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

Risk of second primary cancer in men with breast cancer

INTRODUCTION: A retrospective registry-based cohort study was conducted to examine the risk of second primary cancer following the occurrence of breast cancer in males. METHODS: Data obtained from the California Cancer Registry in the period 1988 to 2003 included 1,926 men aged 85 years and younger diagnosed with a first primary breast cancer. Person-year analysis was applied to determine the risk of second primary cancers after the occurrence of a first primary breast cancer. The effects of age, race, and time since the first breast cancer diagnosis were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1,926 male breast cancer cases, 221 (11.5%) developed a second primary cancer. Men with first incidence of breast cancer have a significantly higher risk of second cancer (standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01–1.32). The risk of a second site-specific cancer is elevated for breast cancer (SIR = 52.12, 95% CI = 31.83–80.49), cutaneous melanoma (SIR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.63–5.00) and stomach cancer (SIR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.01–3.88). There is a general tendency towards higher risks of second malignancies among younger men compared to older men and the risk increased with the passage of time. CONCLUSION: Male breast cancer patients should be monitored carefully for the occurrence of second primary cancers, especially a second primary breast cancer

Unusual presentation of Lynch Syndrome

Lynch Syndrome/HNPCC is a syndrome of cancer predisposition linked to inherited mutations of genes participating in post-replicative DNA mismatch repair (MMR). The spectrum of cancer associated with Lynch Syndrome includes tumours of the colorectum, endometrium, ovary, upper gastrointestinal tract and the urothelium although other cancers are rarely described. We describe a family of Lynch Syndrome with an hMLH1 mutation, that harbours an unusual tumour spectrum and its diagnostic and management challenges

Men's decision-making about predictive BRCA1/2 testing: the role of family

Men who have a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer may be offered a predictive genetic test to determine whether or not they carry the family specific BRCA1/2 mutation. Male carriers may be at increased risk of breast and prostate cancers. Relatively little is known about at-risk men’s decision-making about BRCA1/2 testing. This qualitative study explores the influences on male patients’ genetic test decisions. Twenty-nine in-depth interviews were undertaken with both carrier and noncarrier men and immediate family members (17 male patients, 8 female partners, and 4 adult children). These explored family members’ experiences of cancer and genetic testing, decision-making about testing, family support, communication of test results within the family, risk perception and risk management. Implicit influences on men’s testing decisions such as familial obligations are examined. The extent to which other family members—partners and adult children—were involved in testing decisions is also described. It is demonstrated that mothers of potential mutation carriers not only perceive themselves as having a right to be involved in making this decision, but also were perceived by their male partners as having a legitimate role to play in decision-making. There was evidence that (adult) children were excluded from the decision-making, and some expressed resentment about this. The implications of these findings for the practice of genetic counseling are discussed

Guilt, blame and responsibility: men's understanding of their role in the transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations within their family

Men and women who have a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer may be offered a predictive genetic test to determine whether or not they carry the family specific BRCA1/2 mutation. The sons and daughters of mutation carriers have a 50 per cent chance of inheriting a mutation, which will increase their risk of developing cancer. Little is known about at-risk men's feelings about the part they play in the transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations within their families. This study investigated high risk men's responses to BRCA1/2 predictive genetic testing. Seventeen in-depth interviews were undertaken with carrier (n= 5) and non-carrier men (n= 12). All men described genetic testing as a familial duty. It is observed that carriers and non-carriers mobilised differing explanations about their role in the aetiology of risk. It is noted that men engage in a form of narrative reconstruction in which they draw upon discourses of guilt and blame or fate and predestiny in an effort to present themselves as morally responsible or blameless. It is argued that narrative reconstruction enables these men to reconcile their genetic identity, self and family