Literature DB >> 25960720

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

Ulrich Bick1.   

Abstract

Efforts for early detection of breast cancer play an important role in the care of high-risk women. This will include both women with a pathological mutation in one of the known breast cancer susceptibility genes as well as women with a high breast cancer risk based on family history only. Due to the much higher incidence of breast cancer in premenopausal women with a genetic predisposition or a familial background, to be most effective, imaging-based breast surveillance should start at an age as early as 25-30 years. There is now ample evidence that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is by far the most sensitive imaging modality in young high-risk women. With high-risk multimodality screening at least 30% of breast cancers will be detected primarily by MRI and would have been missed at regular screening without MRI. Therefore, most high-risk breast surveillance programs now offer annual MRI to eligible high-risk women from age 25 to 30, usually supplemented by regular mammography starting at least from age 40. The inclusion of clinical breast exam (CBE) and/or ultrasound in the high-risk surveillance has little impact on the detection of additional cancers, but may improve compliance and reduce unnecessary callbacks for nonspecific findings on MRI. To reduce advanced stage interval cancers, especially in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, some programs offer additional semiannual CBE and/or ultrasound or alternate MRI and mammography every 6 months. How long regular MRI should be continued in high-risk women is a matter of considerable debate. It appears feasible that MRI can safely be discontinued even in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers between the age of 60 and 70, especially if mammographic breast density is low. Even though several cohort studies have now demonstrated a very favorable stage distribution of breast cancers found in women undergoing high-risk surveillance with MRI, data on long-term survival and mortality in these patients is still rare.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasms; Early detection of cancer; Genes, BRCA1; Genes, BRCA2; Magnetic resonance imaging

Year:  2015        PMID: 25960720      PMCID: PMC4395819          DOI: 10.1159/000375390

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)        ISSN: 1661-3791            Impact factor:   2.860


  78 in total

1.  Decade of 'normal' mammography reports--the happygram.

Authors:  Nancy M Cappello
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 5.532

2.  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

3.  The attitudes of women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations toward clinical breast examinations and breast self-examinations.

Authors:  Tirtza N Spiegel; Kimberley A Hill; Ellen Warner
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study.

Authors:  Adriana M J Bluekens; Roland Holland; Nico Karssemeijer; Mireille J M Broeders; Gerard J den Heeten
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Role of detection method in predicting breast cancer survival: analysis of randomized screening trials.

Authors:  Yu Shen; Ying Yang; Lurdes Y T Inoue; Mark F Munsell; Anthony B Miller; Donald A Berry
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-08-17       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 7.  Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ellen Warner; Hans Messersmith; Petrina Causer; Andrea Eisen; Rene Shumak; Donald Plewes
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Effectiveness of screening with annual magnetic resonance imaging and mammography: results of the initial screen from the ontario high risk breast screening program.

Authors:  Anna M Chiarelli; Maegan V Prummel; Derek Muradali; Vicky Majpruz; Meaghan Horgan; June C Carroll; Andrea Eisen; Wendy S Meschino; Rene S Shumak; Ellen Warner; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  A BRCA1/2 mutation, high breast density and prominent pushing margins of a tumor independently contribute to a frequent false-negative mammography.

Authors:  Madeleine Tilanus-Linthorst; Leon Verhoog; Inge-Marie Obdeijn; Karina Bartels; Marian Menke-Pluymers; Alexander Eggermont; Jan Klijn; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Theo van der Kwast; Cecile Brekelmans
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2002-11-01       Impact factor: 7.396

10.  Evaluating the performance of the breast cancer genetic risk models BOADICEA, IBIS, BRCAPRO and Claus for predicting BRCA1/2 mutation carrier probabilities: a study based on 7352 families from the German Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Consortium.

