Background: Despite the fact that heterozygosity for a pathogenic ATM variant is present in 1%-2% of the adult population, clinical guidelines to inform physicians and genetic counsellors about optimal management in that population are lacking. Methods: In this narrative review, we describe the challenges and controversies in the management of women who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant with respect to screening for breast and other malignancies, to choices for systemic therapy, and to decisions about radiation therapy. Results: Given that the lifetime risk for breast cancer in women who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant is likely greater than 25%, those women should undergo annual mammographic screening starting at least by 40 years of age. For women in this group who have a strong family history of breast cancer, earlier screening with both magnetic resonance imaging and mammography should be considered. High-quality data to inform the management of established breast cancer in carriers of pathogenic ATM variants are lacking. Although deficiency in the ATM gene product might confer sensitivity to dna-damaging pharmaceuticals such as inhibitors of poly (adp-ribose) polymerase or platinum agents, prospective clinical trials have not been conducted in the relevant patient population. Furthermore, the evidence with respect to radiation therapy is mixed; some data suggest increased toxicity, and other data suggest improved clinical benefit from radiation in women who are carriers of a pathogenic ATM variant. Conclusions: As in the 2017 U.S. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, we recommend high-risk imaging for women in Ontario who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant. Currently, ATM carrier status should not influence decisions about systemic or radiation therapy in the setting of an established breast cancer diagnosis.
Background: Despite the fact that heterozygosity for a pathogenic ATM variant is present in 1%-2% of the adult population, clinical guidelines to inform physicians and genetic counsellors about optimal management in that population are lacking. Methods: In this narrative review, we describe the challenges and controversies in the management of women who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant with respect to screening for breast and other malignancies, to choices for systemic therapy, and to decisions about radiation therapy. Results: Given that the lifetime risk for breast cancer in women who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant is likely greater than 25%, those women should undergo annual mammographic screening starting at least by 40 years of age. For women in this group who have a strong family history of breast cancer, earlier screening with both magnetic resonance imaging and mammography should be considered. High-quality data to inform the management of established breast cancer in carriers of pathogenic ATM variants are lacking. Although deficiency in the ATM gene product might confer sensitivity to dna-damaging pharmaceuticals such as inhibitors of poly (adp-ribose) polymerase or platinum agents, prospective clinical trials have not been conducted in the relevant patient population. Furthermore, the evidence with respect to radiation therapy is mixed; some data suggest increased toxicity, and other data suggest improved clinical benefit from radiation in women who are carriers of a pathogenic ATM variant. Conclusions: As in the 2017 U.S. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, we recommend high-risk imaging for women in Ontario who are heterozygous for a pathogenic ATM variant. Currently, ATM carrier status should not influence decisions about systemic or radiation therapy in the setting of an established breast cancer diagnosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Genetic testing; ataxia–telangiectasia; breast cancer; gene panel assays
Authors: B Geoffroy-Perez; N Janin; K Ossian; A Laugé; M F Croquette; C Griscelli; M Debré; B Bressac-de-Paillerets; A Aurias; D Stoppa-Lyonnet; N Andrieu Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2001-07-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: U Oppitz; U Bernthaler; D Schindler; A Sobeck; H Hoehn; M Platzer; A Rosenthal; M Flentje Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
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
Authors: Zhiming Fang; Sergei Kozlov; Michael J McKay; Rick Woods; Geoff Birrell; Carl N Sprung; Dédée F Murrell; Kiran Wangoo; Linda Teng; John H Kearsley; Martin F Lavin; Peter H Graham; Raymond A Clarke Journal: Genome Integr Date: 2010-06-24
Authors: Sean V Tavtigian; Peter J Oefner; Davit Babikyan; Anne Hartmann; Sue Healey; Florence Le Calvez-Kelm; Fabienne Lesueur; Graham B Byrnes; Shu-Chun Chuang; Nathalie Forey; Corinna Feuchtinger; Lydie Gioia; Janet Hall; Mia Hashibe; Barbara Herte; Sandrine McKay-Chopin; Alun Thomas; Maxime P Vallée; Catherine Voegele; Penelope M Webb; David C Whiteman; Suleeporn Sangrajrang; John L Hopper; Melissa C Southey; Irene L Andrulis; Esther M John; Georgia Chenevix-Trench Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2009-09-24 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Douglas F Easton; Paul D P Pharoah; Antonis C Antoniou; Marc Tischkowitz; Sean V Tavtigian; Katherine L Nathanson; Peter Devilee; Alfons Meindl; Fergus J Couch; Melissa Southey; David E Goldgar; D Gareth R Evans; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Nazneen Rahman; Mark Robson; Susan M Domchek; William D Foulkes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Renan Gomes; Pricila da Silva Spinola; Ayslan Castro Brant; Bruna Palma Matta; Caroline Macedo Nascimento; Silvia Maria de Aquino Paes; Cibele Rodrigues Bonvicino; Anna Claudia Evangelista Dos Santos; Miguel Angelo Martins Moreira Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Sharon A McGrath-Morrow; Roland Ndeh; Joseph M Collaco; Cynthia Rothblum-Oviatt; Jennifer Wright; Michael A O'Reilly; Benjamin D Singer; Howard M Lederman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kristen S Purrington; Sreejata Raychaudhuri; Michael S Simon; Julie Clark; Valerie Ratliff; Gregory Dyson; Douglas B Craig; Julie L Boerner; Jennifer L Beebe-Dimmer; Ann G Schwartz Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-08-31 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Fabienne Lesueur; Douglas F Easton; Anne-Laure Renault; Sean V Tavtigian; Jonine L Bernstein; Zsofia Kote-Jarai; Rosalind A Eeles; Dijana Plaseska-Karanfia; Lidia Feliubadaló; Banu Arun; Natalie Herold; Beatrix Versmold; Rita Katharina Schmutzler; Tú Nguyen-Dumont; Melissa C Southey; Leila Dorling; Alison M Dunning; Paola Ghiorzo; Bruna Samia Dalmasso; Eve Cavaciuti; Dorothée Le Gal; Nicholas J Roberts; Mev Dominguez-Valentin; Matti Rookus; Alexander M R Taylor; Alisa M Goldstein; David E Goldgar; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Nadine Andrieu Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 2.375