Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Management of Genetic Syndromes Predisposing to Gynecologic Cancers

  • Gynecologic Cancers (RJ Morgan, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Women with personal and family histories consistent with gynecologic cancer-associated hereditary cancer susceptibility disorders should be referred for genetic risk assessment and counseling. Genetic counseling facilitates informed medical decision making regarding genetic testing, screening, and treatment, including chemoprevention and risk-reducing surgery. Because of limitations of ovarian cancer screening, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer-affected women are offered risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) between ages 35 and 40 years, or when childbearing is complete. Women with documented Lynch syndrome, associated with mutations in mismatch repair genes, should be screened at a young age and provided prevention options, including consideration of risk-reducing total abdominal hysterectomy and BSO, as well as intensive gastrointestinal screening. Clinicians caring for high-risk women must consider the potential adverse ethical, legal, and social issues associated with hereditary cancer risk assessment and testing. Additionally, at-risk family members should be alerted to their cancer risks, as well as the availability of risk assessment, counseling, and treatment services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Szabo CI, King MC. Population genetics of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet. 1997;60(5):1013–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(5):355–61.

  3. Tung N. Management of women with BRCA mutations: a 41-year-old woman with a BRCA mutation and a recent history of breast cancer. JAMA. 2011;305(21):2211–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S, Risch HA, Eyfjord JE, Hopper JL, Loman N, Olsson H, Johannsson O, Borg A, 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. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72(5):1117–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen S, Parmigiani G. Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(11):1329–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Panchal S, Bordeleau L, Poll A, Llacuachaqui M, Shachar O, Ainsworth P, Armel S, Eisen A, Sun P, Narod SA. Does family history predict the age at onset of new breast cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation-positive families? Clin Genet. 2010;77(3):273–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goodwin PJ, Phillips KA, West DW, Ennis M, Hopper JL, John EM, O'Malley FP, Milne RL, Andrulis IL, Friedlander ML, et al. Breast cancer prognosis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: an International Prospective Breast Cancer Family Registry population-based cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(1):19–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Weissman SM, Weiss SM, Newlin AC. Genetic testing by cancer site: ovary. Cancer J. 2012;18(4):320–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Petrucelli N, Daly MB, Feldman GL. BRCA1 and BRCA2 Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. In: Pagon RABT, Dolan CR, et al., editors. GeneReviews™ [Internet], 2010/03/20 edn. Seattle (WA): University of Washington; 1993, 1998 Sep 4 [Updated 2011 Jan 20].

  10. Metcalfe K, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, Tung N, Olivotto I, Warner E, Olopade OI, Eisen A, Weber B, McLennan J, et al. Contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(12):2328–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Malone KE, Begg CB, Haile RW, Borg A, Concannon P, Tellhed L, Xue S, Teraoka S, Bernstein L, Capanu M, et al. Population-based study of the risk of second primary contralateral breast cancer associated with carrying a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(14):2404–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Graeser MK, Engel C, Rhiem K, Gadzicki D, Bick U, Kast K, Froster UG, Schlehe B, Bechtold A, Arnold N, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(35):5887–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hampel H, de la Chapelle A. The search for unaffected individuals with Lynch syndrome: do the ends justify the means? Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011;4(1):1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vasen HF. Clinical diagnosis and management of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(21 Suppl):81S–92S.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Resnick KE, Hampel H, Fishel R, Cohn DE. Current and emerging trends in Lynch syndrome identification in women with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(1):128–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed individuals with colorectal cancer aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome in relatives. Genet Med. 2009;11(1):35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hendriks YM, Wagner A, Morreau H, Menko F, Stormorken A, Quehenberger F, Sandkuijl L, Moller P, Genuardi M, Van Houwelingen H, et al. Cancer risk in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer due to MSH6 mutations: impact on counseling and surveillance. Gastroenterology. 2004;127(1):17–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kohlmann W, Gruber SB. Lynch Syndrome. In: Pagon RA BT, Dolan CR, et al., editors. GeneReviews™ [Internet] Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993. Seattle; 2004 Feb 5 [Updated 2012 Sep 20].

