Search

Introduction: Height, body mass index (BMI), and weight gain are associated with breast cancer risk in the general population. It is unclear whether these associations also exist for carriers of pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes., Patients and Methods: An international pooled cohort of 8091 BRCA1/2 variant carriers was used for retrospective and prospective analyses separately for premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cox regression was used to estimate breast cancer risk associations with height, BMI, and weight change., Results: In the retrospective analysis, taller height was associated with risk of premenopausal breast cancer for BRCA2 variant carriers (HR 1.20 per 10 cm increase, 95% CI 1.04-1.38). Higher young-adult BMI was associated with lower premenopausal breast cancer risk for both BRCA1 (HR 0.75 per 5 kg/m 2 , 95% CI 0.66-0.84) and BRCA2 (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.89) variant carriers in the retrospective analysis, with consistent, though not statistically significant, findings from the prospective analysis. In the prospective analysis, higher BMI and adult weight gain were associated with higher postmenopausal breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers (HR 1.20 per 5 kg/m 2 , 95% CI 1.02-1.42; and HR 1.10 per 5 kg weight gain, 95% CI 1.01-1.19, respectively)., Conclusion: Anthropometric measures are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant carriers, with relative risk estimates that are generally consistent with those for women from the general population., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Height and body mass index (BMI) are associated with higher ovarian cancer risk in the general population, but whether such associations exist among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown., Methods: We applied a Mendelian randomisation approach to examine height/BMI with ovarian cancer risk using the Consortium of Investigators for the Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) data set, comprising 14,676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, with 2923 ovarian cancer cases. We created a height genetic score (height-GS) using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score (BMI-GS) using 93 BMI-associated variants. Associations were assessed using weighted Cox models., Results: Observed height was not associated with ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07 per 10-cm increase in height, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.23). Height-GS showed similar results (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85-1.23). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased risk in premenopausal women with HR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.06-1.48) and HR = 1.59 (95% CI: 1.08-2.33) per 5-kg/m 2 increase in observed and genetically determined BMI, respectively. No association was found for postmenopausal women. Interaction between menopausal status and BMI was significant (P interaction  < 0.05)., Conclusion: Our observation of a positive association between BMI and ovarian cancer risk in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is consistent with findings in the general population.

Importance: The clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers requires accurate, prospective cancer risk estimates., Objectives: To estimate age-specific risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for mutation carriers and to evaluate risk modification by family cancer history and mutation location., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of 6036 BRCA1 and 3820 BRCA2 female carriers (5046 unaffected and 4810 with breast or ovarian cancer or both at baseline) recruited in 1997-2011 through the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study, the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, with ascertainment through family clinics (94%) and population-based studies (6%). The majority were from large national studies in the United Kingdom (EMBRACE), the Netherlands (HEBON), and France (GENEPSO). Follow-up ended December 2013; median follow-up was 5 years., Exposures: BRCA1/2 mutations, family cancer history, and mutation location., Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual incidences, standardized incidence ratios, and cumulative risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer., Results: Among 3886 women (median age, 38 years; interquartile range [IQR], 30-46 years) eligible for the breast cancer analysis, 5066 women (median age, 38 years; IQR, 31-47 years) eligible for the ovarian cancer analysis, and 2213 women (median age, 47 years; IQR, 40-55 years) eligible for the contralateral breast cancer analysis, 426 were diagnosed with breast cancer, 109 with ovarian cancer, and 245 with contralateral breast cancer during follow-up. The cumulative breast cancer risk to age 80 years was 72% (95% CI, 65%-79%) for BRCA1 and 69% (95% CI, 61%-77%) for BRCA2 carriers. Breast cancer incidences increased rapidly in early adulthood until ages 30 to 40 years for BRCA1 and until ages 40 to 50 years for BRCA2 carriers, then remained at a similar, constant incidence (20-30 per 1000 person-years) until age 80 years. The cumulative ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years was 44% (95% CI, 36%-53%) for BRCA1 and 17% (95% CI, 11%-25%) for BRCA2 carriers. For contralateral breast cancer, the cumulative risk 20 years after breast cancer diagnosis was 40% (95% CI, 35%-45%) for BRCA1 and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) for BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] for comparing BRCA2 vs BRCA1, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P=.001 for difference). Breast cancer risk increased with increasing number of first- and second-degree relatives diagnosed as having breast cancer for both BRCA1 (HR for ≥2 vs 0 affected relatives, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.41-2.82; P<.001 for trend) and BRCA2 carriers (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.08-3.37; P=.02 for trend). Breast cancer risk was higher if mutations were located outside vs within the regions bounded by positions c.2282-c.4071 in BRCA1 (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P=.007) and c.2831-c.6401 in BRCA2 (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.36-2.74; P<.001)., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.

