Oncological and genetic aspects of heriditary breast cancer associated with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2

In western countries breast cancer affects approximately 1 in every 10 to 12 women. It is the leading cause of cancer death in women in these countries and the leading cause of overall mortality in women aged 35 to 55 years. Many risk factors for breast cancer have been identified including menstrual history. reproductive behavior, exogenous hormones, and a positive family history for the disease. Although most of these factors have only a small impact on breast cancer risk, the role of familial susceptibility can increase the risk for breast cancer up to a lifetime risk of close to 50% (Claus et al, 1994 ). Genetic susceptibility for breast cancer obtained attention and practical relevance upon the identification of the first two major breast cancer susceptibility genes, BR(east)CA(ncer)1 and BRCA2 (Miki et al, 1994; Wooster et al, 1995). Breast cancer, like all cancers, is a 'genetic' disease, as it results from an accumulation of somatic mutations in genes or the altered expression of genes in the absence or presence of germline mutations

Attitudes and distress levels in women at risk to carry a BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutation who decline genetic testing.

Item does not contain fulltextGenetic testing enables women at risk for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer to find out whether they have inherited the gene mutation, and if so, to opt for undergoing frequent surveillance and/or prophylactic surgery. However, the option to know about one's genetic status is not always seen as a benefit by women at risk. Motives for declining genetic testing were explored in 13 women at 25% or 50% risk to be a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carrier, who participated in a surveillance program for breast/ovarian cancer (the non-tested group). We hypothesized that high anxiety might be an important motive to decline testing. In addition, we investigated whether the non-tested group differed from a reference group of women who did undergo the test (tested group; n = 85) with regard to biographical factors, experience with cancer in relatives, and personality traits. Most non-tested women (10/13) were satisfied with participating in the surveillance program. Four reported to feel emotionally unprepared to cope with the consequences of testing. Compared with the tested group, the non-tested women had similar mean distress levels (which were not high), but a higher education level, they were more often childless, showed more reluctance towards prophylactic surgery, were younger when first confronted with a relative affected with breast/ovarian cancer, and were longer aware of the genetic nature of the disease. This study showed that women were more likely to have thoroughly reflected on their decision not to undergo genetic testing, than to deny the whole issue due to high anxiety. Being confronted at a relatively young age with breast/ovarian cancer in a relative, and being aware of the genetic risk for a many years, may have resulted in the risk for cancer becoming an integrated part of their lives. However, generalization of these results to women who neither underwent the test nor participated in a surveillance program should be considered with caution

One year follow-up of women opting for presymptomatic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2: emotional impact of the test outcome and decisions on risk management (surveillance or prophylactic surgery).

Genetic testing enables women at risk for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer to find out whether they have inherited the gene mutation (BRCA1/BRCA2), and if so, to opt for frequent surveillance and/or prophylactic surgery (bilateral mastectomy and/or oophorectomy). Here, a follow-up is described for 63 healthy women at 50% risk of being a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carrier who underwent genetic testing. The course of distress and problems regarding body image and sexuality up to 1 year after disclosure of the test-outcome were described separately for mutation carriers undergoing mastectomy (n = 14), for mutation carriers opting for surveillance (n = 12) and for non-mutation carriers (n = 37). Furthermore, we analyzed whether women opting for prophylactic mastectomy differed from those opting for close surveillance with respect to biographical characteristics, experiences with cancer in relatives and personality. Women opting for prophylactic mastectomy had significantly higher distress levels than mutation carriers who opted for surveillance, and the non-mutation carriers. This difference in levels of distress was highest at pre- and post-test and had almost disappeared at 1-year follow-up. Besides, mutation carriers opting for prophylactic mastectomy were more often in their thirties, more often had young children and had a longer awareness of the genetic nature of cancer in the family than those opting for regular surveillance. Adverse effects were observed in women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy (mostly in combination with immediate breast reconstruction) regarding the perception of how their breast region looked like and felt, the intimate relationship and physical wellbeing whereas women opting for prophylactic mastectomy reported more distress than the other women in the study, their distress levels had significantly decreased 6 months or longer after surgery, possibly due to the significant risk reduction of developing breast cancer. This might explain, why most women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy were satisfied with this decision, despite a perceived negative impact on body image, the intimate relationship and physical wellbeing

Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence in hereditary breast cancer following breast-conserving therapy.