  19. Struewing JP, Hartge P, Wacholder S, Baker SM, Berlin M, McAdams M, Timmerman MM, Brody LC, Tucker MA. The risk of cancer associated with specific mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 among Ashkenazi Jews. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(20):1401–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Venkitaraman AR. Cancer susceptibility and the functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Cell. 2002;108(2):171–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tutt A, Ashworth A. The relationship between the roles of BRCA genes in DNA repair and cancer predisposition. Trends Mol Med. 2002;8(12):571–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bougie O, Weberpals JI. Clinical Considerations of BRCA1- and BRCA2-Mutation Carriers: A Review. Int J Surg Oncol. 2011;2011:374012.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Chung DC, Rustgi AK. The hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome: genetics and clinical implications. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(7):560–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. [http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/colorectal_screening.pdf] [http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/genetics_screening.pdf]

  25. Domchek SM, Eisen A, Calzone K, Stopfer J, Blackwood A, Weber BL. Application of breast cancer risk prediction models in clinical practice. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(4):593–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Amir E, Freedman OC, Seruga B, Evans DG. Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(10):680–91. This is an excellent review of models for estimating the probability of an individual carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and models for estimating the risk of developing breast cancer.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vasen HF, Watson P, Mecklin JP, Lynch HT. New clinical criteria for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome) proposed by the International Collaborative group on HNPCC. Gastroenterology. 1999;116(6):1453–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Umar A, Boland CR, Terdiman JP, Syngal S, de la Chapelle A, Ruschoff J, Fishel R, Lindor NM, Burgart LJ, Hamelin R, et al. Revised Bethesda Guidelines for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) and microsatellite instability. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(4):261–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Green RC, Parfrey PS, Woods MO, Younghusband HB. Prediction of Lynch syndrome in consecutive patients with colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(5):331–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mercado RC, Hampel H, Kastrinos F, Steyerberg E, Balmana J, Stoffel E, Cohn DE, Backes FJ, Hopper JL, Jenkins MA, et al. Performance of PREMM(1,2,6), MMRpredict, and MMRpro in detecting Lynch syndrome among endometrial cancer cases. Genet Med. 2012;14(7):670–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mavaddat N, Rebbeck TR, Lakhani SR, Easton DF, Antoniou AC. Incorporating tumour pathology information into breast cancer risk prediction algorithms. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12(3):R28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Evans DG, Lalloo F, Cramer A, Jones EA, Knox F, Amir E, Howell A. Addition of pathology and biomarker information significantly improves the performance of the Manchester scoring system for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. J Med Genet. 2009;46(12):811–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Kwon JS, Gutierrez-Barrera AM, Young D, Sun CC, Daniels MS, Lu KH, Arun B. Expanding the criteria for BRCA mutation testing in breast cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(27):4214–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Brekelmans CT, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Seynaeve C, vd Ouweland A, Menke-Pluymers MB, Bartels CC, Kriege M, van Geel AN, Burger CW, Eggermont AM, et al. Tumour characteristics, survival and prognostic factors of hereditary breast cancer from BRCA2-, BRCA1- and non-BRCA1/2 families as compared to sporadic breast cancer cases. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(5):867–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Alsop K, Fereday S, Meldrum C, de Fazio A, Emmanuel C, George J, Dobrovic A, Birrer MJ, Webb PM, Stewart C, et al. BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):2654–63. This work correlated BRCA mutation rates with serous histology and demonstrated that BRCA mutation status (germline and somatic) influences treatment response and survival among women with nonmucinous ovarian carcinoma.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Palomaki GE, McClain MR, Melillo S, Hampel HL, Thibodeau SN. EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome. Genet Med. 2009;11(1):42–65. This important paper summarizes the evidence-based review process done by the independent Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group that resulted in a recommendation to offer a series of genetic tests for Lynch syndrome to all individuals with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer, to reduce morbidity and mortality in family members.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bellcross CA, Bedrosian SR, Daniels E, Duquette D, Hampel H, Jasperson K, Joseph DA, Kaye C, Lubin I, Meyer LJ, et al. Implementing screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer: summary of a public health/clinical collaborative meeting. Genet Med. 2012;14(1):152–62. In follow up to [Palomaki] authors explore issues surrounding implementation of the EGAPP recommendation for universal Lynch syndrome testing. This paper acknowledged that effective implementation of this strategy will require multilevel and multidisciplinary approaches built on public health and clinical partnerships.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Robson ME, Storm CD, Weitzel J, Wollins DS, Offit K. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(5):893–901. This statement, by members of American Society of Clinical Oncology’s (ASCO's) Cancer Prevention and Ethics Committees, is an update of previous ASCO genetic testing policy statements. It reviews progress in priority areas identified previously and addresses how new developments, including the availability of genetic tests for low-penetrance genetic variants and direct-to-consumer genetic testing, impact the practice of oncology and preventive medicine.