Purpose: Cis-acting regulatory SNPs resulting in differential allelic expression (DAE) may, in part, explain the underlying phenotypic variation associated with many complex diseases. To investigate whether common variants associated with DAE were involved in breast cancer susceptibility among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, a list of 175 genes was developed based of their involvement in cancer-related pathways., Methods: Using data from a genome-wide map of SNPs associated with allelic expression, we assessed the association of ~320 SNPs located in the vicinity of these genes with breast and ovarian cancer risks in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained from 54 studies participating in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2., Results: We identified a region on 11q22.3 that is significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (most significant SNP rs228595 p = 7 × 10 -6 ). This association was absent in BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.57). The 11q22.3 region notably encompasses genes such as ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. Expression quantitative trait loci associations were observed in both normal breast and tumors across this region, namely for ACAT1, ATM, and other genes. In silico analysis revealed some overlap between top risk-associated SNPs and relevant biological features in mammary cell data, which suggests potential functional significance., Conclusion: We identified 11q22.3 as a new modifier locus in BRCA1 carriers. Replication in larger studies using estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ethical approval Study participants were recruited through the CIMBA Initiative, following the approval of the corresponding protocol by the Institutional Review Board or Ethics Committee at each participating center. Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Background: Most BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers have inherited a single (heterozygous) mutation. Transheterozygotes (TH) who have inherited deleterious mutations in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 are rare, and the consequences of transheterozygosity are poorly understood., Methods: From 32,295 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, we identified 93 TH (0.3 %). "Cases" were defined as TH, and "controls" were single mutations at BRCA1 (SH1) or BRCA2 (SH2). Matched SH1 "controls" carried a BRCA1 mutation found in the TH "case". Matched SH2 "controls" carried a BRCA2 mutation found in the TH "case". After matching the TH carriers with SH1 or SH2, 91 TH were matched to 9316 SH1, and 89 TH were matched to 3370 SH2., Results: The majority of TH (45.2 %) involved the three common Jewish mutations. TH were more likely than SH1 and SH2 women to have been ever diagnosed with breast cancer (BC; p = 0.002). TH were more likely to be diagnosed with ovarian cancer (OC) than SH2 (p = 0.017), but not SH1. Age at BC diagnosis was the same in TH vs. SH1 (p = 0.231), but was on average 4.5 years younger in TH than in SH2 (p < 0.001). BC in TH was more likely to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive (p = 0.010) or progesterone receptor (PR) positive (p = 0.013) than in SH1, but less likely to be ER positive (p < 0.001) or PR positive (p = 0.012) than SH2. Among 15 tumors from TH patients, there was no clear pattern of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) for BRCA1 or BRCA2 in either BC or OC., Conclusions: Our observations suggest that clinical TH phenotypes resemble SH1. However, TH breast tumor marker characteristics are phenotypically intermediate to SH1 and SH2.

Importance: The link between BRCA mutations and uterine cancer is unclear. Therefore, although risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is standard treatment among women with BRCA mutations (BRCA+ women), the role of concomitant hysterectomy is controversial., Objective: To determine the risk for uterine cancer and distribution of specific histologic subtypes in BRCA+ women after RRSO without hysterectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 1083 women with a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation identified from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2011, at 9 academic medical centers in the United States and the United Kingdom who underwent RRSO without a prior or concomitant hysterectomy. Of these, 627 participants were BRCA1+; 453, BRCA2+; and 3, both. Participants were prospectively followed up for a median 5.1 (interquartile range [IQR], 3.0-8.4) years after ascertainment, BRCA testing, or RRSO (whichever occurred last). Follow up data available through October 14, 2014, were included in the analyses. Censoring occurred at uterine cancer diagnosis, hysterectomy, last follow-up, or death. New cancers were categorized by histologic subtype, and available tumors were analyzed for loss of the wild-type BRCA gene and/or protein expression., Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of uterine corpus cancer in BRCA+ women who underwent RRSO without hysterectomy compared with rates expected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database., Results: Among the 1083 women women who underwent RRSO without hysterectomy at a median age 45.6 (IQR: 40.9 - 52.5), 8 incident uterine cancers were observed (4.3 expected; observed to expected [O:E] ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.8-3.7; P = .09). No increased risk for endometrioid endometrial carcinoma or sarcoma was found after stratifying by subtype. Five serous and/or serous-like (serous/serous-like) endometrial carcinomas were observed (4 BRCA1+ and 1 BRCA2+) 7.2 to 12.9 years after RRSO (BRCA1: 0.18 expected [O:E ratio, 22.2; 95% CI, 6.1-56.9; P < .001]; BRCA2: 0.16 expected [O:E ratio, 6.4; 95% CI, 0.2-35.5; P = .15]). Tumor analyses confirmed loss of the wild-type BRCA1 gene and/or protein expression in all 3 available serous/serous-like BRCA1+ tumors., Conclusions and Relevance: Although the overall risk for uterine cancer after RRSO was not increased, the risk for serous/serous-like endometrial carcinoma was increased in BRCA1+ women. This risk should be considered when discussing the advantages and risks of hysterectomy at the time of RRSO in BRCA1+ women.

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of breast cancer family history and maternal BRCA1/2 mutation on the psychosocial adjustment and perceived risk in girls age 11 to 19 years old., Materials and Methods: Girls age 11 to 19 years old with one or more relatives with breast cancer or a familial BRCA1/2 mutation (breast cancer family history [BCFH] positive, n = 208; n = 69 with BRCA1/2-positive mother), peers (BCFH negative, n = 112), and their mothers completed assessments of psychosocial adjustment, breast cancer-specific distress, and perceived risk of breast cancer., Results: General psychosocial adjustment did not differ significantly between BCFH-positive and BCFH-negative girls, either by self-report or mother report, except for higher self-esteem among BCFH-positive girls (P = .01). BCFH-positive girls had higher breast cancer-specific distress than BCFH-negative girls (P < .001), but girls from BRCA1/2-positive families did not differ from other BCFH-positive peers. BCFH-positive girls were more likely to report themselves at increased self-risk for breast cancer in adulthood than BCFH-negative peers (74% v 33%, respectively; P ≤ .001). Girls from BRCA1/2-positive families were more likely than other BCFH-positive and BCFH-negative peers to report themselves at increased risk (P < .001). In all groups, perceived risk of breast cancer was associated with older age. Higher breast cancer-specific distress among adolescent girls was associated with higher self-perceived risk of breast cancer and higher maternal breast cancer-specific distress., Conclusion: Adolescent girls from BRCA1/2-positive and breast cancer families have higher self-esteem and do not have poorer psychosocial adjustment than peers. However, they do experience greater breast cancer-specific distress and perceived risk of breast cancer, particularly among older girls. Understanding the impact is important to optimize responses to growing up in families at familial and genetic risk for breast cancer, particularly given the debate over the genetic testing of children for cancer susceptibility in adulthood., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Population-based genome wide association studies have identified a locus at 9p22.2 associated with ovarian cancer risk, which also modifies ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We conducted fine-scale mapping at 9p22.2 to identify potential causal variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Genotype data were available for 15,252 (2,462 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA1 and 8,211 (631 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following genotype imputation, ovarian cancer associations were assessed for 4,873 and 5,020 SNPs in BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers respectively, within a retrospective cohort analytical framework. In BRCA1 mutation carriers one set of eight correlated candidate causal variants for ovarian cancer risk modification was identified (top SNP rs10124837, HR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.68 to 0.79, p-value 2× 10-16). These variants were located up to 20 kb upstream of BNC2. In BRCA2 mutation carriers one region, up to 45 kb upstream of BNC2, and containing 100 correlated SNPs was identified as candidate causal (top SNP rs62543585, HR: 0.69, 95%CI: 0.59 to 0.80, p-value 1.0 × 10-6). The candidate causal in BRCA1 mutation carriers did not include the strongest associated variant at this locus in the general population. In sum, we identified a set of candidate causal variants in a region that encompasses the BNC2 transcription start site. The ovarian cancer association at 9p22.2 may be mediated by different variants in BRCA1 mutation carriers and in the general population. Thus, potentially different mechanisms may underlie ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers and the general population.