Contains fulltext : 57795.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)The overall rate of an ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) ranges from 1% to 2% per year. Risk factors include young age but data on the impact of BRCA1/2 mutations or a definite positive family history for breast cancer are scarce. We investigated IBTR after BCT in patients with hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Through our family cancer clinic we identified 87 HBC patients, including 26 BRCA1/2 carriers, who underwent BCT between 1980 and 1995 (cases). They were compared to 174 patients with sporadic breast cancer (controls) also treated with BCT, matched for age and year of diagnosis. Median follow up was 6.1 years for the cases and 6.0 years for controls. Patient and tumour characteristics were similar in both groups. An IBTR was observed in 19 (21.8%) hereditary and 21 (12.1%) sporadic patients. In the hereditary patients more recurrences occurred elsewhere in the breast (21% versus 9.5%), suggestive of new primaries. Overall, the actuarial IBTR rate was similar at 2 years, but higher in hereditary as compared to sporadic patients at 5 years (14% versus 7%) and at 10 years (30% versus 16%) (P=0.05). Post-relapse and overall survival was not different between hereditary and sporadic cases. Hereditary breast cancer was therefore associated with a higher frequency of early (2-5 years) and late (>5 years) local recurrences following BCT. These data suggest an indication for long-term follow up in HBC and should be taken into account when additional 'risk-reducing' surgery after primary BCT is eventually considered

A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). CAPRIE Steering Committee

Many clinical trials have evaluated the benefit of long-term use of antiplatelet drugs in reducing the risk of clinical thrombotic events. Aspirin and ticlopidine have been shown to be effective, but both have potentially serious adverse effects. Clopidogrel, a new thienopyridine derivative similar to ticlopidine, is an inhibitor of platelet aggregation induced by adenosine diphosphate. METHODS: CAPRIE was a randomised, blinded, international trial designed to assess the relative efficacy of clopidogrel (75 mg once daily) and aspirin (325 mg once daily) in reducing the risk of a composite outcome cluster of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death; their relative safety was also assessed. The population studied comprised subgroups of patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease manifested as either recent ischaemic stroke, recent myocardial infarction, or symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Patients were followed for 1 to 3 years. FINDINGS: 19,185 patients, with more than 6300 in each of the clinical subgroups, were recruited over 3 years, with a mean follow-up of 1.91 years. There were 1960 first events included in the outcome cluster on which an intention-to-treat analysis showed that patients treated with clopidogrel had an annual 5.32% risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death compared with 5.83% with aspirin. These rates reflect a statistically significant (p = 0.043) relative-risk reduction of 8.7% in favour of clopidogrel (95% Cl 0.3-16.5). Corresponding on-treatment analysis yielded a relative-risk reduction of 9.4%. There were no major differences in terms of safety. Reported adverse experiences in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups judged to be severe included rash (0.26% vs 0.10%), diarrhoea (0.23% vs 0.11%), upper gastrointestinal discomfort (0.97% vs 1.22%), intracranial haemorrhage (0.33% vs 0.47%), and gastrointestinal haemorrhage (0.52% vs 0.72%), respectively. There were ten (0.10%) patients in the clopidogrel group with significant reductions in neutrophils (< 1.2 x 10(9)/L) and 16 (0.17%) in the aspirin group. INTERPRETATION: Long-term administration of clopidogrel to patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease is more effective than aspirin in reducing the combined risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. The overall safety profile of clopidogrel is at least as good as that of medium-dose aspirin