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.
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.
Authors: Xinglei Chai; Tara M Friebel; Christian F Singer; D Gareth Evans; Henry T Lynch; Claudine Isaacs; Judy E Garber; Susan L Neuhausen; Ellen Matloff; Rosalind Eeles; Nadine Tung; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Fergus J Couch; Peter J Hulick; Patricia A Ganz; Mary B Daly; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Gail Tomlinson; Joanne L Blum; Susan M Domchek; Jinbo Chen; Timothy R Rebbeck Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-10-14 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Stephanie Kearton; Karen Wills; Michael Bunting; Penny Blomfield; Paul A James; Jo Burke Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Danielle A Henry; Marie C Lee; Deanna Almanza; Kamran A Ahmed; Weihong Sun; David C Boulware; Christine Laronga Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-11-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Marc D Schwartz; Claudine Isaacs; Kristi D Graves; Elizabeth Poggi; Beth N Peshkin; Christy Gell; Clinton Finch; Scott Kelly; Kathryn L Taylor; Lauren Perley Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Nasim Mavaddat; Timothy R Rebbeck; Sunil R Lakhani; Douglas F Easton; Antonis C Antoniou Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Lee Galmor; Rinat Bernstein-Molho; Miri Sklair-Levy; Dana Madoursky-Feldman; Dov Zippel; Yael Laitman; Eitan Friedman Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Adam H Buchanan; Corrine I Voils; Joellen M Schildkraut; Catherine Fine; Nora K Horick; P Kelly Marcom; Kristi Wiggins; Celette Sugg Skinner Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 2.537