Obstetrician/gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists serve an integral role in the care of women at increased hereditary risk of cancer. Their contribution includes initial identification of high risk patients, screening procedures like bimanual exam, trans-vaginal ultrasound and endometrial biopsy, prophylaxis via TAH and/or BSO, and chemoprevention. Further, gynecologists also serve a central role in the management of the secondary repercussions of efforts to mitigate increased cancer risks, including vasomotor symptoms, sexual function, bone health, cardiovascular disease, and mental health. The past several years has seen multiple new high and moderate penetrance genes introduced into the clinical care of women at increased risk of gynecologic malignancy. Awareness of these new genes and the availability of new multi-gene panel tests is critical for providers on the front-line of women's health., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists., Objective: To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2., Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational study of women who were ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents. We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position. We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk., Exposures: Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2., Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast and ovarian cancer risks., Results: Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10(-9)). We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002). We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers., Conclusions and Relevance: Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

While interplay between BRCA1 and AURKA-RHAMM-TPX2-TUBG1 regulates mammary epithelial polarization, common genetic variation in HMMR (gene product RHAMM) may be associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Following on these observations, we further assessed the link between the AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 functional module and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Forty-one single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers and subsequently analyzed using a retrospective likelihood approach. The association of HMMR rs299290 with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers was confirmed: per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.15, p = 1.9 x 10(-4) (false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted p = 0.043). Variation in CSTF1, located next to AURKA, was also found to be associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs2426618 per-allele HR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.16, p = 0.005 (FDR-adjusted p = 0.045). Assessment of pairwise interactions provided suggestions (FDR-adjusted pinteraction values > 0.05) for deviations from the multiplicative model for rs299290 and CSTF1 rs6064391, and rs299290 and TUBG1 rs11649877 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following these suggestions, the expression of HMMR and AURKA or TUBG1 in sporadic breast tumors was found to potentially interact, influencing patients' survival. Together, the results of this study support the hypothesis of a causative link between altered function of AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 and breast carcinogenesis in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Introduction: More than 70 common alleles are known to be involved in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility, and several exhibit significant heterogeneity in their associations with different BC subtypes. Although there are differences in the association patterns between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and the general population for several loci, no study has comprehensively evaluated the associations of all known BC susceptibility alleles with risk of BC subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers., Methods: We used data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 carriers to analyze the associations between approximately 200,000 genetic variants on the iCOGS array and risk of BC subtypes defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and triple-negative- (TN) status; morphologic subtypes; histological grade; and nodal involvement., Results: The estimated BC hazard ratios (HRs) for the 74 known BC alleles in BRCA1 carriers exhibited moderate correlations with the corresponding odds ratios from the general population. However, their associations with ER-positive BC in BRCA1 carriers were more consistent with the ER-positive associations in the general population (intraclass correlation (ICC) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45 to 0.74), and the same was true when considering ER-negative associations in both groups (ICC = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.72). Similarly, there was strong correlation between the ER-positive associations for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (ICC = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.78), whereas ER-positive associations in any one of the groups were generally inconsistent with ER-negative associations in any of the others. After stratifying by ER status in mutation carriers, additional significant associations were observed. Several previously unreported variants exhibited associations at P <10(-6) in the analyses by PR status, HER2 status, TN phenotype, morphologic subtypes, histological grade and nodal involvement., Conclusions: Differences in associations of common BC susceptibility alleles between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and the general population are explained to a large extent by differences in the prevalence of ER-positive and ER-negative tumors. Estimates of the risks associated with these variants based on population-based studies are likely to be applicable to mutation carriers after taking ER status into account, which has implications for risk prediction.

Purpose: To determine whether adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer (BC) is associated with reduced contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers., Methods: Analysis of pooled observational cohort data, self-reported at enrollment and at follow-up from the International BRCA1, and BRCA2 Carrier Cohort Study, Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, and Breast Cancer Family Registry. Eligible women were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers diagnosed with unilateral BC since 1970 and no other invasive cancer or tamoxifen use before first BC. Hazard ratios (HRs) for CBC associated with tamoxifen use were estimated using Cox regression, adjusting for year and age of diagnosis, country, and bilateral oophorectomy and censoring at contralateral mastectomy, death, or loss to follow-up., Results: Of 1,583 BRCA1 and 881 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 383 (24%) and 454 (52%), respectively, took tamoxifen after first BC diagnosis. There were 520 CBCs over 20,104 person-years of observation. The adjusted HR estimates were 0.38 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.55) and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.50) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. After left truncating at recruitment to the cohort, adjusted HR estimates were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.13) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.22 to 1.05) based on 657 BRCA1 and 426 BRCA2 mutation carriers with 100 CBCs over 4,392 person-years of prospective follow-up. HRs did not differ by estrogen receptor status of the first BC (missing for 56% of cases)., Conclusion: This study provides evidence that tamoxifen use is associated with a reduction in CBC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further follow-up of these cohorts will provide increased statistical power for future prospective analyses.

