Search

BACKGROUND: The effect of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is rarely examined. As carriers may increasingly undergo IVF as part of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), we examined the impact of ovarian stimulation for IVF on breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.METHODS: The study population consisted of 1550 BRCA1 and 964 BRCA2 mutation carriers, derived from the nationwide HEBON study and the nationwide PGD registry. Questionnaires, clinical records and linkages with the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to collect data on IVF exposure, risk-reducing surgeries and cancer diagnosis, respectively. Time-dependent Cox regression analyses were conducted, stratified for birth cohort and adjusted for subfertility.RESULTS: Of the 2514 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, 3% (n = 76) were exposed to ovarian stimulation for IVF. In total, 938 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (37.3%) were diagnosed with breast cancer. IVF exposure was not associated with risk of breast cancer (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.46-1.36). Similar results were found for the subgroups of subfertile women (n = 232; HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.39-1.37) and BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.60-2.09). In addition, age at and recency of first IVF treatment were not associated with breast cancer risk.CONCLUSION: No evidence was found for an association between ovarian stimulation for IVF and breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer caused by a BRCA1/2 mutation is the most frequent indication for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in the Netherlands. The extent to which involved professionals are informed about this option, however, is unclear. The few available international studies mostly represent a limited range of professionals, and suggest that their knowledge about PGD for hereditary cancer syndromes is sparse and referral for PGD is based on limited understanding. A cross-sectional survey assessing awareness, knowledge, acceptability and PGD-referral for BRCA was completed by 188 professionals involved in the field of breast and ovarian cancer or reproduction. One-half of professionals were aware of PGD for BRCA, and most had a low to moderate level of knowledge. A total of 86% considered PGD for BRCA acceptable and 48% had referred patients with BRCA for PGD. Awareness and knowledge was higher among professionals who worked at a university hospital (compared with a general hospital). Knowledge of PGD was positively associated with discussing and referring for PGD, and PGD acceptability was associated with previous awareness. Although PGD counselling is the primary responsibility of the geneticist, other involved professionals may be gatekeepers as patients rely on them for raising awareness and referral. (C) 2017 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE Reproductive decision making for couples with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is complex and can result in decisional conflict or regret. This study investigated couples' support needs and aimed to identify vulnerable couples. Ultimately, we should strive to develop a clear standard of care guideline regarding reproductive decision support. METHODS Mixed methods were used for data collection. A focus group study was conducted among 18 couples (N = 35) with HBOC who had made a reproductive decision after reproductive counselling. Subsequently, 129 similar couples (N = 258) were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey based on the focus group study. RESULTS Clinical and practical aspects of reproductive counselling were positively evaluated in the focus group study, although couples indicated a need for additional support with emotional and social concerns in which their relationship, social environment, and the way they picture their desired family were key elements. The survey was completed by 86 participants. Making a reproductive choice was experienced as (very) difficult by 43%, and 69% showed a need for additional support during decision making. Younger participants and those who opted for a natural pregnancy experienced more difficulty with reproductive decision making, and partners showed a higher need for psychological support than carriers. CONCLUSIONS Couples with HBOC who need to make a reproductive decision have specific needs for guidance and support, of which the desired content and methods can vary. It is therefore important to identify vulnerable couples and to attune counselling to couples' needs.

