Literature DB >> 11181654

Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk.

C T Brekelmans1, C Seynaeve, C C Bartels, M M Tilanus-Linthorst, E J Meijers-Heijboer, C M Crepin, A A van Geel, M Menke, L C Verhoog, A van den Ouweland, I M Obdeijn, J G Klijn.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Women with a high breast cancer risk due to a familial predisposition may choose between preventive surgery and regular surveillance. The effectiveness of surveillance in high-risk women and especially BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown. We present first results from a single large family cancer clinic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with breast cancer risk over 15% were examined by physical examination every 6 months and mammography every year. Detection rates and screening parameters were calculated for the total group and separately for different age and genetic risk groups.
RESULTS: At least one examination was performed in 1,198 women: 449 moderate and 621 high-risk women and 128 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Within a median follow-up of 3 years, 35 breast cancers were detected (four ductal carcinoma-in-situ; 31 invasive tumors); the average detection rate was 9.7 per 1,000. Detection rates (95% confidence interval) for moderate and high-risk women and BRCA1/2 carriers were 3.3 (1.1 to 8.6), 8.4 (5.4 to 13.2), and 33 (17 to 63) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. The ratio of observed cases versus breast cancers expected in an average-risk population of comparable age was 2.7, 7.0 and 23.7 respectively. Overall, node negativity was 65%; 34% of primary tumors were less than 10 mm; sensitivity was 74%. Results with respect to tumor stage and sensitivity were less favorable in BRCA1/2 carriers and in women under the age of 40.
CONCLUSION: It is possible to identify young women at high risk for breast cancer. The number of cancers detected was significantly greater than expected in an age-matched average-risk population and related to the risk category. Overall, screening parameters were comparable to population screening data, with less favorable results in the youngest age group (< 40) and BRCA1/2 carriers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11181654     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.4.924

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  55 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of breast MR imaging and screen-film mammography for screening BRCA1 gene mutation carriers.

Authors:  Janie M Lee; Pamela M McMahon; Chung Y Kong; Daniel B Kopans; Paula D Ryan; Elissa M Ozanne; Elkan F Halpern; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The relation between projected breast cancer risk, perceived cancer risk, and mammography use. Results from the National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  C P Gross; G Filardo; H S Singh; A N Freedman; M H Farrell
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-12-22       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Screening behavior in women at increased familial risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Yoland C Antill; John Reynolds; Mary Anne Young; Judy A Kirk; Katherine M Tucker; Tarli L Bogtstra; Shirley S Wong; Tracy E Dudding; Juliana L Di Iulio; Kelly-Anne Phillips
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 4.  Risk assessment and management of high risk familial breast cancer.

Authors:  D G R Evans; F Lalloo
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 6.318

5.  Prospective study of breast cancer incidence in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation under surveillance with and without magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ellen Warner; Kimberley Hill; Petrina Causer; Donald Plewes; Roberta Jong; Martin Yaffe; William D Foulkes; Parviz Ghadirian; Henry Lynch; Fergus Couch; John Wong; Frances Wright; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  The significance of circumscribed malignant mammographic masses in the surveillance of BRCA 1/2 gene mutation carriers.

Authors:  R Kaas; R Kroger; J H C L Hendriks; A P E Besnard; W Koops; F A Pameijer; W Prevoo; C E Loo; S H Muller
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-04-09       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Personalized medicine: the future is not what it used to be.

Authors:  Michael J Demeure
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  The prevention of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a personal view.

Authors:  Steven Narod
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2004-02-15       Impact factor: 2.857

9.  Successful oxytocin-assisted nipple aspiration in women at increased risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Karijn P M Suijkerbuijk; Elsken van der Wall; Helen Meijrink; Xiaojuan Pan; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Margreet G E M Ausems; Paul J van Diest
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.375

10.  Hereditary cancer syndromes.

Authors:  Nils Rahner; Verena Steinke
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-10-10       Impact factor: 5.594

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.