Background: BRCA1/2 testing is not recommended for children, as risk reduction measures and screening are not generally recommended before 25 years old (YO). Little is known about the prevalence and predictors of parent communication to offspring and how offspring respond to this communication., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents who had BRCA1/2 testing and at least 1 child <25 YO. Logistic regressions were utilized to evaluate associations with communication. Framework analysis was utilized to analyze open-ended responses., Results: A total of 253 parents completed interviews (61% response rate), reporting on 505 offspring. Twenty-nine percent of parents were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Three hundred thirty-four (66%) offspring learned of their parent's test result. Older offspring age (P ≤ .01), offspring gender (female, P = .05), parents' negative test result (P = .03), and parents' education (high school only, P = .02) were associated with communication to offspring. The most frequently reported initial offspring responses were neutral (41%) or relief (28%). Thirteen percent of offspring were reported to experience concern or distress (11%) in response to parental communication of their test results. Distress was more frequently perceived among offspring learning of their parent's BRCA1/2 positive or variant of uncertain significance result., Conclusions: Many parents communicate their BRCA1/2 test results to young offspring. Parents' perceptions of offspring responses appear to vary by offspring age and parent test result. A better understanding of how young offspring respond to information about hereditary risk for adult cancer could provide opportunities to optimize adaptive psychosocial responses to risk information and performance of health behaviors, in adolescence and throughout an at-risk life span., (Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: Mutations in BRCA1/2 dramatically increase the risk of both breast and ovarian cancers. Three mutations in these genes (185delAG, 5382insC, and 6174delT) occur at high frequency in Ashkenazi Jews. We evaluated how these common Jewish mutations (CJMs) affect cancer risks and risk reduction., Methods: Our cohort comprised 4,649 women with disease-associated BRCA1/2 mutations from 22 centers in the Prevention and Observation of Surgical End Points Consortium. Of these women, 969 were self-identified Jewish women. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate breast and ovarian cancer risks, as well as risk reduction from risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), by CJM and self-identified Jewish status., Results: Ninety-one percent of Jewish BRCA1/2-positive women carried a CJM. Jewish women were significantly more likely to undergo RRSO than non-Jewish women (54% v 41%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.42). Relative risks of cancer varied by CJM, with the relative risk of breast cancer being significantly lower in 6174delT mutation carriers than in non-CJM BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.69). No significant difference was seen in cancer risk reduction after RRSO among subgroups., Conclusion: Consistent with previous results, risks for breast and ovarian cancer varied by CJM in BRCA1/2 carriers. In particular, 6174delT carriers had a lower risk of breast cancer. This finding requires additional confirmation in larger prospective and population-based cohort studies before being integrated into clinical care.

Context: Approximately 10% of women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) carry deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. A recent article suggested that BRCA2-related EOC was associated with an improved prognosis, but the effect of BRCA1 remains unclear., Objective: To characterize the survival of BRCA carriers with EOC compared with noncarriers and to determine whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers show similar survival patterns., Design, Setting, and Participants: A pooled analysis of 26 observational studies on the survival of women with ovarian cancer, which included data from 1213 EOC cases with pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1 (n = 909) or BRCA2 (n = 304) and from 2666 noncarriers recruited and followed up at variable times between 1987 and 2010 (the median year of diagnosis was 1998)., Main Outcome Measure: Five-year overall mortality., Results: The 5-year overall survival was 36% (95% CI, 34%-38%) for noncarriers, 44% (95% CI, 40%-48%) for BRCA1 carriers, and 52% (95% CI, 46%-58%) for BRCA2 carriers. After adjusting for study and year of diagnosis, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers showed a more favorable survival than noncarriers (for BRCA1: hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89; P < .001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.76; P < .001). These survival differences remained after additional adjustment for stage, grade, histology, and age at diagnosis (for BRCA1: HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.84; P < .001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39-0.61; P < .001). The BRCA1 HR estimate was significantly different from the HR estimated in the adjusted model (P for heterogeneity = .003)., Conclusion: Among patients with invasive EOC, having a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 was associated with improved 5-year overall survival. BRCA2 carriers had the best prognosis.

Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have a lifetime breast cancer risk of 40% to 80%, suggesting the presence of risk modifiers. We previously identified significant associations in genetic variants in the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) signaling pathway. Here, we investigate additional IGF signaling genes as risk modifiers for breast cancer development in BRCA carriers., Methods: A cohort of 1,019 BRCA1 and 500 BRCA2 mutation carriers were genotyped for 99 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in 13 genes. Proportional hazards regression was used to model time from birth to diagnosis of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers separately. For linkage disequilibrium (LD) blocks with multiple SNPs, an additive genetic model was used. For an SNP analysis, no additivity assumptions were made., Results: Significant associations were found between risk of breast cancer and LD blocks in IGF2 for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (global P values of 0.009 for BRCA1 and 0.007 for BRCA2), HTRA1 for BRCA1 carriers (global P value of 0.005), and MMP3 for BRCA2 carriers (global P = 0.0000007 for BRCA2)., Conclusions: We identified significant associations of genetic variants involved in IGF signaling. With the known interaction of BRCA1 and IGF signaling and the loss of PTEN in a majority of BRCA1 tumors, this suggests that signaling through AKT may modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers., Impact: These results suggest potential avenues for future research targeting the IGF signaling pathway in modifying risk in BRCA1and BRCA2 mutation carriers., (©2011 AACR.)

