Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current Approach to Breast Cancer Risk Reduction for Women with Hereditary Predispositions to Breast Cancer

  • Risk and Prevention (TB Bevers Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Breast Cancer Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Risk reduction strategies for women at an increased risk for breast cancer include prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy, and chemoprevention. These techniques have been well studied in certain high-risk populations such as women with significant family histories of breast cancer and women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Rapid evolution in genetic testing technology has enabled increased access and ability to analyze genes associated with an increased risk for breast cancer. These genes include but are not limited to BRCA1 and BRCA2. This technological progress has expanded the definition and number of women classified as having a genetic predisposition to breast cancer; however, literature specifically evaluating efficacy of breast cancer risk reduction strategies in this expanded population does not yet exist. In order to appreciate the effectiveness of risk-reducing strategies for women with a hereditary predisposition to breast cancer, we provide an overview of current literature and recommendations for risk-reducing mastectomy, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, and chemoprevention in the high-risk breast cancer population.

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

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

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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mavaddat N, Peock S, Frost D, et al. Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(11):812–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Antoniou A, Pharoah P, Narod S, 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  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Ford D. Risks of cancer in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Lancet. 1994;343(8899):692–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. King M-C. Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science. 2003;302(5645):643–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ford D, Easton D, Stratton M, et al. Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62(3):676–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hartmann LC, Schaid DJ, Woods JE, et al. Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a family history of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:77–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kolk DMVD, Bock GHD, Leegte BK, et al. Penetrance of breast cancer, ovarian cancer and contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: high cancer incidence at older age. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;124(3):643–51.

  9. Metcalfe K. Contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(12):2328–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Graeser MK, Engel C, Rhiem K, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(35):5887–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Basu NN, Ingham S, Hodson J, et al. Risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a 30-year semi-prospective analysis. Fam Cancer. 2015;14(4):531–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Asperen CJV. Cancer risks in BRCA2 families: estimates for sites other than breast and ovary. J Med Genet. 2005;42(9):711–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Thompson D, Easton DF, and the Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Cancer incidence in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(18):1358–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Buecher B, Gauthier-Villars M, Desjardins L, et al. Contribution of CDKN2A/P16 INK4A, P14 ARF, CDK4 and BRCA1/2 germline mutations in individuals with suspected genetic predisposition to uveal melanoma. Fam Cancer. 2010;9(4):663–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Scott RJ, Vajdic CM, Armstrong BK, et al. BRCA2 mutations in a population-based series of patients with ocular melanoma. Int J Cancer. 2002;102(2):188–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Cancer risks in BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91(15):1310–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tai YC, Domchek S, Parmigiani G, Chen S. Breast cancer risk among male BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(23):1811–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Evans DGR, Susnerwala I, Dawson J, Woodward E, Maher ER, Lalloo F. Risk of breast cancer in male BRCA2 carriers. J Med Genet. 2010;47(10):710–1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hwang S-J, Lozano G, Amos CI, Strong LC. Germline p53 mutations in a cohort with childhood sarcoma: sex differences in cancer risk. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72(4):975–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Chompret A, Brugières L, Ronsin M, et al. P53 germline mutations in childhood cancers and cancer risk for carrier individuals. Br J Cancer. 2000;82(12):1932–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kaurah P, Macmillan A, Boyd N, et al. Founder and recurrent CDH1 mutations in families with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. JAMA. 2007;297(21):2360.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pharoah PD, Guilford P, Caldas C. Incidence of gastric cancer and breast cancer in CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutation carriers from hereditary diffuse gastric cancer families. Gastroenterology. 2001;121(6):1348–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hansford S, Kaurah P, Li-Chang H, et al. Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome CDH1 mutations and beyond. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(1):23–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bubien V, Bonnet F, Brouste V, et al. High cumulative risks of cancer in patients with PTEN hamartoma tumour syndrome. J Med Genet. 2013;50(4):255–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nieuwenhuis MH, Kets CM, Murphy-Ryan M, et al. Cancer risk and genotype-phenotype correlations in PTEN hematoma tumor syndrome. Fam Cancer. 2014;13(1):57–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hearle N. Frequency and spectrum of cancers in the Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(10):3209–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lim W, Hearle N, Shah B, et al. Further observations on LKB1/STK11 status and cancer risk in Peutz–Jeghers syndrome. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(2):308–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Beggs AD, Hodgson SV. Genomics and breast cancer: the different levels of inherited susceptibility. Eur J Hum Genet. 2009;17(7):855–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rahman N, Seal S, Thompson D, et al. PALB2, which encodes a BRCA2-interacting protein, is a breast cancer susceptibility gene. Nat Genet. 2007;39(2):165–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Erkko H, Xia B, Nikkilä J, et al. A recurrent mutation in PALB2 in Finnish cancer families. Nature. 2007;446(7133):316–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Southey MT, Winship I. PALB2 and breast cancer: ready for clinical translation! Appl Clin Genet. 2013;6:43–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Antoniou AC, Casadei S, Heikkinen T, et al. Breast-cancer risk in families with mutations in PALB2. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:497–506.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Weischer M, Bojesen SE, Ellervik C, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. CHEK2*1100delC genotyping for clinical assessment of breast cancer risk: meta-analyses of 26,000 patient cases and 27,000 controls. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(4):542–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cybulski C, Wokolorczyk D, Jakubowska A, et al. Risk of breast cancer in women with a CHEK2 mutation with and without a family history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(28):3747–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Thompson D, Antoniou AC, Jenkins M, et al. Two ATM variants and breast cancer risk. Hum Mutat. 2005;25(6):594–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Goldgar DE, Healey S, Dowty JG, et al. Rare variants in the ATM gene and risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2011;13(4):R73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Broeks A, Urbanus JH, Floore AN, et al. ATM-heterozygous germline mutations contribute to breast cancer-susceptibility. Am J Hum Genet. 2000;66(2):494–500.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Renwick A, Thompson D, Seal S, et al. ATM mutations that cause ataxia-telangiectasia are breast cancer susceptibility alleles. Nat Genet. 2006;38(8):873–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian (version 1.2014).

