scholarly journals Comparison of risk assessment models of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier in patients with breast cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 68-74
Author(s):  
L. A. Rybchenko ◽  
A. M. Bychkova ◽  
G. V. Skyban ◽  
S. V. Klymenko
2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10034-10034
Author(s):  
S. Panchal ◽  
M. Ennis ◽  
H. Yee ◽  
V. Contiga ◽  
L. J. Bordeleau

10034 Background: A number of models of varying complexity are available to calculate the risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation causing hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. A >10% risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is commonly used to establish testing eligibility in North America (testing threshold). We have compared these risk assessment models to ascertain their utility in patients from a large breast cancer program in our tertiary referral center. Methods: Risk assessment calculations were performed using the BRCAPRO, Myriad, Manchester, and UPennII models for all new probands referred to our clinic at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto (Canada), between May and October 2005. Individuals with a known familial mutation were excluded. Pearson correlation coefficients and pairwise scatterplots were performed for each pair of models. Regression analyses were developed to explore how well the BRCAPRO model can be predicted by other models. Results: 103 probands were included in our analyses (97% female, mean age: 50 yrs, 22% of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, 52.4% affected with breast cancer, 67% with ≥ one 1st degree relative affected with breast or ovarian cancer). The proportion of probands meeting the testing threshold based on each model was: BRCAPRO (34.0%), Myriad (33.0%), Manchester (55.3%), and UPennII (46.6%). Correlations calculated for each pair of models were large (range: 0.48–0.86). In comparing two of the most clinically relevant models (BRCAPRO and UPennII), the proportion of probands meeting the testing threshold was significantly higher using the UPennII model (p=0.0036). Between these two models, a higher correlation was observed for BRCA1 than for BRCA2 (R=0.76, R=0.58, respectively). The UPennII model was the strongest univariate predictor of the BRCAPRO results. Conclusions: All risk assessment models predicted a substantial proportion of patients referred to our clinic to be eligible for testing (≥ 33% of probands). A significantly higher proportion of probands were eligible for testing when using the UPennII model compared to the BRCAPRO model. This difference is in part due to the differential inclusion of prostate/pancreatic cancers and of third degree relatives with cancer in these models. An exploration of the sensitivity and specificity of these models will be presented. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. 604-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seema Panchal ◽  
Orli Shachar ◽  
Frances O'Malley ◽  
Pavel Crystal ◽  
Jaime Escallon ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1532-1532
Author(s):  
L. Chen ◽  
B. Crawford ◽  
J. McLennan ◽  
E. S. Hwang ◽  
R. Foster ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (23) ◽  
pp. 4322-4328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth N. Peshkin ◽  
Claudine Isaacs ◽  
Clinton Finch ◽  
Sheryl Kent ◽  
Marc D. Schwartz

Purpose: To assess physician recommendations about the use of tamoxifen in premenopausal BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Methods: We mailed surveys to a stratified random sample of 1,286 physicians selected from the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium mailing list. Eligible participants were physicians whose practice consisted of ≥ 10% breast cancer patients. Participants were asked to complete a three-part, 10-minute questionnaire. Demographics and responses to hypothetical patient vignettes were analyzed. Results: Of potentially eligible participants, 27% responded to the survey, and 260 participants were included in the final analysis. Physicians did not distinguish between BRCA1 and BRCA2 status in making recommendations about tamoxifen to breast cancer patients; however, in an unaffected woman, they were more likely to recommend tamoxifen to a BRCA2 mutation carrier than to a BRCA1 mutation carrier (73% v 57%; P < .0001). In newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, physicians were much more likely to recommend tamoxifen to an estrogen receptor (ER)–positive mutation carrier versus an ER-negative carrier (94% v 27%; P < .0001). When the mutation carrier was diagnosed 10 years ago, physicians were still much more likely to recommend tamoxifen if the tumor was ER-positive versus ER-negative (79% v 35%; P < .0001). Conclusion: Physicians’ recommendations about tamoxifen use in mutation carriers with a history of breast cancer seem to be heavily dependent on ER status. This finding suggests that among mutation carriers, physicians are influenced by adjuvant treatment guidelines more so than the potential role that tamoxifen might play in the reduction of risk for contralateral breast cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 4557-4563
Author(s):  
EFRAT SCHWARZ KENAN ◽  
MICHAEL FRIGER ◽  
DAPHNA SHOCHAT-BIGON ◽  
HAGIT SCHAYEK ◽  
RINAT BERNSTEIN-MOLHO ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 132 (2) ◽  
pp. 669-673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiri Bernholtz ◽  
Yael Laitman ◽  
Bella Kaufman ◽  
Shnai Shimon-Paluch ◽  
Eitan Friedman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document