BRCA1/2 test disclosure has, historically, been conducted in-person by genetics professionals. Given increasing demand for, and access to, genetic testing, interest in telephone and Internet genetic services, including disclosure of test results, has increased. Semi-structured interviews with genetic counselors were conducted to determine interest in, and experiences with telephone disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results. Descriptive data are summarized with response proportions. One hundred and ninety-four genetic counselors completed self-administered surveys via the web. Although 98% had provided BRCA1/2 results by telephone, 77% had never provided pre-test counseling by telephone. Genetic counselors reported perceived advantages and disadvantages to telephone disclosure. Thirty-two percent of participants described experiences that made them question this practice. Genetic counselors more frequently reported discomfort with telephone disclosure of a positive result or variant of uncertain significance (p < 0.01) than other results. Overall, 73% of participants reported interest in telephone disclosure. Many genetic counselors have provided telephone disclosure, however, most, infrequently. Genetic counselors identify potential advantages and disadvantages to telephone disclosure, and recognize the potential for testing and patient factors to impact patient outcomes. Further research evaluating the impact of testing and patient factors on cognitive, affective, social and behavioral outcomes of alternative models of communicating genetic information is warranted., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Background: Germline mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are associated with increased risks of breast and ovarian cancers. Although several common variants have been associated with breast cancer susceptibility in mutation carriers, none have been associated with ovarian cancer susceptibility. A genome-wide association study recently identified an association between the rare allele of the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs3814113 (ie, the C allele) at 9p22.2 and decreased risk of ovarian cancer for women in the general population. We evaluated the association of this SNP with ovarian cancer risk among BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers by use of data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2., Methods: We genotyped rs3814113 in 10,029 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 5837 BRCA2 mutation carriers. Associations with ovarian and breast cancer were assessed with a retrospective likelihood approach. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: The minor allele of rs3814113 was associated with a reduced risk of ovarian cancer among BRCA1 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio of ovarian cancer = 0.78, 95% confidence interval = 0.72 to 0.85; P = 4.8 × 10(-9)) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (hazard ratio of ovarian cancer = 0.78, 95% confidence interval = 0.67 to 0.90; P = 5.5 × 10(-4)). This SNP was not associated with breast cancer risk among either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. BRCA1 mutation carriers with the TT genotype at SNP rs3814113 were predicted to have an ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years of 48%, and those with the CC genotype were predicted to have a risk of 33%., Conclusion: Common genetic variation at the 9p22.2 locus was associated with decreased risk of ovarian cancer for carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

Introduction: Previous studies have demonstrated that common breast cancer susceptibility alleles are differentially associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers. It is currently unknown how these alleles are associated with different breast cancer subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers defined by estrogen (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) status of the tumour., Methods: We used genotype data on up to 11,421 BRCA1 and 7,080 BRCA2 carriers, of whom 4,310 had been affected with breast cancer and had information on either ER or PR status of the tumour, to assess the associations of 12 loci with breast cancer tumour characteristics. Associations were evaluated using a retrospective cohort approach., Results: The results suggested stronger associations with ER-positive breast cancer than ER-negative for 11 loci in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Among BRCA1 carriers, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs2981582 (FGFR2) exhibited the biggest difference based on ER status (per-allele hazard ratio (HR) for ER-positive = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.56 vs HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.98 for ER-negative, P-heterogeneity = 6.5 × 10-6). In contrast, SNP rs2046210 at 6q25.1 near ESR1 was primarily associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. In BRCA2 carriers, SNPs in FGFR2, TOX3, LSP1, SLC4A7/NEK10, 5p12, 2q35, and 1p11.2 were significantly associated with ER-positive but not ER-negative disease. Similar results were observed when differentiating breast cancer cases by PR status., Conclusions: The associations of the 12 SNPs with risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers differ by ER-positive or ER-negative breast cancer status. The apparent differences in SNP associations between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, and non-carriers, may be explicable by differences in the prevalence of tumour subtypes. As more risk modifying variants are identified, incorporating these associations into breast cancer subtype-specific risk models may improve clinical management for mutation carriers.

Context: Mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy are widely used by carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations to reduce their risks of breast and ovarian cancer., Objective: To estimate risk and mortality reduction stratified by mutation and prior cancer status., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, multicenter cohort study of 2482 women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations ascertained between 1974 and 2008. The study was conducted at 22 clinical and research genetics centers in Europe and North America to assess the relationship of risk-reducing mastectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy with cancer outcomes. The women were followed up until the end of 2009., Main Outcomes Measures: Breast and ovarian cancer risk, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality., Results: No breast cancers were diagnosed in the 247 women with risk-reducing mastectomy compared with 98 women of 1372 diagnosed with breast cancer who did not have risk-reducing mastectomy. Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, women who underwent salpingo-oophorectomy had a lower risk of ovarian cancer, including those with prior breast cancer (6% vs 1%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.59) and those without prior breast cancer (6% vs 2%; HR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.12-0.69]), and a lower risk of first diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers (20% vs 14%; HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.41-0.96]) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (23% vs 7%; HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16-0.82]). Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, undergoing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality (10% vs 3%; HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.26-0.61]), breast cancer-specific mortality (6% vs 2%; HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26-0.76]), and ovarian cancer-specific mortality (3% vs 0.4%; HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.06-0.80])., Conclusions: Among a cohort of women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, the use of risk-reducing mastectomy was associated with a lower risk of breast cancer; risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with a lower risk of ovarian cancer, first diagnosis of breast cancer, all-cause mortality, breast cancer-specific mortality, and ovarian cancer-specific mortality.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer due to mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is the most common cause of hereditary forms of both breast and ovarian cancer. The overall prevalence of BRCA1/2 mutations is estimated to be from 1 in 400 to 1 in 800 with a higher prevalence in the Ashkenazi Jewish population (1 in 40). Estimates of penetrance (cancer risk) vary considerably depending on the context in which they were derived and have been shown to vary within families with the same BRCA1/2 mutation. This suggests there is no exact risk estimate that can be applied to all individuals with a BRCA1/2 mutation. The likelihood of harboring a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is dependent on one's personal and/or family history of cancer and can be estimated using various mutation probability models. For those individuals who have a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, several screening and primary prevention options have been suggested, including prophylactic surgery and chemoprevention. Once a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation has been identified in a family, testing of at-risk relatives can identify those family members who also have the familial mutation and thus need increased surveillance and early intervention when a cancer is diagnosed.

The Breast Cancer Family Registry is a resource for interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer. This resource is available to researchers worldwide for collaborative studies. Herein, we report the results of testing for germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. We have tested 4,531 probands for mutations in BRCA1 and 4,084 in BRCA2. Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were identified for 9.8% of probands tested [233/4,531 (5.1%) for BRCA1 and 193/4,084 (4.7%) for BRCA2]. Of 1,385 Ashkenazi Jewish women tested for only the three founder mutations, 17.4% carried a deleterious mutation. In total, from the proband and subsequent family testing, 1,360 female mutation carriers (788 in BRCA1, 566 in BRCA2, 6 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2) have been identified. The value of the resource has been greatly enhanced by determining the germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation statuses of nearly 6,000 probands.

