Limited family structure and BRCA gene mutation status in single cases of breast cancer.

CONTEXT An autosomal dominant pattern of hereditary breast cancer may be masked by small family size or transmission through males given sex-limited expression. OBJECTIVE To determine if BRCA gene mutations are more prevalent among single cases of early onset breast cancer in families with limited vs adequate family structure than would be predicted by currently available probability models. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 1543 women seen at US high-risk clinics for genetic cancer risk assessment and BRCA gene testing were enrolled in a prospective registry study between April 1997 and February 2007. Three hundred six of these women had breast cancer before age 50 years and no first- or second-degree relatives with breast or ovarian cancers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE The main outcome measure was whether family structure, assessed from multigenerational pedigrees, predicts BRCA gene mutation status. Limited family structure was defined as fewer than 2 first- or second-degree female relatives surviving beyond age 45 years in either lineage. Family structure effect and mutation probability by the Couch, Myriad, and BRCAPRO models were assessed with stepwise multiple logistic regression. Model sensitivity and specificity were determined and receiver operating characteristic curves were generated. RESULTS Family structure was limited in 153 cases (50%). BRCA gene mutations were detected in 13.7% of participants with limited vs 5.2% with adequate family structure. Family structure was a significant predictor of mutation status (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-6.73; P = .02). Although none of the models performed well, receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that modification of BRCAPRO output by a corrective probability index accounting for family structure was the most accurate BRCA gene mutation status predictor (area under the curve, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.81; P<.001) for single cases of breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS Family structure can affect the accuracy of mutation probability models. Genetic testing guidelines may need to be more inclusive for single cases of breast cancer when the family structure is limited and probability models need to be recreated using limited family history as an actual variable.

[1]  P. Hartge,et al.  The risk of cancer associated with specific mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 among Ashkenazi Jews. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  J. Weitzel,et al.  Effect of genetic cancer risk assessment on surgical decisions at breast cancer diagnosis. , 2003, Archives of surgery.

[3]  J. Satagopan,et al.  Ovarian cancer risk in Ashkenazi Jewish carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. , 2002, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[4]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[5]  Adopted on March American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, Adopted on February 20, 1996. , 1996, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  M. Skolnick,et al.  Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology : Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Commentaries , 1996 .

[8]  S. Seal,et al.  BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequency in women evaluated in a breast cancer risk evaluation clinic. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  Sean V Tavtigian,et al.  Clinical characteristics of individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: analysis of 10,000 individuals. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  T. Sellers,et al.  Efficacy of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a personal and family history of breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination , 2004 .

[12]  G. Mills,et al.  Assessing BRCA carrier probabilities in extended families. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  O. Olopade,et al.  The risk of ovarian cancer after breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. , 2005, Gynecologic oncology.

[14]  C. Magnant,et al.  Impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 counseling and testing on newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  M. King,et al.  Inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer. , 1994, American journal of human genetics.

[16]  D. Berry,et al.  Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 1998, American journal of human genetics.

[17]  C B Begg,et al.  The lifetime risks of breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. , 2001, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[18]  J. Hopper,et al.  Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. , 2003, American journal of human genetics.

[19]  N. Rahman,et al.  Update on the Manchester Scoring System for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing , 2005, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[20]  Susan L Neuhausen,et al.  Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  J. Andersen,et al.  Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy improves the outcome of selected patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer. , 2000, American journal of surgery.

[22]  J. Elmore,et al.  Efficacy of prophylactic mastectomy in women with unilateral breast cancer: a cancer research network project. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  N E Day,et al.  A comprehensive model for familial breast cancer incorporating BRCA1, BRCA2 and other genes , 2002, British Journal of Cancer.

[24]  J. Weitzel Genetic cancer risk assessment , 1999, Cancer.

[25]  N. Rahman,et al.  A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO , 2004, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[26]  D. Easton,et al.  BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation predictions using the BOADICEA and BRCAPRO models and penetrance estimation in high-risk French-Canadian families , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[27]  J Chang-Claude,et al.  Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. , 1998, American journal of human genetics.

[28]  R. Tollenaar,et al.  MRI screening for breast cancer in women with high familial and genetic risk: First results of the Dutch MRI screening study (MRISC). , 2003 .

[29]  S. Schnitt,et al.  Prevalence of BRCA1 mutations in triple negative breast cancer (BC). , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  B. Mukesh,et al.  Optimal selection of individuals for BRCA mutation testing: a comparison of available methods. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  S. C. Lee,et al.  The Importance of Paternal Family History in Hereditary Breast Cancer Is Underappreciated by Health Care Professionals , 2003, Oncology.

[32]  Ellen Warner,et al.  Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination , 2004, JAMA.

[33]  F. Couch,et al.  BRCA1 mutations in women attending clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  U. P. S. T. Force Genetic Risk Assessment and BRCA Mutation Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility: Recommendation Statement , 2005, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[35]  Ellen Warner,et al.  Contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[36]  B. Weber,et al.  Application of breast cancer risk prediction models in clinical practice. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[37]  Susan L Neuhausen,et al.  Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[38]  D. Easton,et al.  The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer , 2004, British Journal of Cancer.