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Epplein M, Koon KP, Ramsey SD, Potter JD. Genetic services for familial cancer patients: a follow-up survey of National Cancer Institute Cancer Centers. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(21):4713–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cass I, Baldwin RL, Varkey T, Moslehi R, Narod SA, Karlan BY. Improved survival in women with BRCA-associated ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2003;97(9):2187–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Boyd J, Sonoda Y, Federici MG, Bogomolniy F, Rhei E, Maresco DL, Saigo PE, Almadrones LA, Barakat RR, Brown CL, et al. Clinicopathologic features of BRCA-linked and sporadic ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2000;283(17):2260–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Chetrit A, Hirsh-Yechezkel G, Ben-David Y, Lubin F, Friedman E, Sadetzki S. Effect of BRCA1/2 mutations on long-term survival of patients with invasive ovarian cancer: the national Israeli study of ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(1):20–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Tan DS, Rothermundt C, Thomas K, Bancroft E, Eeles R, Shanley S, Ardern-Jones A, Norman A, Kaye SB, Gore ME. "BRCAness" syndrome in ovarian cancer: a case–control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(34):5530–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ben David Y, Chetrit A, Hirsh-Yechezkel G, Friedman E, Beck BD, Beller U, Ben-Baruch G, Fishman A, Levavi H, Lubin F, et al. Effect of BRCA mutations on the length of survival in epithelial ovarian tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(2):463–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Popat S, Hubner R, Houlston RS. Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(3):609–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Sinicrope FA, Sargent DJ. Molecular pathways: microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: prognostic, predictive, and therapeutic implications. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(6):1506–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Scheuer L, Kauff N, Robson M, Kelly B, Barakat R, Satagopan J, Ellis N, Hensley M, Boyd J, Borgen P, et al. Outcome of preventive surgery and screening for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(5):1260–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Komenaka IK, Ditkoff BA, Joseph KA, Russo D, Gorroochurn P, Ward M, Horowitz E, El-Tamer MB, Schnabel FR. The development of interval breast malignancies in patients with BRCA mutations. Cancer. 2004;100(10):2079–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Pijpe A, Andrieu N, Easton DF, Kesminiene A, Cardis E, Nogues C, Gauthier-Villars M, Lasset C, Fricker JP, Peock S, et al. Exposure to diagnostic radiation and risk of breast cancer among carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations: retrospective cohort study (GENE-RAD-RISK). BMJ. 2012;345:e5660. This study examined the impact of diagnostic radiation, including mammography, before age 30 years on breast cancer risk among those with BRCA mutations, revealing exposure to diagnostic radiation before the age of 30 was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. The results of this study support the use of non-ionizing radiation imaging modalities, i.e., magnetic resonance imaging, as the main tool for surveillance in young HBOC-affected women.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, Besnard PE, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, Manoliu RA, Kok T, Peterse H, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(5):427–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Warner E, Messersmith H, Causer P, Eisen A, Shumak R, Plewes D. Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(9):671–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, Verdecchia A, Santaquilani M, Musumeci R, Trecate G, Manoukian S, Morassut S, de Giacomi C, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology. 2007;242(3):698–715.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Daniel BL, Ikeda DM, Stockdale FE, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 2006;295(20):2374–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Goff BA, Mandel LS, Melancon CH, Muntz HG. Frequency of symptoms of ovarian cancer in women presenting to primary care clinics. JAMA. 2004;291(22):2705–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Friedman GD, Skilling JS, Udaltsova NV, Smith LH. Early symptoms of ovarian cancer: a case–control study without recall bias. Fam Pract. 2005;22(5):548–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hermsen BB, Olivier RI, Verheijen RH, van Beurden M, de Hullu JA, Massuger LF, Burger CW, Brekelmans CT, Mourits MJ, de Bock GH, et al. No efficacy of annual gynaecological screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers; an observational follow-up study. Br J Cancer. 2007;96(9):1335–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Olivier RI, Lubsen-Brandsma MA, Verhoef S, van Beurden M. CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound monitoring in high-risk women cannot prevent the diagnosis of advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;100(1):20–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Gaarenstroom KN, van der Hiel B, Tollenaar RA, Vink GR, Jansen FW, van Asperen CJ, Kenter GG. Efficacy of screening women at high risk of hereditary ovarian cancer: results of an 11-year cohort study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16 Suppl 1:54–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Oei AL, Massuger LF, Bulten J, Ligtenberg MJ, Hoogerbrugge N, de Hullu JA. Surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary ovarian cancer is inefficient. Br J Cancer. 