Purpose The aim of this study was to determine whether BRCA1/2 mutation carriers produce fewer mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), in comparison to a PGD control group. Methods A retrospective, international, multicenter cohort study was performed on data of first PGD cycles performed between January 2006 and September 2015. Data were extracted from medical files. The study was performed in one PGD center and three affiliated IVF centers in the Netherlands and one PGD center in Belgium. Exposed couples underwent PGD because of a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation, controls for other monogenic conditions. Only couples treated in a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist-suppressive protocol, stimulated with at least 150 IU follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), were included. Women suspected to have a diminished ovarian reserve status due to chemotherapy, auto-immune disorders, or genetic conditions (other than BRCA1/2 mutations) were excluded. A total of 106 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers underwent PGD in this period, of which 43 (20 BRCA1 and 23 BRCA2 mutation carriers) met the inclusion criteria. They were compared to 174 controls selected by frequency matching. Results Thirty-eight BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (18 BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and 154 controls proceeded to oocyte pickup. The median number of mature oocytes was 7.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 4.0–9.0) in the BRCA group as a whole, 6.5 (IQR 4.0–8.0) in BRCA1 mutation carriers, 7.5 (IQR 5.5–9.0) in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 8.0 (IQR 6.0–11.0) in controls. Multiple linear regression analysis with the number of mature oocytes as a dependent variable and adjustment for treatment center, female age, female body mass index (BMI), type of gonadotropin used, and the total dose of gonadotropins administered revealed a significantly lower yield of mature oocytes in the BRCA group as compared to controls (p = 0.04). This finding could be fully accounted for by the BRCA1 subgroup (BRCA1 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.02, BRCA2 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.50). Conclusions Ovarian response to stimulation, expressed as the number of mature oocytes, was reduced in BRCA1 but not in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Although oocyte yield was in correspondence to a normal response in all subgroups, this finding points to a possible negative influence of the BRCA1 gene on ovarian reserve. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10815-017-1014-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Item does not contain fulltext STUDY QUESTION: To what extent are BRCA mutation carriers and their partners in the Netherlands aware about preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) as reproductive options and what is their attitude towards these options? SUMMARY ANSWER: Awareness of PGD (66%) and PND (61%) among BRCA mutation carriers and their partners is relatively high and 80% and 26%, respectively, of BRCA carriers and their partners find offering PGD and PND for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) acceptable. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Internationally, awareness of PGD among persons with a genetic cancer predisposition appears to be relatively low (35%) and although acceptability is generally high (71%), only a small proportion of mutation carriers would consider using PGD (36%). However, for HBOC, there are no studies available that investigated the perspective of individuals with a confirmed BRCA1/2 mutation and their partners about PGD and PND including demographic and medical correlates of awareness and acceptability. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional survey was completed by 191 participants between July 2012 and June 2013. Participants were recruited through patient organizations (88%) and the databases of two Clinical Genetics departments in the Netherlands (12%). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Male and female BRCA carriers and their partners completed an online survey, which assessed demographic and medical characteristics, and awareness, knowledge, acceptability and consideration of PGD and PND as main outcomes. Correlations between demographic and medical characteristics and the main outcomes were investigated. MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE: The majority of respondents were female (87%), of reproductive age (86%) and about half reported a desire for a child in the future. About two-thirds (66%) were aware of PGD and 61% of PND for HBOC. PGD knowledge was moderate (5.5 on a 9-point scale) and acceptability of PGD and PND for HBOC was 80% and 26%, respectively. A minority would personally consider using PGD (39%) or PND (20%). Individuals with a higher educational level were more likely to be aware of PGD (P < 0.001) and PND (P < 0.001) and persons with a more immediate child wish were more often aware of PGD (P = 0.044) and had more knowledge about PGD (P = 0.001). PGD acceptability was positively associated with knowledge about PGD (P = 0.047), and PND acceptability was higher among partners in comparison to carriers (P = 0.001). Participants with a history of cancer and with a higher perceived seriousness of breast and ovarian cancer were more likely to consider using PGD (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001 respectively) or PND (P = 0.021 and P = 0.017 respectively). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The response rate (23%) of participants invited by the clinical genetics departments was low, probably related to a simultaneous study that used a similar recruitment strategy within the same target group, which may have resulted in selection bias. Moreover, PGD knowledge was measured with an instrument that is not yet validated since to date such an instrument is not available in the literature. Finally, the cross-sectional design of this study limits us from drawing any causal conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Improvement of information provision remains needed, in order to timely inform all couples with HBOC about the available reproductive options and enable them to make a balanced reproductive decision. This may limit the risk of negative psychological impact due to decisional conflict and possible regret. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon (grant number 2010.PS11.C74). None of the authors have competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Study question How do couples with a BRCA1/2 mutation decide on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC)? Summary answer BRCA couples primarily classify PGD and/or PND as reproductive options based on the perceived severity of HBOC and moral considerations, and consequently weigh the few important advantages of PGD against numerous smaller disadvantages. What is known already Awareness of PGD is generally low among persons at high risk for hereditary cancers. Most persons with HBOC are in favour of offering PGD for BRCA1/2 mutations, although only a minority would consider this option for themselves. Studies exploring the motivations for using or refraining from PGD among well-informed BRCA carriers of reproductive age are lacking. We studied the reproductive decision-making process by interviewing a group of well-informed, reproductive aged couples carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation, regarding their decisional motives and considerations. Study design, size, duration This exploratory, qualitative study investigated the motives and considerations taken into account by couples with a BRCA1/2 mutation and who have received extensive counselling on PGD and PND and have made a well-informed decision regarding this option. Eighteen couples took part in focus group and dyadic interviews between January and September 2012. Participants/materials, setting, methods Semi-structured focus groups were conducted containing two to four couples, assembled based on the reproductive method the couple had chosen: PGD (n = 6 couples) or conception without testing (n = 8 couples). Couples who had chosen PND for BRCA (n = 4) were interviewed dyadically. Two of the women, of whom one had chosen PND and the other had chosen no testing, had a history of breast cancer. Main results and the role of chance None of the couples who opted for PGD or conception without testing found the use of PND, with possible pregnancy termination, acceptable. PND users chose this method because of decisive, mainly practical reasons (natural conception, high chance of favourable outcome). Motives and considerations regarding PGD largely overlapped between PGD users, PND users and non-users, all mentioning some significant advantages (e.g. protecting the child and family from the mutation) and many smaller disadvantages (e.g. the necessity of in vitro fertilization (IVF), low chance of pregnancy by IVF/PGD). For female carriers, the safety of hormonal stimulation and the time required for PGD before undergoing preventive surgeries were important factors in the decision. Non-users expressed doubts about the moral justness of their decision afterwards and emphasized the impact the decision still had on their lives. Limitations, reason for caution The interviewed couples were at different stages in their chosen trajectory, up to 3 years after completion. This may have led to recall bias of original motives and considerations. Couples who did not actively seek information about PGD were excluded. Therefore the results may not be readily generalizable to all BRCA couples. Wider implications of the findings The perceived severity of HBOC and, for female carriers, the safety of hormonal stimulation and the time frames for PGD planning before preventive surgeries are essential items BRCA couples consider in reproductive decision-making. The emotional impact of this decision should not be underestimated; especially non-users may experience feelings of doubt or guilt up to several years afterwards. PGD counselling with tailored information addressing these items and decisional support in order to guarantee well-informed decision-making is needed. Study funding/competing interest(s) This study was funded by the Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon, grant number 2010.PS11.C74. None of the authors have competing interests to declare. Trial registration number Not applicable.

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a method of testing in vitro embryos as an alternative to prenatal diagnosis with possible termination of pregnancy in case of an affected child. Recently, PGD for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer caused by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations has found its way in specialized labs. We describe the route to universal single-cell PGD tests for carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. Originally, mutation-specific protocols with one or two markers were set up and changed when new couples were not informative. This route of changing protocols was finalized after 2 years with universal tests for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers based on haplotyping of, respectively, 6 (BRCA1) and 8 (BRCA2) microsatellite markers in a multiplex PCR. Using all protocols, 30 couples had a total of 47 PGD cycles performed. Eight cycles were cancelled upon IVF treatment due to hypostimulation. Of the remaining 39 cycles, a total of 261 embryos were biopsied and a genetic diagnosis was obtained in 244 (93%). In 34 of the 39 cycles (84.6%), an embryo transfer was possible and resulted in 8 pregnancies leading to a fetal heart beat per oocyte retrieval of 20.5% and a fetal heart beat per embryonic transfer of 23.5%. The preparation time and costs for set-up and validation of tests are minimized. The informativity of microsatellite markers used in the universal PGD-PCR tests is based on CEPH and deCODE pedigrees, making the tests applicable in 90% of couples coming from these populations.

Contains fulltext : 171486.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) STUDY QUESTION: Do BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have a compromised ovarian reserve compared to proven non-carriers, based on serum anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels? SUMMARY ANSWER: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers do not show a lower serum AMH level in comparison to proven non-carriers, after adjustment for potential confounders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: It has been suggested that the BRCA genes play a role in the process of ovarian reserve depletion, although previous studies have shown inconsistent results regarding the association between serum AMH levels and BRCA mutation status. Hence, it is yet unclear whether BRCA1/2 mutation carriers may indeed be at risk of a reduced reproductive lifespan. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed between January 2012 and February 2015 in 255 women. We needed to include 120 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and 120 proven non-carriers to demonstrate a difference in AMH levels of 0.40 microg/l (SD +/- 0.12 microg/l, two-sided alpha-error 0.05, power 80%). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHOD: Healthy women aged 18-45 years who were referred to the Clinical Genetics Department and applied for predictive BRCA1/2 testing because of a familial BRCA1/2 mutation were asked to participate. A cross-sectional assessment was performed by measuring serum AMH levels and filling out a questionnaire. Multivariate linear regression analyses adjusted for age, current smoking and current hormonal contraceptive use were performed on log-transformed serum AMH levels. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Out of 823 potentially eligible women, 421 (51.2%) were willing to participate, and of those, 166 (39%) did not meet our inclusion criteria. Two hundred and fifty-five women were available for analyses; 124 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and 131 proven non-carriers. The median [range] AMH level in carriers was 1.90 microg/l [0.11-19.00] compared to 1.80 microg/l [0.11-10.00] in non-carriers (P = 0.34). Adjusted linear regression analysis revealed no reduction in AMH level in the carriers (relative change = 0.98 (95%CI, 0.77-1.22); P = 0.76). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Participants were relatively young. Power was insufficient to analyze BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers separately. AMH levels may have been influenced by the use of hormonal contraceptives, though similar proportions of carriers and non-carriers were current users and adjustments were made to correct for potential confounding in our analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Limitations of the current analysis and limitations of the existing literature argue for prospective, well-controlled follow-up studies with recurrent AMH measurements to determine whether carriers might be at risk for low ovarian reserve and to definitively guide care. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was partially financially supported by a personal grant for Inge A.P. Derks-Smeets, kindly provided by the Dutch Cancer Society (Grant Number UM 2011-5249). Theodora C. van Tilborg, Inge A.P. Derks-Smeets, Anna M.E. Bos, Jan C. Oosterwijk, Christine E. de Die-Smulders, Lizet E. van der Kolk, Wendy A.G. van Zelst-Stams, Maria E. Velthuizen, Marinus J.C. Eijkemans and Margreet G.E.M. Ausems have nothing to disclose. Ron J. van Golde has received unrestricted research grants from Ferring and Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. Annemieke Hoek received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceutical BV, The Netherlands and a speaker's fee for post graduate education from MSD pharmaceutical company, outside the submitted work. Joop S.E. Laven has received unrestricted research grants from Ferring, Merck Serono, Merck Sharpe & Dome, Organon, and Schering Plough, outside the submitted work. Frank J.M. Broekmans is a member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono (The Netherlands), outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR no. 4324.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a reproductive option for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers wishing to avoid transmission of the predisposition for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) to their offspring. Embryos obtained by in vitro fertilisation (IVF/ICSI) are tested for the presence of the mutation. Only BRCA-negative embryos are transferred into the uterus. The suitability and outcome of PGD for HBOC are evaluated in an observational cohort study on treatments carried out in two of Western-Europe's largest PGD centres from 2006 until 2012. Male carriers, asymptomatic female carriers and breast cancer survivors were eligible. If available, PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy was possible. Generic PGD-PCR tests were developed based on haplotyping, if necessary combined with mutation detection. 70 Couples underwent PGD for BRCA1/2. 42/71 carriers (59.2 %) were female, six (14.3 %) of whom have had breast cancer prior to PGD. In total, 145 PGD cycles were performed. 720 embryos were tested, identifying 294 (40.8 %) as BRCA-negative. Of fresh IVF/PGD cycles, 23.9 % resulted in a clinical pregnancy. Three cycles involved PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy; two of these women delivered a healthy child. Overall, 38 children were liveborn. Two BRCA1 carriers were diagnosed with breast cancer shortly after PGD treatment, despite negative screening prior to PGD. PGD for HBOC proved to be suitable, yielding good pregnancy rates for asymptomatic carriers as well as breast cancer survivors. Because of two cases of breast cancer shortly after treatment, maternal safety of IVF(PGD) in female carriers needs further evaluation.