  40. Guillem JG, Wood WC, Moley JF, et al. ASCO/SSO review of current role of risk-reducing surgery in common hereditary cancer syndromes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(10):1296–321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Visvanathan K, Hurley P, Bantug E, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(23):2942–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994;73(3):643–51.

  43. Meijers-Heijboer H, Geel BV, Putten WLV, et al. Breast cancer after prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(3):159–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT, et al. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(6):1055–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, et al. Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA. 2010;304(9):967.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Evans DGR, Baildam AD, Anderson E, et al. Risk reducing mastectomy: outcomes in 10 European centres. J Med Genet. 2008;46(4):254–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Skytte A-B, Crüger D, Gerster M, et al. Breast cancer after bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy. Clin Genet. 2011;79(5):431–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Brekelmans CTM, Menke-Pluymers MBE, et al. Prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at risk of hereditary breast cancer: long-term experiences at the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(12):3335–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Boughey JC, Hoskin TL, Degnim AC, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy is associated with a survival advantage in high-risk women with a personal history of breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(10):2702–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Kiely BE, Jenkins MA, Mckinley JM, et al. Contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and other high-risk women in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;120(3):725–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Ghadirian P, et al. Contralateral mastectomy and survival after breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2014;348:g226. This study compared survival rates of women with BRCA mutations who did and did not undergo contralateral mastectomy subsequent to a breast cancer diagnosis. Their findings suggest that that contralateral mastectomy reduces the risk of breast cancer related mortality by 48%, compared to unilateral mastectomy, in women with BRCA mutations.

  52. Sprundel TCV, Schmidt MK, Rookus MA, et al. Risk reduction of contralateral breast cancer and survival after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br J Cancer. 2005;93(3):287–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Heemskerk-Gerritsen BA, Rookus MA, Aalfs CM, et al. Improved overall survival after contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with a history of unilateral breast cancer: a prospective analysis. Int J Cancer. 2014. This prospective study analyzed the efficacy of contralateral mastectomy on survival in women with BRCA mutations and a history of unilateral breast cancer. Their findings suggest that overall survival is improved and contralateral breast cancer incidence is reduced following contralateral mastectomy in this population.

