Literature DB >> 26867710

BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Testing in Young Women With Breast Cancer.

Shoshana M Rosenberg1, Kathryn J Ruddy2, Rulla M Tamimi3, Shari Gelber4, Lidia Schapira5, Steven Come6, Virginia F Borges7, Bryce Larsen1, Judy E Garber1, Ann H Partridge1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: BRCA testing is recommended for young women diagnosed as having breast cancer, but little is known about decisions surrounding testing and how results may influence treatment decisions in young patients.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the use of BRCA testing and to evaluate how concerns about genetic risk and use of genetic information affect subsequent treatment decisions in young women with breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of data collected following the opening of the study to accrual from October 10, 2006, through December 31, 2014, as part of the Helping Ourselves, Helping Others: Young Women's Breast Cancer Study, an ongoing prospective cohort study. Study participants included 897 women aged 40 years and younger at breast cancer diagnosis from 11 academic and community medical centers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Frequency and trends in the use of BRCA testing and how genetic information is used to make treatment decisions among women who test positive vs negative for a BRCA mutation.
RESULTS: A total of 780 (87.0%) of 897 women reported BRCA testing by 1 year after breast cancer diagnosis (mean age at diagnosis, 35.3 vs 36.9 years for untested women; P < .001), with the frequency of testing increasing among women diagnosed from August 1, 2006, through December 31, 2013. Of 39 women who were diagnosed as having breast cancer in 2006, 30 (76.9%) reported testing. In 2007, a slightly lower percentage of women (87 of 124 [70.2%]) reported testing; however, the proportion tested increased each subsequent year, with 141 (96.6%) of 146 and 123 (95.3%) of 129 women diagnosed as having breast cancer in 2012 and 2013, respectively, reporting BRCA testing (P < .001). Among untested women, 37 (31.6%) of 117 did not report discussion of the possibility that they might have a mutation with a physician and/or genetic counselor, and 43 (36.8%) of 117 were thinking of testing in the future. A total of 248 (29.8%) of 831 women said that knowledge or concern about genetic risk influenced treatment decisions; among these women, 76 (86.4%) of 88 mutation carriers and 82 (51.2%) of 160 noncarriers chose bilateral mastectomy (P < .001). Fewer women reported that systemic treatment decisions were influenced by genetic risk concern. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Rates of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing are increasing in young women with breast cancer. Given that knowledge and concern about genetic risk influence surgical decisions and may affect systemic therapy trial eligibility, all young women with breast cancer should be counseled and offered genetic testing, consistent with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26867710      PMCID: PMC5002892          DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Oncol        ISSN: 2374-2437            Impact factor:   31.777


  20 in total

1.  Referral and experience with genetic testing among women with early onset breast cancer.

Authors:  Karen L Brown; Robin Hutchison; Randi E Zinberg; Margaret M McGovern
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2005

2.  Tamoxifen and contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers: an update.

Authors:  Jacek Gronwald; Nadine Tung; William D Foulkes; Kenneth Offit; Ruth Gershoni; Mary Daly; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Hakan Olsson; Peter Ainsworth; Andrea Eisen; Howard Saal; Eitan Friedman; Olufunmilayo Olopade; Michael Osborne; Jeffrey Weitzel; Henry Lynch; Parviz Ghadirian; Jan Lubinski; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2006-05-01       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Predictors that influence contralateral prophylactic mastectomy election among women with ductal carcinoma in situ who were evaluated for BRCA genetic testing.

Authors:  Nisreen Elsayegh; Henry M Kuerer; Heather Lin; Angelica M Gutierrez Barrera; Michelle Jackson; Kimberly I Muse; Jennifer K Litton; Constance Albarracin; Aimaz Afrough; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Banu K Arun
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Adherence Patterns to National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for Referral of Women With Breast Cancer to Genetics Professionals.

Authors:  Ashley Stuckey; Terri Febbraro; Jessica Laprise; Jennifer S Wilbur; Vrishali Lopes; Katina Robison
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.339

5.  Breast cancer genetic counseling after diagnosis but before treatment: a pilot study on treatment consequences and psychological impact.

