Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 10/2016

01-10-2016 | Breast Oncology

Assessing, Counseling, and Treating Patients at High Risk for Breast Cancer

Authors: Edward Clifford, MD, Kevin S. Hughes, MD, Maegan Roberts, MS, CGC, Sara Pirzadeh-Miller, MS, CGC, Sarah A. McLaughlin, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 10/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Identifying patients at high risk of carrying pathogenic variants in genes is a crucial part of providing both accurate counseling and evidence-based treatment recommendations. Current risk assessment models have strengths and weaknesses that may limit their applicability to specific clinical circumstances. Clinicians must have knowledge regarding variations in available models, how they should be used, and what data they can expect from specific models. In addition, indications for genetic testing are expanding, and the adoption of next-generation sequencing has allowed the creation of multigene testing panels. Complex consequences of panel testing have included an increase in the incidence of identifying variants of uncertain significance and the identification of pathogenic variants in genes for which treatment guidelines are not available. Women diagnosed with breast cancer who carry pathogenic variants in genes with proven associations with breast cancer (BRCA1/2) or highly likely associations (PTEN, PALB2) require additional risk assessment to facilitate treatment decisions that will limit in-breast tumor recurrence and contralateral breast cancer.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89.CrossRefPubMed Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Smith SG, Sestak I, Forster A, et al. Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:575–90.CrossRefPubMed Smith SG, Sestak I, Forster A, et al. Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:575–90.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ropka ME, Keim J, Philbrick JT. Patient decisions about breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3090–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ropka ME, Keim J, Philbrick JT. Patient decisions about breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3090–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Senter L, Clendenning M, Sotamaa K, et al. The clinical phenotype of Lynch syndrome due to germ-line PMS2 mutations. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:419–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Senter L, Clendenning M, Sotamaa K, et al. The clinical phenotype of Lynch syndrome due to germ-line PMS2 mutations. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:419–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference ten Broeke SW, Brohet RM, Tops CM, et al. Lynch syndrome caused by germline PMS2 mutations: delineating the cancer risk. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:319–25.CrossRefPubMed ten Broeke SW, Brohet RM, Tops CM, et al. Lynch syndrome caused by germline PMS2 mutations: delineating the cancer risk. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:319–25.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Greenblatt MS. Sequence variants of uncertain significance: what to do when genetic test results are not definitive. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:833–46.CrossRefPubMed Greenblatt MS. Sequence variants of uncertain significance: what to do when genetic test results are not definitive. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:833–46.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference 14. LaDuca H, Stuenkel AJ, Dolinsky JS, et al. Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients. Genet Med. 2014;16:830–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 14. LaDuca H, Stuenkel AJ, Dolinsky JS, et al. Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients. Genet Med. 2014;16:830–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Tung N, Lin NU, Kidd J, et al. Frequency of germline mutations in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in a sequential series of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. In press. Tung N, Lin NU, Kidd J, et al. Frequency of germline mutations in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in a sequential series of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. In press.
16.
go back to reference Eggington JM, Burbidge LA, Roa B, et al. Current variant of uncertain significance rates in BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome testing (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, EPCAM). Myriad Genetics Laboratories poster presentation; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics annual meeting 2012. Eggington JM, Burbidge LA, Roa B, et al. Current variant of uncertain significance rates in BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome testing (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, EPCAM). Myriad Genetics Laboratories poster presentation; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics annual meeting 2012.
17.
go back to reference Yorczyk A, Robinson LS, Ross TS. Use of panel tests in place of single gene tests in the cancer genetics clinic. Clin Genet. 2015;88:278–82.CrossRefPubMed Yorczyk A, Robinson LS, Ross TS. Use of panel tests in place of single gene tests in the cancer genetics clinic. Clin Genet. 2015;88:278–82.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference 18. Jez S, Martin M, South S, et al. Variants of unknown significance on chromosomal microarray analysis: parental perspectives. J Community Genet. 2015;6:343–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 18. Jez S, Martin M, South S, et al. Variants of unknown significance on chromosomal microarray analysis: parental perspectives. J Community Genet. 2015;6:343–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference 19. Kiedrowski LA, Owens KM, Yashar BM, et al. Parents’ perspectives on variants of uncertain significance from chromosome microarray analysis. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:101–11.CrossRefPubMed 19. Kiedrowski LA, Owens KM, Yashar BM, et al. Parents’ perspectives on variants of uncertain significance from chromosome microarray analysis. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:101–11.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Reiff M, Bernhardt BA, Mulchandani S, et al. “What does it mean?”: uncertainties in understanding results of chromosomal microarray testing. Genet Med. 2012;14:250–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Reiff M, Bernhardt BA, Mulchandani S, et al. “What does it mean?”: uncertainties in understanding results of chromosomal microarray testing. Genet Med. 2012;14:250–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Richter S, Haroun I, Graham TC, et al. Variants of unknown significance in BRCA testing: impact on risk perception, worry, prevention and counseling. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(Suppl 8):viii69–74. Richter S, Haroun I, Graham TC, et al. Variants of unknown significance in BRCA testing: impact on risk perception, worry, prevention and counseling. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(Suppl 8):viii69–74.
22.
go back to reference Rosell AM, Pena LD, Schoch K, et al. Not the end of the odyssey: parental perceptions of whole exome sequencing (WES) in pediatric undiagnosed disorders. J Genet Couns. In press. Rosell AM, Pena LD, Schoch K, et al. Not the end of the odyssey: parental perceptions of whole exome sequencing (WES) in pediatric undiagnosed disorders. J Genet Couns. In press.
23.
24.
go back to reference Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS, et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2373–8.CrossRefPubMed Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS, et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2373–8.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference 25. Wapnir IL, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP, et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project node-positive adjuvant breast cancer trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2028–37.CrossRefPubMed 25. Wapnir IL, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP, et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project node-positive adjuvant breast cancer trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2028–37.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Pierce LJ, Levin AM, Rebbeck TR, et al. Ten-year multi-institutional results of breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy in BRCA1/2-associated stage I/II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2437–43.CrossRefPubMed Pierce LJ, Levin AM, Rebbeck TR, et al. Ten-year multi-institutional results of breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy in BRCA1/2-associated stage I/II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2437–43.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference 27Graeser MK, Engel C, Rhiem K, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5887–92.CrossRefPubMed 27Graeser MK, Engel C, Rhiem K, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5887–92.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference 28. Scheuer L, Kauff N, Robson M, et al. Outcome of preventive surgery and screening for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1260–8.CrossRefPubMed 28. Scheuer L, Kauff N, Robson M, et al. Outcome of preventive surgery and screening for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1260–8.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference 29. Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Lynch HT, et al. Predictors of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1384–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 29. Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Lynch HT, et al. Predictors of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1384–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference 30. Metcalfe KA, Lubinski J, Ghadirian P, et al. Predictors of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: the Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1093–7.CrossRefPubMed 30. Metcalfe KA, Lubinski J, Ghadirian P, et al. Predictors of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: the Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1093–7.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference 31. Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Ghadirian P, et al. Contralateral mastectomy and survival after breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2014;348:g226.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 31. Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Ghadirian P, et al. Contralateral mastectomy and survival after breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2014;348:g226.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference 32. Evans DG, Ingham SL, Baildam A, et al. Contralateral mastectomy improves survival in women with BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140:135–42.CrossRefPubMed 32. Evans DG, Ingham SL, Baildam A, et al. Contralateral mastectomy improves survival in women with BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140:135–42.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Heemskerk-Gerritsen BA, Rookus MA, Aalfs CM, et al. Improved overall survival after contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with a history of unilateral breast cancer: a prospective analysis. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:668–77.PubMed Heemskerk-Gerritsen BA, Rookus MA, Aalfs CM, et al. Improved overall survival after contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with a history of unilateral breast cancer: a prospective analysis. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:668–77.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Assessing, Counseling, and Treating Patients at High Risk for Breast Cancer
Authors
Edward Clifford, MD
Kevin S. Hughes, MD
Maegan Roberts, MS, CGC
Sara Pirzadeh-Miller, MS, CGC
Sarah A. McLaughlin, MD
Publication date
01-10-2016
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 10/2016
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5399-5

Other articles of this Issue 10/2016

Annals of Surgical Oncology 10/2016 Go to the issue