  54. Fayanju OM, Stoll CRT, Fowler S, Colditz GA, Margenthaler JA. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy after unilateral breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2014;260(6):1000–10. This review paper examined the whether contralateral mastectomy improved survival, reduced contralateral breast cancer incidence, and reduced recurrence in patients with a history of unilateral breast cancer. The meta-analysis of several studies indicated that in the high-risk breast cancer population, contralateral mastectomy is associated with a decreased in contralateral breast cancer incidence but does not impact overall survival in this population.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Chung A, Huynh K, Lawrence C, Sim M-S, Giuliano A. Comparison of patient characteristics and outcomes of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and unilateral total mastectomy in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2600–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Arrington AK, Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, Habermann EB, Tuttle TM. Patient and surgeon characteristics associated with increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(10):2697–704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: a trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(33):5203–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Manning AT, Wood C, Eaton A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations and variants of uncertain significance. Br J Surg. 2015;102(11):1354–9. This study examined the indications for and outcomes of technically precise nipple-sparring mastectomy in women with BRCA mutations. Based on short-term follow up, the data indicates that, when performed with technical precision, nipple-sparring mastectomy is not associated with a compromise of oncological safety and may be considered an acceptable choice for women with BRCA mutations.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. 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  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Finch A, Beiner M, Lubinski J, et al. Salpingo-oophorectomy and the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. JAMA. 2006;296(2):185–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kauff ND, Domchek SM, Friebel TM, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1331–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Finch APM, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1547–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Kramer JL, Velazquez IA, Chen BE, Rosenberg PS, Struewing JP, Greene MH. Prophylactic oophorectomy reduces breast cancer penetrance during prospective, long-term follow-up of BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(34):8629–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Eisen A, Lubinski J, Klijn J, et al. Breast cancer risk following bilateral oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: an international case-control study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(30):7491–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Neuhausen SL, et al. Mortality after bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7(3):223–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Wagner T, et al. Effect of short-term hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk reduction after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(31):7804–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Armstrong K, Schwartz JS, Randall T, Rubin SC, Weber B. Hormone replacement therapy and life expectancy after prophylactic oophorectomy in women with BRCA1/2 mutations: a decision analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(6):1045–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Klaren HM, Veer LJV, Leeuwen FEV, Rookus MA. Potential for bias in studies on efficacy of prophylactic surgery for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95(13):941–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Seynaeve C, Asperen CJV, et al. Breast cancer risk after salpingo-oophorectomy in healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: revisiting the evidence for risk reduction. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(5). This study demonstrated how previous research designs and statistical analyses not accounting for ascertainment bias and immortal time bias, may have inflated breast cancer risk reduction attributed to RRSO in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

  70. Chai X, Domchek S, Kauff N, Rebbeck T, Chen J. RE: Breast cancer risk after salpingo-oophorectomy in healthy BRCA1/2 Mutation carriers: revisiting the evidence for risk reduction. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(9). In response to the study published by Heemsker-Gerritsen BAM, et al. (2015), the authors re-analyzed data supplied by two previous research studies accounting for immortal time bias and concluded that RRSO in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers confers a breast cancer risk reduction of approximately 41-50%.

  71. Schiff R, Osborne CK. Endocrinology and hormone therapy in breast cancer: new insight into estrogen receptor-alpha function and its implication for endocrine therapy resistance in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7(5):205–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Lowery A, Sweeney K. The role of prophylactic oophorectomy in the management of hereditary breast & ovarian cancer syndrome. Hysterectomy. 2012.

  73. Arnold AG, Kauff ND. Prophylactic oophorectomy may differentially reduce breast cancer risk in women with BRCA1 versus BRCA2 mutations. Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2009;1(3):157–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Atchley DP, Albarracin CT, Lopez A, et al. Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(26):4282–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Lakhani SR, Gusterson BA, Jacquemier J, et al. The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(9):2310–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 1998;351(9114):1451–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 Trial: preventing breast cancer. Cancer Prev Res. 2010;3(6):696–706.

  79. King M-C, Wieand S, Hale K, et al. Tamoxifen and breast cancer incidence among women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. JAMA. 2001;286(18):2251.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Duffy SW, Nixon RM. Estimates of the likely prophylactic effect of tamoxifen in women with high risk BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Br J Cancer. 2002;86(2):218–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Phillips K, Milne R, Rookus M, et al. Tamoxifen and risk of contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(25):3091–9. The authors analyzed pooled retrospective and prospective data to evaluate whether adjuvant tamoxifen use in BRCA mutation carriers plays a role in CBC risk reduction.