Recent advances in genetics have identified several genes associated with inherited susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer and have led to the commercial availability of mutation analyses. Although the majority of cancers associated with BRCA1/2 mutations are seen in women, men with BRCA1/2 mutations are at increased risk for male breast cancer, prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer and melanoma. Limited data available on the response of men in BRCA1/2 families suggest that the majority do not pursue genetic counseling, thus they may forgo the opportunity to improve health practices and to pass on valuable cancer risk information to offspring. The patterns of relationships of men within the family and society can pose challenges to their recognition of genetic health threats and the need for preventive interventions. Genetic counselors are in a position to inform at-risk males of their genetic risk, and to help them explore their personal health options.

Introduction: Women who carry mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have a substantially increased risk of developing breast cancer as compared with the general population. However, risk estimates range from 20 to 80%, suggesting the presence of genetic and/or environmental risk modifiers. Based on extensive in vivo and in vitro studies, one important pathway for breast cancer pathogenesis may be the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) signaling pathway, which regulates both cellular proliferation and apoptosis. BRCA1 has been shown to directly interact with IGF signaling such that variants in this pathway may modify risk of cancer in women carrying BRCA mutations. In this study, we investigate the association of variants in genes involved in IGF signaling and risk of breast cancer in women who carry deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations., Methods: A cohort of 1,665 adult, female mutation carriers, including 1,122 BRCA1 carriers (433 cases) and 543 BRCA2 carriers (238 cases) were genotyped for SNPs in IGF1, IGF1 receptor (IGF1R), IGF1 binding protein (IGFBP1, IGFBP2, IGFBP5), and IGF receptor substrate 1 (IRS1). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model time from birth to diagnosis of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers separately. For linkage disequilibrium (LD) blocks with multiple SNPs, an additive genetic model was assumed; and for single SNP analyses, no additivity assumptions were made., Results: Among BRCA1 carriers, significant associations were found between risk of breast cancer and LD blocks in IGF1R (global P = 0.011 for LD block 2 and global P = 0.012 for LD block 11). Among BRCA2 carriers, an LD block in IGFBP2 (global P = 0.0145) was found to be associated with the time to breast cancer diagnosis. No significant LD block associations were found for the other investigated genes among BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers., Conclusions: This is the first study to investigate the role of genetic variation in IGF signaling and breast cancer risk in women carrying deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. We identified significant associations in variants in IGF1R and IRS1 in BRCA1 carriers and in IGFBP2 in BRCA2 carriers. Although there is known to be interaction of BRCA1 and IGF signaling, further replication and identification of causal mechanisms are needed to better understand these associations.

Guided by the theory of planned behavior, this analysis explores the communication skills of women who had genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2. The key outcome was intention to tell test results to adult first-degree relatives. The theory predicts that global and specific attitudes, global and specific perceived social norms, and perceived control will influence the communication of genetic test results. A logistic regression model revealed that global attitude (p < .05), specific social influence (p < .01), and perceived control (p < .05) were significant predictors of intention to tell. When gender and generation of relatives were added to the regression, participants were more likely to convey genetic test results to female than to male relatives (p < .05) and were also more likely to communicate test results to children (p < .01) or siblings (p < .05) than to parents. However, this association depended on knowing the relative's opinion of genetic testing. Intention to tell was lowest among participants who did not know their relative's opinion. These results extend the theory of planned behavior by showing that gender and generation influence intention when the relative's opinion is unknown., ((c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved.)

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 confer high risks of breast cancer. However, evidence suggests that these risks are modified by other genetic or environmental factors that cluster in families. A recent genome-wide association study has shown that common alleles at single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in FGFR2 (rs2981582), TNRC9 (rs3803662), and MAP3K1 (rs889312) are associated with increased breast cancer risks in the general population. To investigate whether these loci are also associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we genotyped these SNPs in a sample of 10,358 mutation carriers from 23 studies. The minor alleles of SNP rs2981582 and rs889312 were each associated with increased breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.20-1.45, p(trend) = 1.7 x 10(-8) and HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.24, p(trend) = 0.02) but not in BRCA1 carriers. rs3803662 was associated with increased breast cancer risk in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20, p(trend) = 5 x 10(-5) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 combined). These loci appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. The differences in the effects of the FGFR2 and MAP3K1 SNPs between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers point to differences in the biology of BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer tumors and confirm the distinct nature of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Purpose: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has been widely adopted as a key component of breast and gynecologic cancer risk-reduction for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Despite 17% to 39% of all BRCA mutation carriers having a mutation in BRCA2, no prospective study to date has evaluated the efficacy of RRSO for the prevention of breast and BRCA-associated gynecologic (ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal) cancer when BRCA2 mutation carriers are analyzed separately from BRCA1 mutation carriers., Patients and Methods: A total of 1,079 women 30 years of age and older with ovaries in situ and a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were enrolled onto prospective follow-up studies at one of 11 centers from November 1, 1994 to December 1, 2004. Women self-selected RRSO or observation. Follow-up information through November 30, 2005, was collected by questionnaire and medical record review. The effect of RRSO on time to diagnosis of breast or BRCA-associated gynecologic cancer was analyzed using a Cox proportional-hazards model., Results: During 3-year follow-up, RRSO was associated with an 85% reduction in BRCA1-associated gynecologic cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.56) and a 72% reduction in BRCA2-associated breast cancer risk (HR = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.92). While protection against BRCA1-associated breast cancer (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.22) and BRCA2-associated gynecologic cancer (HR = 0.00; 95% CI, not estimable) was suggested, neither effect reached statistical significance., Conclusion: The protection conferred by RRSO against breast and gynecologic cancers may differ between carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Further studies evaluating the efficacy of risk-reduction strategies in BRCA mutation carriers should stratify by the specific gene mutated.

