Influence of young age at diagnosis and family history of breast or ovarian cancer on breast cancer outcomes in a population-based cohort study
The objective of this study was to examine the association of: (i) diagnosis at age ≤35, (ii) first-degree family history of breast or ovarian cancer (BOC) and (iii) a research based definition of genetic risk, with tumor characteristics, treatment and survival in breast cancer (BC).
Patients and methods
Consenting female participants in the population-based Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry diagnosed with primary invasive BC between 1996 and 1998 were followed prospectively until 2005.
Among 967 women, 105 were ≤35 years old at diagnosis and 686 were classified as genetic risk cases, including 349 with a first-degree family history. Individuals diagnosed at age ≤35 were more likely to self-detect tumors, to present with inflammatory BC, to have invasive ductal carcinoma of no special type, high T stage, and tumors with lymphovascular invasion (LVI), high grade and negative estrogen receptors. Younger women were more likely to receive chemotherapy and less likely to receive hormonal therapy. Diagnosis ≤35 years old was associated with significantly reduced distant recurrence free survival, an effect that did not persist after adjustment for tumor and treatment related variables. Poor outcomes were restricted to younger women with hormone responsive BC. Family history was associated with increased rates of mammographic detection of BC, lower tumor stage and less frequent inflammatory BC, but had no association with BC outcomes.
Women diagnosed with BC at age ≤35 have more aggressive tumors; these adverse tumor characteristics, rather than age, lead to poor outcomes. Family history was not associated with survival.
KeywordsBreast cancer Family history Young age Tumor pathology Treatment Survival Population-based Prospective
The authors would like to acknowledge the important contributions of Gord Glendon, Nayana Weerasooriya and Elaine Maloney of the OFBCR. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the B-CFR, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government or B-CFR. This research was supported by the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Agency and the US National Institutes for Health. J.C.F. received a fellowship from the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation.
- 10.Frost MH, Slezak JM, Tran NV, Williams CI, Johnson JL, Woods JE, Petty PM, Donohue JH, Grant CS, Sloan JA, Sellers TA, Hartmann LC (2005) Satisfaction after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: the significance of mastectomy type, reconstructive complications, and body appearance. J Clin Oncol 23:7849–7856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Colleoni M, Rotmensz N, Robertson C, Orlando L, Viale G, Renne G, Luini A, Veronesi P, Intra M, Orecchia R, Catalano G, Galimberti V, Nole F, Martinelli G, Goldhirsch A (2002) Very young women (<35 years) with operable breast cancer: features of disease at presentation. Ann Oncol 13:273–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.(2001) Consensus conference 2000: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement November 1–3, 2000. Cancer Control 8:55Google Scholar
- 28.Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Yothers G, Gray RJ, Green S, Bryant J, Gelber S, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Coates AS (2001) Adjuvant therapy for very young women with breast cancer: need for tailored treatments. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 30:44–51Google Scholar
- 29.Aebi S, Gelber S, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Gelber RD, Collins J, Thurlimann B, Rudenstam CM, Lindtner J, Crivellari D, Cortes-Funes H, Simoncini E, Werner ID, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A (2000) Is chemotherapy alone adequate for young women with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer? Lancet 355:1869–1874PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.John EM, Hopper JL, Beck JC, Knight JA, Neuhausen SL, Senie RT, Ziogas A, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Boyd N, Buys SS, Daly MB, O’Malley FP, Santella RM, Southey MC, Venne VL, Venter DJ, West DW, Whittemore AS, Seminara D (2004) The Breast Cancer Family Registry: an infrastructure for cooperative multinational, interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 6:R375–R389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Holowaty EJ, Marrett LD, Fehringer G (1995) Cancer incidence in Ontario trends and regional variations. The Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, TorontoGoogle Scholar
- 35.Longacre TA, Ennis M, Quenneville LA, Bane AL, Bleiweiss IJ, Carter BA, Catelano E, Hendrickson MR, Hibshoosh H, Layfield LJ, Memeo L, Wu H, O’Malley FP (2006). Interobserver agreement and reproducibility in classification of invasive breast carcinoma: an NCI breast cancer family registry study. Mod Pathol 19:195–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.(2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717Google Scholar
- 39.Colleoni M, Gelber S, Goldhirsch A, Aebi S, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Price KN, Coates AS, Gelber RD (2006) Tamoxifen after adjuvant chemotherapy for premenopausal women with lymph node-positive breast cancer: International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 13–93. J Clin Oncol 24:1332–1341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Burke W, Daly M, Garber J, Botkin J, Kahn MJ, Lynch P, McTiernan A, Offit K, Perlman J, Petersen G, Thomson E, Varricchio C (1997) Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. II. BRCA1 and BRCA2. Cancer Genetics Studies Consortium. JAMA 277:997–1003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar