BACKGROUND: Multiple observational studies have suggested that breast cancer gene (BRCA)-associated ovarian cancers have improved survival compared with BRCA-negative ovarian cancers. However, most of those studies combined BRCA1 and BRCA2 patients or evaluated only BRCA1 patients. The objective of the current study was to examine whether BRCA1-associated and BRCA2-associated ovarian cancers were associated with different outcomes. METHODS: This was a single-institution, retrospective analysis of patients who had a new diagnosis of histologically confirmed stage III or IV serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer between January 1, 1996 and February 1, 2011 and who underwent BRCA mutation testing on 1 of 2 institutional review board-approved follow-up studies. Patients who had been tested for BRCA mutations beyond 24 months of diagnosis were excluded from analysis to minimize selection bias from including patients who were referred for genetic testing because of long survival. RESULTS: Data from 190 patients (143 BRCA-negative patients, 30 BRCA1-positive patients, and 17 BRCA2-positive patients) were analyzed. During the study period, 73 deaths were observed (60 BRCA-negative patients, 10 BRCA1-positive patients, 3 BRCA2-positive patients). The median follow-up for the remaining 117 survivors was 2.5 years. At 3 years, 69.4%, 90.7%, and 100% of BRCA-negative patients, BRCA1-positive patients, and BRCA2-positive patients were alive, respectively. On univariate analysis, age, BRCA2 mutations, debulking status, and type of first-line therapy (intravenous or intraperitoneal) were significant predictors of overall survival. On multivariate analysis, BRCA2 mutations (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.65; P = .007), but not BRCA1 mutations (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.38; P = .31), predicted for improved overall survival compared with BRCA-negative patients. When carriers of BRCA2 mutations were directly compared with carriers of BRCA1 mutations, BRCA2 mutations appeared to confer improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-1.05; P = .060), although this finding did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggests that BRCA2 mutations confer an overall survival advantage compared with either being BRCA-negative or having a BRCA1 mutation in high-grade serous ovarian cancer. This finding may have important implications for clinical trial design.
BACKGROUND: Multiple observational studies have suggested that breast cancer gene (BRCA)-associated ovarian cancers have improved survival compared with BRCA-negative ovarian cancers. However, most of those studies combined BRCA1 and BRCA2patients or evaluated only BRCA1patients. The objective of the current study was to examine whether BRCA1-associated and BRCA2-associated ovarian cancers were associated with different outcomes. METHODS: This was a single-institution, retrospective analysis of patients who had a new diagnosis of histologically confirmed stage III or IV serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer between January 1, 1996 and February 1, 2011 and who underwent BRCA mutation testing on 1 of 2 institutional review board-approved follow-up studies. Patients who had been tested for BRCA mutations beyond 24 months of diagnosis were excluded from analysis to minimize selection bias from including patients who were referred for genetic testing because of long survival. RESULTS: Data from 190 patients (143 BRCA-negative patients, 30 BRCA1-positive patients, and 17 BRCA2-positive patients) were analyzed. During the study period, 73 deaths were observed (60 BRCA-negative patients, 10 BRCA1-positive patients, 3 BRCA2-positive patients). The median follow-up for the remaining 117 survivors was 2.5 years. At 3 years, 69.4%, 90.7%, and 100% of BRCA-negative patients, BRCA1-positive patients, and BRCA2-positive patients were alive, respectively. On univariate analysis, age, BRCA2 mutations, debulking status, and type of first-line therapy (intravenous or intraperitoneal) were significant predictors of overall survival. On multivariate analysis, BRCA2 mutations (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.65; P = .007), but not BRCA1 mutations (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.38; P = .31), predicted for improved overall survival compared with BRCA-negative patients. When carriers of BRCA2 mutations were directly compared with carriers of BRCA1 mutations, BRCA2 mutations appeared to confer improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-1.05; P = .060), although this finding did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggests that BRCA2 mutations confer an overall survival advantage compared with either being BRCA-negative or having a BRCA1 mutation in high-grade serous ovarian cancer. This finding may have important implications for clinical trial design.
Authors: J Boyd; Y Sonoda; M G Federici; F Bogomolniy; E Rhei; D L Maresco; P E Saigo; L A Almadrones; R R Barakat; C L Brown; D S Chi; J P Curtin; E A Poynor; W J Hoskins Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-05-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Y Ben David; A Chetrit; G Hirsh-Yechezkel; E Friedman; B D Beck; U Beller; G Ben-Baruch; A Fishman; H Levavi; F Lubin; J Menczer; B Piura; J P Struewing; B Modan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-01-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Ford; D F Easton; M Stratton; S Narod; D Goldgar; P Devilee; D T Bishop; B Weber; G Lenoir; J Chang-Claude; H Sobol; M D Teare; J Struewing; A Arason; S Scherneck; J Peto; T R Rebbeck; P Tonin; S Neuhausen; R Barkardottir; J Eyfjord; H Lynch; B A Ponder; S A Gayther; M Zelada-Hedman Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: H A Risch; J R McLaughlin; D E Cole; B Rosen; L Bradley; E Kwan; E Jack; D J Vesprini; G Kuperstein; J L Abrahamson; I Fan; B Wong; S A Narod Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2001-02-15 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Marcia S Brose; Timothy R Rebbeck; Kathleen A Calzone; Jill E Stopfer; Katherine L Nathanson; Barbara L Weber Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-09-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Amir A Jazaeri; Cindy J Yee; Christos Sotiriou; Kelly R Brantley; Jeff Boyd; Edison T Liu Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-07-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: James R Conner; Emily Meserve; Ellen Pizer; Judy Garber; Michael Roh; Nicole Urban; Charles Drescher; Bradley J Quade; Michael Muto; Brooke E Howitt; Mark D Pearlman; Ross S Berkowitz; Neil Horowitz; Christopher P Crum; Colleen Feltmate Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Stephanie Nougaret; Yulia Lakhman; Mithat Gönen; Debra A Goldman; Maura Miccò; Melvin D'Anastasi; Sarah A Johnson; Krishna Juluru; Angela G Arnold; Ramon E Sosa; Robert A Soslow; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Hedvig Hricak; Noah D Kauff; Evis Sala Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-06-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: John R McLaughlin; Barry Rosen; Joel Moody; Tuya Pal; Isabel Fan; Patricia A Shaw; Harvey A Risch; Thomas A Sellers; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Yaser R Hussein; Jennifer A Ducie; Angela G Arnold; Noah D Kauff; Hebert A Vargas-Alvarez; Evis Sala; Douglas A Levine; Robert A Soslow Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 6.394