Background: Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations can reduce cancer incidence and mortality by using bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy (BPO) or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM). The availability of these risk-reduction strategies is an important consideration in the decision to undergo genetic testing., Patients and Methods: We evaluated the use of BPO and BPM in a prospective sample of 537 female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers from 17 centers in North America and Europe. These women were aged > 30 years, had no BPM, BPO, breast cancer, or ovarian cancer before the disclosure of their genetic test results and were followed for > or = 6 months., Results: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is used significantly more frequently than BPM (55% vs. 21%; P < .001). Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy was more common among women age > or = 40 years compared with women aged < 40 years (68% vs. 43%; P < .001) and among parous women compared with nulliparous women (60% vs. 39%; P < .001). There was no difference in BPM (P = .83) or BPO (P = .09) in BRCA1 versus BRCA2 carriers. Multivariate models identified age and parity as a predictor of BPO in BRCA1 carriers; age and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers; parity and ovarian cancer family history as a predictor of BPM in BRCA1 carriers; and smoking and ovarian cancer family history in BRCA2 carriers., Conclusion: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy is more commonly used than BPM in unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Parity, age, and family history can also influence BPO and BPM uptake. Consistent with current recommendations, BPO is used by the majority of parous women aged > 40 years.

LAMBDA is a model that estimates the probability an Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) woman carries an ancestral BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation from her personal and family cancer history. LAMBDA is relevant to clinical practice, and its implementation does not require a computer. It was developed principally from Australian and UK data. We conducted a validation study using 1286 North American AJ women tested for the mutations 185delAG and 5382insC in BRCA1 and 6174delT in BRCA2. Most had a personal or family history of breast cancer. We observed 197 carriers. The area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve (a measure of ranking) was 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.77-0.81], similar to that for the model-generating data (0.78; 95% CI = 0.75-0.82). LAMBDA predicted 232 carriers (18% more than observed; p = 0.002) and was overdispersed (p = 0.009). The Bayesian computer program BRCAPRO gave a similar area under the ROC curve (0.78; 95% CI = 0.76-0.80), but predicted 367 carriers (86% more than observed; p < 0.0001), and was substantially overdispersed (p < 0.0001). Therefore, LAMBDA is comparable to BRCAPRO for ranking AJ women according to their probability of being a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carrier and is more accurate than brcapro which substantially overpredicts carriers in this population.

The AURKA oncogene is associated with abnormal chromosome segregation and aneuploidy and predisposition to cancer. Amplification of AURKA has been detected at higher frequency in tumors from BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers than in sporadic breast tumors, suggesting that overexpression of AURKA and inactivation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 cooperate during tumor development and progression. The F31I polymorphism in AURKA has been associated with breast cancer risk in the homozygous state in prior studies. We evaluated whether the AURKA F31I polymorphism modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 was established to provide sufficient statistical power through increased numbers of mutation carriers to identify polymorphisms that act as modifiers of cancer risk and can refine breast cancer risk estimates in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. A total of 4,935 BRCA1 and 2,241 BRCA2 mutation carriers and 11 individuals carrying both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations was genotyped for F31I. Overall, homozygosity for the 31I allele was not significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers combined [hazard ratio (HR), 0.91; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.77-1.06]. Similarly, no significant association was seen in BRCA1 (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.08) or BRCA2 carriers (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67-1.29) or when assessing the modifying effects of either bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy or menopausal status of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. In summary, the F31I polymorphism in AURKA is not associated with a modified risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers.

Background: Bilateral prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy (BPSO) is used widely used to reduce the risk of breast and ovarian cancer in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. However, the reduction in mortality after this surgery is unclear. We aimed to assess whether BPSO improves overall mortality or cancer-specific mortality in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers., Methods: We identified a prospective cohort of 666 women with disease-associated germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and no previous cancer diagnosis. In our primary analysis, we compared 155 women who had had BPSO and 271 women matched for age at BPSO who had not had BPSO. In our secondary analysis, we compared 188 women who had had BPSO with 478 women who had not. In both analyses, we compared overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality. All analyses were adjusted for centre, mutation (BRCA1 vs BRCA2), and birth year., Findings: In the primary analysis, mean follow-up from BPSO to censoring was 3.1 years [SD 2.4] in the BPSO group and 2.1 years [2.0] in the non-BPSO group. The hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality was 0.24 (95% CI 0.08-0.71), for breast-cancer-specific mortality was 0.10 (0.02-0.71), and for ovarian-cancer-specific mortality was 0.05 (0.01-0.46) for women who had BPSO compared with those who had not. In secondary analysis, BPSO was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.28 [95% CI 0.10-0.74]), but not with breast-cancer-specific mortality (0.15 [0.02-1.18] or ovarian-cancer-specific mortality (0.23 [0.02-1.87]. When regarded as a time-dependent covariate, BPSO was not associated significantly with mortality., Interpretation: If confirmed, the finding that BPSO improves overall survival and cancer-specific survival in women with BRCA mutations will complement our existing knowledge of cancer-risk reduction associated with BPSO. Together, these data could give information to women who are considering genetic testing.

Introduction: Patient preferences are central to the economic appraisal of health services. Cancer genetic services are relatively new, and little is known about clients' preferences. We sought to determine clients' preferences for genetic service delivery, and to identify factors that predict those preferences., Methods: We studied female participants in the Australian Jewish Breast Cancer Study who were offered a test for ancestral mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Questionnaires, asking respondents to rank their preferences for functions, or attributes, of genetic counselling were received from 256 women (76% response rate)., Results: Sixty-two per cent of the respondents gave their highest preference for information on cancer and genetic risk; 19% gave it to breast and ovarian cancer surveillance; 14% gave it to preparation for testing; and, 5% gave it to direction with decision making. Most ranked direction as their least preferred attribute (53%). Women with a strong cancer family history were less likely to give highest preference to information (52%) and more likely to give highest preference to preparation for testing (22%) (P=0.04; 0.01, respectively). Women with a university degree were less likely to give highest preference to surveillance (15%) (P=0.04)., Conclusion: Most women offered testing had highest preference for information and lowest preference for direction. We have identified factors that predict highest preference for information, preparation, and surveillance attributes. Understanding preferences and their predictors may assist cancer genetic services to provide clients with greater benefits from counselling.