Authors:  Marijke R Wevers; Daniela E E Hahn; Senno Verhoef; Marijke D K Bolhaar; Margreet G E M Ausems; Neil K Aaronson; Eveline M A Bleiker
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2012-04-28

6.  Declining incidence of contralateral breast cancer in the United States from 1975 to 2006.

Authors:  Hazel B Nichols; Amy Berrington de González; James V Lacey; Philip S Rosenberg; William F Anderson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-03-14       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Perceptions, knowledge, and satisfaction with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among young women with breast cancer: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Shoshana M Rosenberg; Michaela S Tracy; Meghan E Meyer; Karen Sepucha; Shari Gelber; Judi Hirshfield-Bartek; Susan Troyan; Monica Morrow; Lidia Schapira; Steven E Come; Eric P Winer; Ann H Partridge
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 8.  Cancer in young adults 20 to 39 years of age: overview.

Authors:  Archie Bleyer; Ronald Barr
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.929

9.  Use of and mortality after bilateral mastectomy compared with other surgical treatments for breast cancer in California, 1998-2011.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Daphne Y Lichtensztajn; Theresa H M Keegan; David O Nelson; Christina A Clarke; Scarlett L Gomez
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 157.335

10.  The Angelina Jolie effect: how high celebrity profile can have a major impact on provision of cancer related services.

Authors:  D Gareth Evans; Julian Barwell; Diana M Eccles; Amanda Collins; Louise Izatt; Chris Jacobs; Alan Donaldson; Angela F Brady; Andrew Cuthbert; Rachel Harrison; Sue Thomas; Anthony Howell; Zosia Miedzybrodzka; Alex Murray
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2014-09-19       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  41 in total

1.  Psychosocial factors associated with the uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among BRCA1/2 mutation noncarriers with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Margaux C Genoff; Melissa Salerno; Kimberly Amoroso; Sherry R Boyar; Margaret Sheehan; Megan Harlan Fleischut; Beth Siegel; Angela G Arnold; Erin E Salo-Mullen; Jennifer L Hay; Kenneth Offit; Mark E Robson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Racial disparities in BRCA testing and cancer risk management across a population-based sample of young breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Deborah Cragun; Anne Weidner; Courtney Lewis; Devon Bonner; Jongphil Kim; Susan T Vadaparampil; Tuya Pal
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  BRCA testing in unaffected young women in the United States, 2006-2017.

Authors:  Fangjian Guo; Matthew Scholl; Erika L Fuchs; Abbey B Berenson; Yong-Fang Kuo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Use of BRCA Mutation Test in the U.S., 2004-2014.

Authors:  Fangjian Guo; Jacqueline M Hirth; Yu-Li Lin; Gwyn Richardson; Lyuba Levine; Abbey B Berenson; Yong-Fang Kuo
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 5.043

5.  Variations in the Referral Pattern for Genetic Counseling of Patients with Early-Onset Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study in Southern Sweden.

Authors:  Annelie Augustinsson; Carolina Ellberg; Ulf Kristoffersson; Håkan Olsson; Hans Ehrencrona
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 2.000

6.  Information and support needs of young women regarding breast cancer risk and genetic testing: adapting effective interventions for a novel population.

Authors:  Suzanne C O'Neill; Chalanda Evans; Rebekah J Hamilton; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Sue Friedman; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.375

7.  National Estimates of Genetic Testing in Women With a History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Christopher P Childers; Kimberly K Childers; Melinda Maggard-Gibbons; James Macinko
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Predictors of genetic testing uptake in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Mary K Ladd; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Gillian Hooker; Shawna Willey; Heiddis Valdimarsdottir; Tiffani DeMarco; Suzanne O'Neill; Savannah Binion; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.454

9.  Genetic Counseling Referral Rates in Long-Term Survivors of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Carlos H Barcenas; Maryam N Shafaee; Arup K Sinha; Akshara Raghavendra; Babita Saigal; Rashmi K Murthy; Ashley H Woodson; Banu Arun
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 11.908

10.  Oncologic Safety of Prophylactic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in a Population With BRCA Mutations: A Multi-institutional Study.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.