2006;94(6):814–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Iodice S, Barile M, Rotmensz N, Feroce I, Bonanni B, Radice P, Bernard L, Maisonneuve P, Gandini S. Oral contraceptive use and breast or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2 carriers: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(12):2275–84. This meta-analysis of 2855 breast cancer cases and 1503 ovarian cancer cases reported the benefit of oral contraceptive use in hereditary ovarian cancer, with a summary relative risk for ovarian cancer of 0.5 found for oral contraceptive users compared with non-users, and no significant increased risk of breast cancer found (increased risk of breast cancer with oral contraceptive with formulations made prior to 1975 has been found, but not with more recent formulations). Thus previously-reported benefits of oral contraceptive use in ovarian cancer without regard to BRCA1/2 carrier status have shown benefit specifically in BRCA1/2 carriers in this study.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Narod SA, Risch H, Moslehi R, Dorum A, Neuhausen S, Olsson H, Provencher D, Radice P, Evans G, Bishop S, et al. Oral contraceptives and the risk of hereditary ovarian cancer. Hereditary Ovarian Cancer Clinical Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(7):424–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Narod SA, Dube MP, Klijn J, Lubinski J, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, Provencher D, Heimdal K, Moller P, Robson M, et al. Oral contraceptives and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(23):1773–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Jernstrom H, Loman N, Johannsson OT, Borg A, Olsson H. Impact of teenage oral contraceptive use in a population-based series of early-onset breast cancer cases who have undergone BRCA mutation testing. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(15):2312–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Gronwald J, Byrski T, Huzarski T, Cybulski C, Sun P, Tulman A, Narod SA, Lubinski J. Influence of selected lifestyle factors on breast and ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers from Poland. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(2):105–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Milne RL, Knight JA, John EM, Dite GS, Balbuena R, Ziogas A, Andrulis IL, West DW, Li FP, Southey MC, et al. Oral contraceptive use and risk of early-onset breast cancer in carriers and noncarriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(2):350–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Rebbeck TR, Kauff ND, Domchek SM. Meta-analysis of risk reduction estimates associated with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(2):80–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Gien LT, Mackay HJ. The Emerging Role of PARP Inhibitors in the Treatment of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. J Oncol. 2010;2010:151750.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Fong PC, Boss DS, Yap TA, Tutt A, Wu P, Mergui-Roelvink M, Mortimer P, Swaisland H, Lau A, O'Connor MJ, et al. Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in tumors from BRCA mutation carriers. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(2):123–34. This study summarizes the results of a phase I trial of a poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]–ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib (AZD2281), in ovarian, breast, and prostate cancer patients, enriched for those with BRCA1 or BRC2 mutations. It found acceptable levels of toxicity and selective anti-tumor response in those with BRCA1/2 mutations. These early results were encouraging and subsequent phase II trials in advanced breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 carriers were undertaken.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Fong PC, Yap TA, Boss DS, Carden CP, Mergui-Roelvink M, Gourley C, De Greve J, Lubinski J, Shanley S, Messiou C, et al. Poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibition: frequent durable responses in BRCA carrier ovarian cancer correlating with platinum-free interval. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(15):2512–9. This expansion trial to [Fong 68], reported the results of a study of olaparib in ovarian cancer patients with documented or strongly suspected BRCA1/2 mutations. Complete or partial response to the drug was found in 40% of the 50 patients treated, and 46% of patients showed clinical benefit, with response rate correlated with platinum sensitivity. While these early results of the drug were encouraging, a press release by AstraZeneca in 2011 (http://www.astrazeneca.com/Media/Press-releases/Article/20111220-az-updates-olaparib-TC5214-development) indicated that phase III trials in maintenance treatment of serous ovarian cancer would not be undertaken due to interim analysis of phase II results suggesting that the previously reported progression-free survival benefit was not likely to translate into improved overall survival.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Edwards SL, Brough R, Lord CJ, Natrajan R, Vatcheva R, Levine DA, Boyd J, Reis-Filho JS, Ashworth A. Resistance to therapy caused by intragenic deletion in BRCA2. Nature. 2008;451(7182):1111–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Rijcken FE, Mourits MJ, Kleibeuker JH, Hollema H, van der Zee AG. Gynecologic screening in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;91(1):74–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Butzow R, Leminen A, Lehtovirta P, Mecklin JP, Jarvinen HJ. Surveillance for endometrial cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Int J Cancer. 2007;120(4):821–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Dove-Edwin I, Boks D, Goff S, Kenter GG, Carpenter R, Vasen HF, Thomas HJ. The outcome of endometrial carcinoma surveillance by ultrasound scan in women at risk of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma and familial colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;94(6):1708–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Gerritzen LH, Hoogerbrugge N, Oei AL, Nagengast FM, van Ham MA, Massuger LF, de Hullu JA. Improvement of endometrial biopsy over transvaginal ultrasound alone for endometrial surveillance in women with Lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer. 2009;8(4):391–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Combination oral contraceptive use and the risk of endometrial cancer. The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study of the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. JAMA 1987, 257(6):796–800.