This is by far the largest study of its kind to date, and further suggests that AIB1 does not play a substantial role in modifying the phenotype of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. The AIB1 gene encodes the AIB1/SRC-3 steroid hormone receptor coactivator, and amplification of the gene and/or protein occurs in breast and ovarian tumors. A CAG/CAA repeat length polymorphism encodes a stretch of 17 to 29 glutamines in the HR-interacting carboxyl-terminal region of the protein which is somatically unstable in tumor tissues and cell lines. There is conflicting evidence regarding the role of this polymorphism as a modifier of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. To further evaluate the evidence for an association between AIB1 glutamine repeat length and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we have genotyped this polymorphism in 1,090 BRCA1 and 661 BRCA2 mutation carriers from Australia, Europe, and North America. There was no evidence for an increased risk associated with AIB1 glutamine repeat length. Given the large sample size, with more than adequate power to detect previously reported effects, we conclude that the AIB1 glutamine repeat does not substantially modify risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers., ((Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(1):76-9).)

Purpose: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy (BPO) is widely used for cancer risk reduction in women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Many premenopausal women choose to take hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after undergoing BPO to abrogate immediate symptoms of surgically-induced menopause. Thus, we evaluated whether the breast cancer risk reduction conferred by BPO in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is altered by use of post-BPO HRT., Methods: We identified a prospective cohort of 462 women with disease-associated germline BRCA1/2 mutations at 13 medical centers to evaluate breast cancer risk after BPO with and without HRT. We determined the incidence of breast cancer in 155 women who had undergone BPO and in 307 women who had not undergone BPO on whom we had complete information on HRT use. Postoperative follow-up was 3.6 years., Results: Consistent with previous reports, BPO was significantly associated with breast cancer risk reduction overall (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.40; 95%CI, 0.18 to 0.92). Using mutation carriers without BPO or HRT as the referent group, HRT of any type after BPO did not significantly alter the reduction in breast cancer risk associated with BPO (HR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.96)., Conclusion: Short-term HRT use does not negate the protective effect of BPO on subsequent breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

The authors evaluated the impact of an enhanced counseling intervention, designed to promote well-informed decision making for follow-up risk reduction options for ovarian cancer, among high-risk women undergoing BRCA1/2 testing (N = 77). Following standard genetic counseling, participants received either an enhanced counseling session--designed to help participants anticipate their reactions to possible test outcomes and plan for postresult consequences--or a general health information control session. One week after disclosure of test results, women in the enhanced counseling group experienced a greater reduction in avoidant ideation, suggesting more complete processing of risk feedback. At the 6-month follow-up, intervention respondents reported seeking out more information about prophylactic oophorectomy and were more likely to have actually undergone preventive surgery. The results indicate that the use of enhanced counseling can play an important role in decision making about risk reduction behaviors following BRCA1/2 testing.

Purpose: Data on the efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer risk reduction in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations are limited, despite the clinical use of this risk-management strategy. Thus, we estimated the degree of breast cancer risk reduction after surgery in women who carry these mutations., Patients and Methods: Four hundred eighty-three women with disease-associated germline BRCA1/2 mutations were studied for the occurrence of breast cancer. Cases were mutation carriers who underwent bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and who were followed prospectively from the time of their center ascertainment and their surgery, with analyses performed for both follow-up periods. Controls were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with no history of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy matched to cases on gene, center, and year of birth. Both cases and controls were excluded for previous or concurrent diagnosis of breast cancer. Analyses were adjusted for duration of endogenous ovarian hormone exposure, including age at bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy if applicable., Results: Breast cancer was diagnosed in two (1.9%) of 105 women who had bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and in 184 (48.7%) of 378 matched controls who did not have the procedure, with a mean follow-up of 6.4 years. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduced the risk of breast cancer by approximately 95% in women with prior or concurrent bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and by approximately 90% in women with intact ovaries., Conclusion: Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces the risk of breast cancer in women with BRCA1/2 mutations by approximately 90%.

We describe results from a survey designed to assess patterns of communication within families shortly after an individual receives results of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Shortly after disclosure of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results, the proband was contacted by phone to administer the post disclosure survey. Questions asked included whether they had shared their results with their siblings or adult children, if there were difficulties in communicating the test results, and if there was any distress associated with the sharing of results. A total of 162 women who have received results from BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing participated in the survey. The probands shared their results more often with their female than their male relatives (P < 0.001). Probands who had tested positive for a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene shared their results more often with their relatives than did probands who were not carriers (P = 0.002). Probands reported more often that their siblings rather than their adult children had difficulties understanding the results (P = 0.001). The probands who were carriers more often reported having difficulties explaining their results to their relatives (P < 0.001) and their relatives were upset on hearing the result more often than were the relatives of probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). The probands who were carriers reported more often that they were upset explaining their results to their relatives than did the probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). Individuals are disclosing their test results to their relatives. Probands who are BRCA1- or BRCA2-positive are more likely to experience difficulty and distress with the communication of their test results to family members., (Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: Data concerning the efficacy of bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy for reducing the risk of gynecologic cancer in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are limited. We investigated whether this procedure reduces the risk of cancers of the coelomic epithelium and breast in women who carry such mutations., Methods: A total of 551 women with disease-associated germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations were identified from registries and studied for the occurrence of ovarian and breast cancer. We determined the incidence of ovarian cancer in 259 women who had undergone bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and in 292 matched controls who had not undergone the procedure. In a subgroup of 241 women with no history of breast cancer or prophylactic mastectomy, the incidence of breast cancer was determined in 99 women who had undergone bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and in 142 matched controls. The length of postoperative follow-up for both groups was at least eight years., Results: Six women who underwent prophylactic oophorectomy (2.3 percent) received a diagnosis of stage I ovarian cancer at the time of the procedure; two women (0.8 percent) received a diagnosis of papillary serous peritoneal carcinoma 3.8 and 8.6 years after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy. Among the controls, 58 women (19.9 percent) received a diagnosis of ovarian cancer, after a mean follow-up of 8.8 years. With the exclusion of the six women whose cancer was diagnosed at surgery, prophylactic oophorectomy significantly reduced the risk of coelomic epithelial cancer (hazard ratio, 0.04; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.01 to 0.16). Of 99 women who underwent bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and who were studied to determine the risk of breast cancer, breast cancer developed in 21 (21.2 percent), as compared with 60 (42.3 percent) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.29 to 0.77)., Conclusions: Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy reduces the risk of coelomic epithelial cancer and breast cancer in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.