  82. Gronwald J, Robidoux A, Kim-Sing C, et al. Duration of tamoxifen use and the risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;146(2):421–7. This matched case-control study evaluated the duration of tamoxifen use in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers for the purpose of prevention of contralateral breast cancer following an initial breast cancer diagnosis. The authors concluded that a short-term course of tamoxifen provided the same contralateral breast cancer risk reduction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers as the full duration of the recommended tamoxifen use (4 or more years).

  83. Gronwald J, Tung N, Foulkes WD, et al. Tamoxifen and contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers: an update. Int J Cancer. 2006;118(9):2281–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Frost MH, Schaid DJ, Sellers TA, et al. Long-term satisfaction and psychological and social function following bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. JAMA. 2000;284(3):319.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Gahm J, Wickman M, Brandberg Y. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with inherited risk of breast cancer—prevalence of pain and discomfort, impact on sexuality, quality of life and feelings of regret two years after surgery. Breast. 2010;19(6):462–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Hatcher MB, Fallowfield L, A’Hern R. The psychosocial impact of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy: prospective study using questionnaires and semistructured. BMJ. 2001;322(7278):76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Brandberg Y, Sandelin K, Erikson S, et al. Psychological reactions, quality of life, and body image after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women at high risk for breast cancer: a prospective 1-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(24):3943–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Litton JK, Westin SN, Ready K, et al. Perception of screening and risk reduction surgeries in patients tested for a BRCA deleterious mutation. Cancer. 2009;115(8):1598–604.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Fang CY, Cherry C, Devarajan K, Li T, Malick J, Daly MB. A prospective study of quality of life among women undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy versus gynecologic screening for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112(3):594–600.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Tiller K, Meiser B, Butow P, et al. Psychological impact of prophylactic oophorectomy in women at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;86(2):212–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Elit L, Esplen MJ, Butler K, Narod S. Quality of life and psychosexual adjustment after prophylactic oophorectomy for a family history of ovarian cancer. Fam Cancer. 2001;1(3-4):149–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Robson M, Hensley M, Barakat R, et al. Quality of life in women at risk for ovarian cancer who have undergone risk-reducing oophorectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89(2):281–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Madalinska JB, Hollenstein J, Bleiker E, et al. Quality-of-life effects of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy versus gynecologic screening among women at increased risk of hereditary ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(28):6890–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Finch A, Narod SA. Quality of life and health status after prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in women who carry a BRCA mutation: a review. Maturitas. 2011;70(3):261–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Finch A, Metcalfe K, Chiang J, et al. The impact of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy on menopausal symptoms and sexual function in women who carry a BRCA mutation. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121(1):163–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Fallowfield L, Fleissig A, Edwards R, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: psychosocial impact on women participating in two randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(7):1885–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Mourits MJE, Vries EGED, Willemse PHB, Hoor KAT, Hollema H, Ate G. J. Van Der Zee. Tamoxifen treatment and gynecologic side effects: a review. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(5):855–66.

  98. Day R. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Projet P-1 study (NSABP-1). Quality of life and tamoxifen in a breast cancer prevention trial. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006;949(1):143–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Day R, Ganz PA, Costantino JP, Cronin WM, Wickerham DL, Fisher B. Health-related quality of life and tamoxifen in breast cancer prevention: a report from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(9):2659–266.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Berglund G, Nystedt M, Bolund C, Sjödén SO, Rutquist LE. Effect of endocrine treatment on sexuality in premenopausal breast cancer patients: a prospective randomized study. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(11):2788–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Cancer Genetics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1155 Pressler St, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Grace Tran & Monica Helm

  2. Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1155 Pressler St, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Jennifer Litton

Authors
  1. Grace Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monica Helm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer Litton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Litton.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Grace Tran, Monica Helm, and Jennifer Litton declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Risk, Prevention, and Screening

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tran, G., Helm, M. & Litton, J. Current Approach to Breast Cancer Risk Reduction for Women with Hereditary Predispositions to Breast Cancer. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 8, 165–174 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-016-0220-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-016-0220-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation