PURPOSE: Women with BRCA1/2 mutations inherit high risks of breast and ovarian cancer; options to reduce cancer mortality include prophylactic surgery or breast screening, but their efficacy has never been empirically compared. We used decision analysis to simulate risk-reducing strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and to compare resulting survival probability and causes of death. METHODS: We developed a Monte Carlo model of breast screening with annual mammography plus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from ages 25 to 69 years, prophylactic mastectomy (PM) at various ages, and/or prophylactic oophorectomy (PO) at ages 40 or 50 years in 25-year-old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: With no intervention, survival probability by age 70 is 53% for BRCA1 and 71% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The most effective single intervention for BRCA1 mutation carriers is PO at age 40, yielding a 15% absolute survival gain; for BRCA2 mutation carriers, the most effective single intervention is PM, yielding a 7% survival gain if performed at age 40 years. The combination of PM and PO at age 40 improves survival more than any single intervention, yielding 24% survival gain for BRCA1 and 11% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. PM at age 25 instead of age 40 offers minimal incremental benefit (1% to 2%); substituting screening for PM yields a similarly minimal decrement in survival (2% to 3%). CONCLUSION: Although PM at age 25 plus PO at age 40 years maximizes survival probability, substituting mammography plus MRI screening for PM seems to offer comparable survival. These results may guide women with BRCA1/2 mutations in their choices between prophylactic surgery and breast screening.
PURPOSE:Women with BRCA1/2 mutations inherit high risks of breast and ovarian cancer; options to reduce cancer mortality include prophylactic surgery or breast screening, but their efficacy has never been empirically compared. We used decision analysis to simulate risk-reducing strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and to compare resulting survival probability and causes of death. METHODS: We developed a Monte Carlo model of breast screening with annual mammography plus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from ages 25 to 69 years, prophylactic mastectomy (PM) at various ages, and/or prophylactic oophorectomy (PO) at ages 40 or 50 years in 25-year-old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: With no intervention, survival probability by age 70 is 53% for BRCA1 and 71% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The most effective single intervention for BRCA1 mutation carriers is PO at age 40, yielding a 15% absolute survival gain; for BRCA2 mutation carriers, the most effective single intervention is PM, yielding a 7% survival gain if performed at age 40 years. The combination of PM and PO at age 40 improves survival more than any single intervention, yielding 24% survival gain for BRCA1 and 11% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. PM at age 25 instead of age 40 offers minimal incremental benefit (1% to 2%); substituting screening for PM yields a similarly minimal decrement in survival (2% to 3%). CONCLUSION: Although PM at age 25 plus PO at age 40 years maximizes survival probability, substituting mammography plus MRI screening for PM seems to offer comparable survival. These results may guide women with BRCA1/2 mutations in their choices between prophylactic surgery and breast screening.
Authors: Steven A Narod; Marie-Pierre Dubé; Jan Klijn; Jan Lubinski; Henry T Lynch; Parviz Ghadirian; Diane Provencher; Ketil Heimdal; Pal Moller; Mark Robson; Kenneth Offit; Claudine Isaacs; Barbara Weber; Eitan Friedman; Ruth Gershoni-Baruch; Gad Rennert; Barbara Pasini; Theresa Wagner; Mary Daly; Judy E Garber; Susan L Neuhausen; Peter Ainsworth; Hakan Olsson; Gareth Evans; Michael Osborne; Fergus Couch; William D Foulkes; Ellen Warner; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Olufunmilayo Olopade; Nadine Tung; Howard M Saal; Jeffrey Weitzel; Sofia Merajver; Marion Gauthier-Villars; Helena Jernstrom; Ping Sun; Jean-Sebastien Brunet Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-12-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: M C King; S Wieand; K Hale; M Lee; T Walsh; K Owens; J Tait; L Ford; B K Dunn; J Costantino; L Wickerham; N Wolmark; B Fisher Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-11-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: A Antoniou; P D P Pharoah; S Narod; H A Risch; J E Eyfjord; J L Hopper; N Loman; H Olsson; O Johannsson; A Borg; B Pasini; P Radice; S Manoukian; D M Eccles; N Tang; E Olah; H Anton-Culver; E Warner; J Lubinski; J Gronwald; B Gorski; H Tulinius; S Thorlacius; H Eerola; H Nevanlinna; K Syrjäkoski; O-P Kallioniemi; D Thompson; C Evans; J Peto; F Lalloo; D G Evans; D F Easton Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2003-04-03 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: B Modan; P Hartge; G Hirsh-Yechezkel; A Chetrit; F Lubin; U Beller; G Ben-Baruch; A Fishman; J Menczer; J P Struewing; M A Tucker; S Wacholder Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-07-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sunil R Lakhani; Marc J Van De Vijver; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Thomas J Anderson; Peter P Osin; Lesley McGuffog; Douglas F Easton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mariëlle S van Roosmalen; Lia C G Verhoef; Peep F M Stalmeier; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Willem A J van Daal Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Victor R Grann; Judith S Jacobson; Dustin Thomason; Dawn Hershman; Daniel F Heitjan; Alfred I Neugut Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-05-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark Robson; Martee Hensley; Richard Barakat; Carol Brown; Dennis Chi; Elizabeth Poynor; Kenneth Offit Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jacques E Rossouw; Garnet L Anderson; Ross L Prentice; Andrea Z LaCroix; Charles Kooperberg; Marcia L Stefanick; Rebecca D Jackson; Shirley A A Beresford; Barbara V Howard; Karen C Johnson; Jane Morley Kotchen; Judith Ockene Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-07-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Victor R Grann; Priya R Patel; Judith S Jacobson; Ellen Warner; Daniel F Heitjan; Maxine Ashby-Thompson; Dawn L Hershman; Alfred I Neugut Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-07-20 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Thejus T Jayakrishnan; Ryan T Groeschl; Ben George; James P Thomas; Sam Pappas; T Clark Gamblin; Kiran K Turaga Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-04-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Diego Munoz; Aimee M Near; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Sandra J Lee; Clyde B Schechter; Oguzhan Alagoz; Donald A Berry; Elizabeth S Burnside; Yaojen Chang; Gary Chisholm; Harry J de Koning; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Hui Huang; Natasha K Stout; Brian L Sprague; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Sylvia K Plevritis Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Roman Gulati; Heather H Cheng; Paul H Lange; Peter S Nelson; Ruth Etzioni Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: James W Jakub; Anne Warren Peled; Richard J Gray; Rachel A Greenup; John V Kiluk; Virgilio Sacchini; Sarah A McLaughlin; Julia C Tchou; Robert A Vierkant; Amy C Degnim; Shawna Willey Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 14.766