Literature DB >> 22744338

Differences in natural history between breast cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and effects of MRI screening-MRISC, MARIBS, and Canadian studies combined.

Eveline A M Heijnsdijk1, Ellen Warner, Fiona J Gilbert, Madeleine M A Tilanus-Linthorst, Gareth Evans, Petrina A Causer, Rosalind A Eeles, Reinie Kaas, Gerrit Draisma, Elizabeth A Ramsay, Ruth M L Warren, Kimberly A Hill, Nicoline Hoogerbrugge, Martin N J M Wasser, Elisabeth Bergers, Jan C Oosterwijk, Maartje J Hooning, Emiel J T Rutgers, Jan G M Klijn, Don B Plewes, Martin O Leach, Harry J de Koning.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is recommended that BRCA1/2 mutation carriers undergo breast cancer screening using MRI because of their very high cancer risk and the high sensitivity of MRI in detecting invasive cancers. Clinical observations suggest important differences in the natural history between breast cancers due to mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2, potentially requiring different screening guidelines.
METHODS: Three studies of mutation carriers using annual MRI and mammography were analyzed. Separate natural history models for BRCA1 and BRCA2 were calibrated to the results of these studies and used to predict the impact of various screening protocols on detection characteristics and mortality.
RESULTS: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (N = 1,275) participated in the studies and 124 cancers (99 invasive) were diagnosed. Cancers detected in BRCA2 mutation carriers were smaller [80% ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or ≤10 mm vs. 49% for BRCA1, P < 0.001]. Below the age of 40, one (invasive) cancer of the 25 screen-detected cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers was detected by mammography alone, compared with seven (three invasive) of 11 screen-detected cancers in BRCA2 (P < 0.0001). In the model, the preclinical period during which cancer is screen-detectable was 1 to 4 years for BRCA1 and 2 to 7 years for BRCA2. The model predicted breast cancer mortality reductions of 42% to 47% for mammography, 48% to 61% for MRI, and 50% to 62% for combined screening.
CONCLUSIONS: Our studies suggest substantial mortality benefits in using MRI to screen BRCA1/2 mutation carriers aged 25 to 60 years but show important clinical differences in natural history. IMPACT: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers may benefit from different screening protocols, for example, below the age of 40. ©2012 AACR

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22744338     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-1196

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  21 in total

1.  Breast cancer detection and tumor characteristics in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Julia Krammer; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Mark E Robson; Mithat Gönen; Blanca Bernard-Davila; Elizabeth A Morris; Debra A Mangino; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-03-25       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Screening Men at Increased Risk for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Model Estimates of Benefits and Harms.

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

3.  Intensive Surveillance with Biannual Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Downstages Breast Cancer in BRCA1 Mutation Carriers.

Authors:  Rodrigo Santa Cruz Guindalini; Yonglan Zheng; Hiroyuki Abe; Kristen Whitaker; Toshio F Yoshimatsu; Tom Walsh; David Schacht; Kirti Kulkarni; Deepa Sheth; Marion S Verp; Angela R Bradbury; Jane Churpek; Elias Obeid; Jeffrey Mueller; Galina Khramtsova; Fang Liu; Akila Raoul; Hongyuan Cao; Iris L Romero; Susan Hong; Robert Livingston; Nora Jaskowiak; Xiaoming Wang; Marcio Debiasi; Colin C Pritchard; Mary-Claire King; Gregory Karczmar; Gillian M Newstead; Dezheng Huo; Olufunmilayo I Olopade
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  Intensified surveillance for early detection of breast cancer in high-risk patients.

Authors:  Ulrich Bick
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 5.  Breast cancer screening for women at high risk: review of current guidelines from leading specialty societies.

Authors:  Natsuko Onishi; Masako Kataoka
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 4.239

Review 6.  Counselling framework for moderate-penetrance cancer-susceptibility mutations.

Authors:  Nadine Tung; Susan M Domchek; Zsofia Stadler; Katherine L Nathanson; Fergus Couch; Judy E Garber; Kenneth Offit; Mark E Robson
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 7.  Breast density implications and supplemental screening.

Authors:  Athina Vourtsis; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Is there a role for routine screening MRI in women with LCIS?

Authors:  Tari A King; Shirin Muhsen; Sujata Patil; Starr Koslow; Sabine Oskar; Anna Park; Mary Morrogh; Rita A Sakr; Monica Morrow
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2013-10-19       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Lingling Li; Elisabeth S Malin; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Diana S M Buist; Marjorie A Rosenberg; Marina Alfisher; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 10.  Screening Algorithms in Dense Breasts: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Sarah M Friedewald; Carrie B Hruska; Habib Rahbar
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.