462 research outputs found

    Preventive Surgery is Associated with Reduced Cancer Risk and Mortality in Women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations

    Get PDF
    Women who have inherited mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes have a substantially elevated risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. For more than 10 years, researchers have studied whether preventive surgery (to remove breasts, ovaries, and/or fallopian tubes) can reduce the cancer and mortality risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. This Issue Brief summarizes the results of the latest, largest, multinational study on the effects of preventive surgery in these women. The results are consistent with earlier studies and provide strong evidence for the use of preventive surgery as an effective approach to managing this genetic risk

    Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Olaparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that has promising antitumor activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. METHODS We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial in which olaparib monotherapy was compared with standard therapy in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2: 1 ratio, to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or standard therapy with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, or vinorelbine in 21-day cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review and was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS Of the 302 patients who underwent randomization, 205 were assigned to receive olaparib and 97 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the standardtherapy group (7.0 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.43 to 0.80; P<0.001). The response rate was 59.9% in the olaparib group and 28.8% in the standard-therapy group. The rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 36.6% in the olaparib group and 50.5% in the standard-therapy group, and the rate of treatment discontinuation due to toxic effects was 4.9% and 7.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation, olaparib monotherapy provided a significant benefit over standard therapy; median progression-free survival was 2.8 months longer and the risk of disease progression or death was 42% lower with olaparib monotherapy than with standard therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; OlympiAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02000622.

    Evaluation of Polygenic Risk Scores for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

    Get PDF
    Background:\textbf{Background:} Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1\textit{BRCA1} or BRCA2\textit{BRCA2}. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods:\textbf{Methods:} We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through populationbased GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]–positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1\textit{BRCA1} and 8211 BRCA2\textit{BRCA2} carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results:\textbf{Results:} The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1\textit{BRCA1} carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, PP = 8.2 ×\times 1053^{-53}). In BRCA2\textit{BRCA2} carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, PP = 7.2 ×\times 1020^{-20}). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1\textit{BRCA1} and BRCA2\textit{BRCA2} carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom AR deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2\textit{BRCA2} carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions:\textbf{Conclusions:} BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1\textit{BRCA1} and BRCA2\textit{BRCA2} carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management.Cancer Research U

    The utility of ductal lavage in breast cancer detection and risk assessment

    Get PDF
    Ductal lavage (DL) permits noninvasive retrieval of epithelial cells from the breast. Clinical development of this technique has been fueled largely by its potential, as yet unproven, to improve detection of breast cancer and definition of individual risk for development of breast cancer. Early studies demonstrate the feasibility of performing this technique, provide data on cellular yield and findings, and demonstrate the ability to measure molecular markers in DL fluid. However, the sensitivity and specificity of DL for the detection of breast cancer remains unknown, as does the significance of atypia, particularly mild atypia, when found in DL fluid. Although DL appears safe and the device is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, DL is still best utilized in the setting of clinical trials designed to resolve issues of sensitivity, specificity, and localization

    Conflicting Interpretation of Genetic Variants and Cancer Risk by Commercial Laboratories as Assessed by the Prospective Registry of Multiplex Testing

    Get PDF
    Altres ajuts: Ambry Genetics, Myriad Genetics, Novartis (I), Pfizer (I)Massively parallel sequencing allows simultaneous testing of multiple genes associated with cancer susceptibility. Guidelines are available for variant classification; however, interpretation of these guidelines by laboratories and providers may differ and lead to conflicting reporting and, potentially, to inappropriate medical management. We describe conflicting variant interpretations between Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-approved commercial clinical laboratories, as reported to the Prospective Registry of Multiplex Testing (PROMPT), an online genetic registry. Clinical data and genetic testing results were gathered from 1,191 individuals tested for inherited cancer susceptibility and self-enrolled in PROMPT between September 2014 and October 2015. Overall, 518 participants (603 genetic variants) had a result interpreted by more than one laboratory, including at least one submitted to ClinVar, and these were used as the final cohort for the current analysis. Of the 603 variants, 221 (37%) were classified as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), 191 (32%) as pathogenic, and 34 (6%) as benign. The interpretation differed among reporting laboratories for 155 (26%). Conflicting interpretations were most frequently reported for CHEK2 and ATM, followed by RAD51C, PALB2, BARD1, NBN, and BRIP1. Among all participants, 56 of 518 (11%) had a variant with conflicting interpretations ranging from pathogenic/likely pathogenic to VUS, a discrepancy that may alter medical management. Conflicting interpretation of genetic findings from multiplex panel testing used in clinical practice is frequent and may have implications for medical management decisions
    corecore