    Google Scholar 

  76. van Leeuwen FE, Rookus MA. The role of exogenous hormones in the epidemiology of breast, ovarian and endometrial cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1989;25(12):1961–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Schmeler KM, Lynch HT, Chen LM, Munsell MF, Soliman PT, Clark MB, Daniels MS, White KG, Boyd-Rogers SG, Conrad PG, et al. Prophylactic surgery to reduce the risk of gynecologic cancers in the Lynch syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(3):261–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Lodder LN, Duivenvoorden HJ, van Gool AR, Seynaeve C, van der Meer CA, Klijn JG, van Geel BN, Burger CW, et al. Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(20):3867–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Verhoog LC, Brekelmans CT, Seynaeve C, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Wagner A, Dukel L, Devilee P, van den Ouweland AM, van Geel AN, et al. Presymptomatic DNA testing and prophylactic surgery in families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Lancet. 2000;355(9220):2015–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Hurley K, Rubin LR, Werner-Lin A, Sagi M, Kemel Y, Stern R, Phillips A, Cholst I, Kauff N, Offit K: Incorporating information regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis into discussions concerning testing and risk management for BRCA1/2 mutations: A qualitative study of patient preferences. Cancer 2012.

  81. Bakos AD, Hutson SP, Loud JT, Peters JA, Giusti RM, Greene MH. BRCA mutation-negative women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: a qualitative study of the BRCA-negative experience. Health Expect. 2008;11(3):220–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Stein CJ, Colditz GA. Modifiable risk factors for cancer. Br J Cancer. 2004;90(2):299–303.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Norma Albrecht and Karen Stowe for their technical assistance.

Disclosure

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cancer Risk and Prevention Program, Maine Medical Center Cancer Institute, Scarborough, ME, 04074, USA

    Susan Miesfeldt MD & Amanda Lamb ScM

  2. Maine Medical Center Research Institute, Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, 509 Forest Ave, Suite 200, Portland, ME, 04101, USA

    Susan Miesfeldt MD & Christine Duarte PhD

  3. Medical Oncology, Maine Medical Center, Scarborough, ME, 04074, USA

    Susan Miesfeldt MD

Authors
  1. Susan Miesfeldt MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda Lamb ScM
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christine Duarte PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Miesfeldt MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miesfeldt, S., Lamb, A. & Duarte, C. Management of Genetic Syndromes Predisposing to Gynecologic Cancers. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 14, 34–50 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-012-0215-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-012-0215-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation