CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home »

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 12 No. 8
The Cummings/Olopade Article Reviewed 

Predisposition Testing for Inherited Breast Cancer

By

Judy E. Garber, MD, MPH, Harvard Medical School, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts

| August 1, 1998

Physicians and patients have become increasingly aware that women with a personal or family history of early-onset breast and/or ovarian cancer have a significant probability of carrying an altered breast cancer susceptibility gene. The elegant work of many groups, nicely summarized in the article by Ms. Cummings and Dr. Olopade, has begun to provide more specific information for patients and physicians facing medical decisions, such as those illustrated in the cases provided in the article.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has mandated that medical oncologists be able to recognize inherited cancer syndromes and discuss with patients the advantages and disadvantages of genetic testing, based on their individual circumstances. The article provides much information that should prove useful to oncologists who want to incorporate inherited breast and ovarian cancer and genetic testing issues into patient care--whether they provide the testing and counseling themselves or refer patients to other professionals for those services.

Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility may help specify cancer risk assessment for unaffected individuals. Cancer patients and survivors face a complementary set of issues, which may be more often encountered by medical oncologists.

Importance of Risk Assessment

The high cost of the resources currently necessary to provide genetic testing--the actual tests and the hours of counselor/physician time--have made it reasonable for most programs to offer testing only to individuals who have a sufficient prior probability of carrying a mutation, which is often set at about 10%. This probability is estimated from pedigrees by considering the pattern of breast and ovarian cancers in a family, ages at diagnosis, and ethnic derivation. In addition to the approaches described by Cummings and Olopade, newer models for the personal computer developed at Myriad Genetics or by Berry and colleagues may further facilitate risk assessment for complex families by providing more accurate estimates of their chances of carrying alterations in specific susceptibility genes.[1,2]

Pedigree interpretation and model estimation are the first links in the chain of probabilistic statements that comprise cancer risk estimation. Despite the mathematical complexities, all of the conditional statements in risk estimation--the chance that a particular cancer or second malignancy will occur by a certain age, the chance that a deleterious mutation informing that risk will be found, and, ultimately, the chance that specific interventions will alter these risks--are not fundamentally different from the probabilistic information contained in staging algorithms or treatment trial results. They should, therefore, easily become familiar territory for oncologists.

Communication of these complex statements and the issues that they raise for self-image, family communication, and insurance or employment discrimination is a difficult task. Thus, statements by official bodies recommend the involvement of a trained genetic counselor or nurse geneticist as a required component of genetic testing.[3]

As is true for cancer treatment, cancer risk analysis is only as good as the data on which it is based. Medical documentation of key cancer diagnoses in relatives permits risk assessments to be as accurate as possible. Results of genetic tests may assist in cancer risk estimation. If a genetic test result is not clearly positive, assessment of the risk of cancer reverts to estimation based on family history, the accuracy of which may be especially important if a patient plans prophylactic surgery.

For example, a 35-year-old woman with early-stage breast cancer who is contemplating prophylactic oophorectomy who reports that her mother and sister were diagnosed with breast and ovarian cancer, respectively, by 40 years old has a very high likelihood of carrying a hereditary predisposition, even if BRCA1 and BRCA2 analyses are negative. However, if the mother really developed breast cancer at age 70 and the sister actually had ovarian cysts, the negative test is much more reassuring and prophylactic oophorectomy would not be advised or encouraged.

Small families pose a special challenge since individuals may harbor a germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation without a remarkable family cancer history, as when an altered gene has been transmitted through the paternal lineage. The chance that a woman with breast cancer diagnosed before age 30 will have a germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation exceeds 10%, even if she has no other affected relatives, and would surpass 20% if she were of Ashkenazi Jewish descent.[4,5] Eventually, rapid inexpensive genetic analysis will replace all of the risk models.

The current availability of genetic testing has not resulted in uniformly high demand for its use, even among cancer patients. There have been serious concerns about insurance discrimination, personal coping, and familial relationships. Ultimately, an individual may decide to learn her genetic status if the information would influence medical decisions about cancer treatment, surveillance, or prevention; provide risk information to other family members; or just for the sake of knowing about her risk or the "reason" for her own cancer (see the authors’ Table 7).

Should Inherited Breast Cancers Be Managed Differently?

Whether the management of inherited cancers should differ from that of the more common sporadic tumors remains to be determined. Comparison of the pathologic features of BRCA1- and BRCA2-related breast cancers with those of sporadic controls have revealed that high nuclear grade and medullary subtype--features generally more common in younger women--occur more frequently among BRCA1-related tumors.[6] Population-based series comparing survival in patients with hereditary vs sporadic breast cancers have generally shown no significant differences, stage for stage.[7,8]

The interaction of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene products with proteins involved in the repair of radiation-induced DNA errors have raised concerns that adjuvant radiation therapy may increase the rates of local recurrence, radiation-induced second primary cancers, or treatment-related complications in mutation carriers.[9] Since early data do not confirm increased radiation-related toxicities in women with inherited breast cancer, these concerns remain hypothetical at present.[10,11] Nevertheless, physicians may want to discuss these issues, as well as the increased rate of contralateral breast cancers in mutation carriers, when making primary therapy recommendations at diagnosis. No data regarding differential efficacy of chemotherapy or tamoxifen(Drug information on tamoxifen) (Nolvadex) in inherited vs sporadic breast cancers have yet appeared.

Breast or Ovarian Cancer Survivors

Given the limitations of current analytic technologies, a woman who has survived breast or ovarian cancer is often the family member whose genetic test results would be most informative for other relatives. In our experience, cancer survivors are often less surprised to learn of positive results and have more difficulty coping with negative results. The existence of other genes that confer breast cancer susceptibility leaves open the possibility that their cancer has an inherited component, and does not completely eliminate the possibility that the survivor has passed on an increased risk to her offspring.

Contrary to expectation, women found to carry a predisposing mutation may find themselves somewhat isolated within their families if, despite earlier conversations, relatives do not eagerly opt for testing. Certainly, many families are supportive and open with each other, but others bring their particular difficulties in communication to the issues raised by testing. Individuals who provide psychosocial and emotional support services for patients at high risk of developing cancer may benefit from some targeted education about the issues raised by this emerging approach to cancer risk assessment.

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.



Shelly Cummings, MS, and Olufunmilayo Olopade, MD


1. Frank TS, Manley S, Thomas A, et al: Sequence analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2: Correlation of mutations with family history and ovarian cancer risk. J Clin Oncol 61:2417-2425, 1998.

2. Parmigiani G, Berry DA, Aguilar O: Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 62:145-158, 1998.

3. Statement of the American Societ of Clinical Oncology: Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 14(5):1730-1736, 1996.

4. Fitzgerald MG, MacDonald DJ, Krainer M, et al. Germ-line BRCA1 mutations in Jewish and non-Jewish women with early onset breast cancer. N Engl J Med 334:143-149, 1996.

5. Rao BB, Boyd AA, Volick K, et al: Ashkenazi Jewish population frequencies for common mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Nat Genet 14:185-187, 1996.

6. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium: Pathology of familial breast cancer: Differences between breast cancers in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and sporadic cases. Lancet 349:1505-1510, 1997.

7. Verhoog L, Brekelmans C, Seynaeve C, et al: Survival and tumor characteristics of breast cancer patients with germline mutations of BRCA1. Lancet 351:316-321, 1998.

8. Johannasson OT, Ranstam J, Borg A, et al: Survival of BRCA1 breast and ovarian cancer patients: A population-based study from southern Sweden. J Clin Oncol 16: 397-404, 1998.

9. Scully R, Chen J, Plug A, et al: Association of BRCA1 with Rad51 in mitotic and meiotic cells. Cell 88:265-275, 1997.

10. Chabner E, Nixon A, Gelman R, et al: Family history and treatment outcome in young women after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for early stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2045-1051, 1998.

11. Robson ME, Gilewski T, Hass B, et al: BRCA-associated breast cancer in young Jewish women. J Clin Oncol 61:1642-1649, 1998


 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
IMAGE IQ

A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
Brian Morse, MD1 , June 10, 2013

A 48-year-old female presents with complaints of irregular vaginal bleeding and postcoital bleeding. Images from a PET/CT and pelvis MRI reveal characteristic findings. What is your diagnosis?

More Image IQs 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Soluble HER2 Levels Prognostic Factor in HER2+ Breast Cancer
  • ASCO: PD-L1 Antibody Elicits Durable Response in RCC
  • RECORD-3: Sunitinib Still Standard First-Line Treatment in Metastatic RCC
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • ASCO: Vinegar Screening Significantly Reduces Cervical Cancer Mortality
  • ASCO: Sulforaphane in Prostate Cancer Found Worthy of Further Investigation
  • Study: Recurrent Heartburn Ups Risk for Throat Cancer
  • Radiation-Induced Enteritis: Incidence, Mechanisms, and Management
  • HER2-Directed Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer
  • Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation: The Current State of Our Knowledge
  • It’s Time for Clinicians to Reconsider Their Proscription Against the Use of Soyfoods by Breast Cancer Patients
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter



CancerNetwork on Facebook

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy