a diagnostic setting. METHODS: We have developed an easy to use method which calculates the likelihood ratio (LR) of an UV being deleterious, with penetrance as a function of age of onset, thereby avoiding the use of liability classes. The application of this algorithm is publicly available http://www.msbi.nl/cosegregation. It can easily be used in a diagnostic setting since it requires only information on gender, genotype, present age and/or age of onset for breast and/or ovarian cancer. RESULTS: We have used the algorithm to calculate the likelihood ratio in favour of causality for 3 UVs in BRCA1 (p.M18T, p.S1655F and p.R1699Q) and 5 in BRCA2 (p.E462G p.Y2660D, p.R2784Q, p.R3052W and p.R3052Q). Likelihood ratios varied from 0.097 (BRCA2, p.E462G) to 230.69 (BRCA2, p.Y2660D). Typing distantly related individuals with extreme phenotypes (i.e. very early onset cancer or old healthy individuals) are most informative and give the strongest likelihood ratios for or against causality. CONCLUSION: Although co-segregation analysis on itself is in most cases insufficient to prove pathogenicity of an UV, this method simplifies the use of co-segregation as one of the key features in a multifactorial approach considerably

The development of an online decision aid to support persons having a genetic predisposition to cancer and their partners during reproductive decision-making: a usability and pilot study

An online decision aid to support persons having a genetic predisposition to cancer and their partners during reproductive decision-making was developed. A two-phase usability test was conducted among 12 couples (N = 22; 2 persons participated without their partner) at risk for hereditary cancer and 15 health care providers. Couples and health care providers expressed similar suggestions for improvements, and evaluated the modified decision aid as acceptable, easy to use, and comprehensible. The final decision aid was pilot tested (N = 16) with paired sample t tests comparing main outcomes (decisional conflict, knowledge, realistic expectations regarding the reproductive options and decision self-efficacy) before (T0), immediately (T1) and 2 weeks after (T2) use of the decision aid. Pilot testing indicated decreased decisional conflict scores, increased knowledge, and improved realistic expectations regarding the reproductive options, at T1 and T2. No effect was found for couples’ decision self-efficacy. The positive findings during usability testing were thus reflected in the pilot study. The decision aid will be further evaluated in a nationwide pretest–posttest study to facilitate implementation in the onco-genetic counselling setting. Ultimately, it is expected that the decision aid will enable end-users to make an informed decision

Reproductive decision-making in the context of hereditary cancer: the effects of an online decision aid on informed decision-making

Individuals having a genetic predisposition to cancer and their partners face challenging decisions regarding their wish to have children. This study aimed to determine the effects of an online decision aid to support couples in making an informed decision regarding their reproductive options. A nationwide pretest-posttest study was conducted in the Netherlands among 131 participants between November 2016 and May 2018. Couples were eligible for participation if one partner had a pathogenic variant predisposing for an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer syndrome. Participants completed a questionnaire before use (T0), and at 3 months (T3) after use of the decision aid to assess the primary outcome measure informed decision-making, and the secondary outcome measures decisional conflict, knowledge, realistic expectations, level of deliberation, and decision self-efficacy. T0–T3 comparisons show an overall positive effect for all outcome measures (all ps < 0.05; knowledge (ES = − 1.05), decisional conflict (ES = 0.99), participants’ decision self-efficacy (ES = −0.55), level of deliberation (ES = − 0.50), and realistic expectations (ES = − 0.44). Informed decision-making increased over time and 58.0% of the participants made an informed reproductive decision at T3. The online decision aid seems to be an appropriate tool to complement standard reproductive counseling to support our target group in making an informed reproductive decision. Use of the decision aid may lessen the negative psychological impact of decision-making on couples’ daily life and wellbeing