Melissa Pilewskie1, Emily C Zabor2, Elizabeth Gilbert3, Michelle Stempel3, Oriana Petruolo3, Debra Mangino3, Mark Robson4, Maxine S Jochelson5. 1. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA. pilewskm@mskcc.org. 2. Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 4. Breast Medicine Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: BRCA mutation carriers have an elevated lifetime breast cancer risk and remain at risk for interval cancer development. We sought to compare BRCA mutation carriers with screen-detected versus interval breast cancers. METHODS: Women with a known BRCA mutation prior to a breast cancer diagnosis were identified. Clinical and pathologic factors, and imaging within 18 months of diagnosis were compared among screen-detected versus interval cancers. Interval cancers were those detected by physical exam among women undergoing regular screening. RESULTS: Of 124 breast cancers, 92 were screen and 22 clinically detected, of which 11 were interval cancers among regular screeners, and 10 were incidentally found on prophylactic mastectomy. Women with interval cancers were younger, had lower body mass indexes, and were more likely to be Black than those with screen-detected cancers (p < 0.05). Interval cancers were all invasive, larger, more likely to be node positive, and more likely to require axillary lymph node dissection and chemotherapy (p < 0.05). No significant differences were seen by BRCA mutation, mammographic density, MRI background parenchymal enhancement, tumor grade, or receptor status between cohorts. Women screened with both mammogram and MRI had significantly lower proportions of interval cancers compared to women screened with only mammogram or MRI alone (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers have worse clinicopathologic features than screen-detected tumors, and require more-aggressive medical and surgical therapy. Imaging with mammogram and MRI is associated with lower interval cancer development and should be utilized among this high-risk population.
BACKGROUND:BRCA mutation carriers have an elevated lifetime breast cancer risk and remain at risk for interval cancer development. We sought to compare BRCA mutation carriers with screen-detected versus interval breast cancers. METHODS:Women with a known BRCA mutation prior to a breast cancer diagnosis were identified. Clinical and pathologic factors, and imaging within 18 months of diagnosis were compared among screen-detected versus interval cancers. Interval cancers were those detected by physical exam among women undergoing regular screening. RESULTS: Of 124 breast cancers, 92 were screen and 22 clinically detected, of which 11 were interval cancers among regular screeners, and 10 were incidentally found on prophylactic mastectomy. Women with interval cancers were younger, had lower body mass indexes, and were more likely to be Black than those with screen-detected cancers (p < 0.05). Interval cancers were all invasive, larger, more likely to be node positive, and more likely to require axillary lymph node dissection and chemotherapy (p < 0.05). No significant differences were seen by BRCA mutation, mammographic density, MRI background parenchymal enhancement, tumor grade, or receptor status between cohorts. Women screened with both mammogram and MRI had significantly lower proportions of interval cancers compared to women screened with only mammogram or MRI alone (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers have worse clinicopathologic features than screen-detected tumors, and require more-aggressive medical and surgical therapy. Imaging with mammogram and MRI is associated with lower interval cancer development and should be utilized among this high-risk population.
Entities:
Keywords:
BRCA; Interval breast cancer; Mutation carriers; Screen-detected breast cancer
Authors: P A van den Brandt; D Spiegelman; S S Yaun; H O Adami; L Beeson; A R Folsom; G Fraser; R A Goldbohm; S Graham; L Kushi; J R Marshall; A B Miller; T Rohan; S A Smith-Warner; F E Speizer; W C Willett; A Wolk; D J Hunter Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2000-09-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: P L Porter; A Y El-Bastawissi; M T Mandelson; M G Lin; N Khalid; E A Watney; L Cousens; D White; S Taplin; E White Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: H Wang; N Bjurstam; H Bjørndal; A Braaten; L Eriksen; P Skaane; B Vitak; S Hofvind; S Ø Thoresen Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: F D Gilliland; N Joste; P M Stauber; W C Hunt; R Rosenberg; G Redlich; C R Key Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-05-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Karin Collett; Ingunn M Stefansson; Johan Eide; Audun Braaten; Hege Wang; Geir Egil Eide; Steinar Ø Thoresen; William D Foulkes; Lars A Akslen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Ian K Komenaka; Beth-Ann Ditkoff; Kathie-Ann Joseph; Donna Russo; Prakash Gorroochurn; Marie Ward; Elizabeth Horowitz; Mahmoud B El-Tamer; Freya R Schnabel Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ellen Warner; Donald B Plewes; Kimberley A Hill; Petrina A Causer; Judit T Zubovits; Roberta A Jong; Margaret R Cutrara; Gerrit DeBoer; Martin J Yaffe; Sandra J Messner; Wendy S Meschino; Cameron A Piron; Steven A Narod Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Veronica L Irvin; Zhenzhen Zhang; Michael S Simon; Rowan T Chlebowski; Shiuh-Wen Luoh; Aladdin H Shadyab; Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Fred K Tabung; Lihong Qi; Marcia L Stefanick; Pepper Schedin; Sonali Jindal Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-06-01