Authors:  Christine Fischer; Karoline Kuchenbäcker; Christoph Engel; Silke Zachariae; Kerstin Rhiem; Alfons Meindl; Nils Rahner; Nicola Dikow; Hansjörg Plendl; Irmgard Debatin; Tiemo Grimm; Dorothea Gadzicki; Ricarda Flöttmann; Judit Horvath; Evelin Schröck; Friedrich Stock; Dieter Schäfer; Ira Schwaab; Christiana Kartsonaki; Nasim Mavaddat; Brigitte Schlegelberger; Antonis C Antoniou; Rita Schmutzler
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 6.318

View more
  9 in total

1.  New avenues in secondary and tertiary prevention of breast cancer.

Authors:  Rita K Schmutzler
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 2.  Current approaches in the clinical management of pregnancy-associated breast cancer-pros and cons.

Authors:  Pavol Zubor; Peter Kubatka; Ivana Kapustova; Lence Miloseva; Zuzana Dankova; Alexandra Gondova; Tibor Bielik; Stefan Krivus; Jan Bujnak; Zuzana Laucekova; Christina Kehrer; Erik Kudela; Jan Danko
Journal:  EPMA J       Date:  2018-06-24       Impact factor: 6.543

Review 3.  Breast density implications and supplemental screening.

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

4.  An international survey of surveillance schemes for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Dana Madorsky-Feldman; Miri Sklair-Levy; Tamar Perri; Yael Laitman; Shani Paluch-Shimon; Rita Schmutzler; Kerstin Rhiem; Jenny Lester; Beth Y Karlan; Christian F Singer; Tom Van Maerken; Kathleen Claes; Joan Brunet; Angel Izquierdo; Alex Teulé; Jong Won Lee; Sung-Won Kim; Banu Arun; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Katherine Tucker; Nicola K Poplawski; Liliana Varesco; Luigina Ada Bonelli; Saundra S Buys; Gillian Mitchell; Marc Tischkowitz; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Caroline Seynaeve; Mark Robson; Ava Kwong; Nadine Tung; Nalven Tessa; Susan M Domchek; Andrew K Godwin; Johanna Rantala; Brita Arver; Eitan Friedman
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  "High-Risk Breast Cancer Screening in BRCA1/2 Carriers Leads to Early Detection and Improved Survival After a Breast Cancer Diagnosis".

Authors:  Shay Shraga; Albert Grinshpun; Aviad Zick; Luna Kadouri; Yogev Cohen; Ofra Maimon; Yael Adler-Levy; Galina Zeltzer; Avital Granit; Bella Maly; Einat Carmon; Vardiella Meiner; Tamar Sella; Tamar Hamburger; Tamar Peretz
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Rational Approach to Finding Genes Encoding Molecular Biomarkers: Focus on Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Nathalie Schneider; Ellen Reed; Faddy Kamel; Enrico Ferrari; Mikhail Soloviev
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 4.141

7.  Digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesised images versus standard full-field digital mammography in population-based screening (TOSYMA): protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Stefanie Weigel; Joachim Gerss; Hans-Werner Hense; Miriam Krischke; Alexander Sommer; Jörg Czwoydzinski; Horst Lenzen; Laura Kerschke; Karin Spieker; Stefanie Dickmaenken; Sonja Baier; Marc Urban; Gerold Hecht; Oliver Heidinger; Joachim Kieschke; Walter Heindel
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Addition of T2-guided optical tomography improves noncontrast breast magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis.

Authors:  Jinchao Feng; Junqing Xu; Shudong Jiang; Hong Yin; Yan Zhao; Jiang Gui; Ke Wang; Xiuhua Lv; Fang Ren; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 6.466

9.  Efficacy of breast MRI for surgical decision in patients with breast cancer: ductal carcinoma in situ versus invasive ductal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jeeyeon Lee; Jin Hyang Jung; Wan Wook Kim; Chan Sub Park; Ryu Kyung Lee; Hye Jung Kim; Won Hwa Kim; Ho Yong Park
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 4.430

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.