http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/34671/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25360/ 2009-08-10T00:00:00Z Purpose: Preclinical as well as a few small retrospective, neoadjuvant studies suggest that breast cancer (cells) without functional BRCA1 or BRCA2 protein have an increased sensitivity to some chemotherapeutic agents causing double-strand DNA breaks. In this study we assessed the sensitivity to standard first-line chemotherapy of metastatic BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer, compared with sporadic breast cancer patients. Patients and Methods: From the Family Cancer Clinic database, we selected 93 BRCA1- and 28 BRCA2-associated breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease before January 1, 2007. Objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) after start of first-line chemotherapy were compared with those of sporadic patients, matched for year of birth, age at diagnosis of primary breast cancer, and year of detection of metastatic disease. Results: The chemotherapy regimens most frequently used were anthracycline-based (n = 147) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF)/CMF like (n = 68). As compared to sporadic patients, BRCA2-associated patients had a significantly higher OR (89% v 50%; P = .001), a longer PFS (hazard ratio multivariate [HRmult] 0.64; P = .04) and a prolonged OS (HRmult, 0.53; P = .005) after start of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. For BRCA1-associated patients, a nonsignificant trend for an increased OR (66% v 50%; P = .07), and a longer PFS (HRmult, 0.79; P = .14) after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer was observed, but not for OS. Conclusion: BRCA2-associated breast cancer is more sensitive to standard first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer in comparison with sporadic breast cancer, especially to anthracyclines. For BRCA1-associated breast cancer no statistically significant higher sensitivity was observed. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25348/ 2009-03-31T00:00:00Z Background: Women at increased (genetic) risk of breast cancer have to weigh the personal pros and cons of prophylactic mastectomy (PM) as an option to reduce their cancer risk. So far, no routine referral to a psychologist has been investigated for women considering PM. Aim of this study was to asses: 1) the acceptance of the offer of a standard psychological consultation as part of pre-surgical decision-making in high-risk women, 2) reasons for PM and reasons for postponing it, 3) the need for additional psychological interventions, and factors associated, and 4) the frequency of psychiatric/psychological treatment history.Methods: During a 30 months period, women at high risk considering PM were offered a psychological consultation. The content of these, and follow-up, consultations were analyzed.Results: Most women (70 out of 73) accepted the psychological consultation, and 81% proceeded with PM. Main reasons for undergoing PM were to reduce anxiety about cancer, and to reduce the cancer risk. Uncertainty about surgery and the need for further information were the reasons given most frequently for postponing PM. Additional psychological support was given to 31% before and 14% after PM. The uptake of additional support was significantly higher in women with a BRCA1/2 mutation. A history of psychiatric/psychological treatment was present in 36%, mainly consisting of depression and grief after death of a mother.Conclusion: The uptake-rate of the standard psychological consultation indicates a high level of acceptability of this service for women deciding about PM. Since anxiety is one of the main reasons for considering PM, and depression and grief were present in a third, a standard consultation with a psychologist for high-risk women considering PM may be indicated. This may help them arrive at an informed decision, to detect and manage psychological distress, and to plan psychological support services. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29454/ 2008-09-01T00:00:00Z Background: Data on distant disease-free interval (DDFI) and the localization of the first distant metastasis (DM) in BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast cancer (BC) patients are as yet scarcely available. Patients and methods: We identified 57 BRCA1-associated and 31 BRCA2-associated BC patients, diagnosed between 1980 and 2001, and developing DM disease before 2004, July 1. DDFI, the site(s) of first DM and post-relapse survival of these patients were compared with those of 192 sporadic BC patients. Results: As compared to sporadic patients, BRCA1 patients developed less often bone DM (30% vs. 51%; P = 0.005), but tended to develop more often lung DM (26% vs. 16%; P = 0.07), and DM at multiple sites (44% vs. 32%; P = 0.11). In BRCA2-associated compared to sporadic patients, first DM more commonly occurred in lymph nodes (23% vs. 7%; P = 0.007) and at multiple sites (48% vs. 32%; P = 0.08). Adjuvant systemic therapy appeared to be most effective in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Post-relapse survival was worse for BRCA1- and better for BRCA2-associated patients as compared to sporadic patients, but differences disappeared after adjustment for ER-status, site of first DM and DDFI. Conclusion: The site of first DM is different between BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated and sporadic BC patients. Differences in post-relapse survival could be explained by differences in site of first DM, in ER-status and in DDFI. Treatment efficacy may differ dependent on genetic status. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/9688/ 2001-01-01T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have a high risk of breast cancer and may choose to undergo prophylactic bilateral total mastectomy. We investigated the efficacy of this procedure in such women. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of 139 women with a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who were enrolled in a breast-cancer surveillance program at the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. At the time of enrollment, none of the women had a history of breast cancer. Seventy-six of these women eventually underwent prophylactic mastectomy, and the other 63 remained under regular surveillance. The effect of mastectomy on the incidence of breast cancer was analyzed by the Cox proportional-hazards method in which mastectomy was modeled as a time-dependent covariate. RESULTS: No cases of breast cancer were observed after prophylactic mastectomy after a mean (+/-SE) follow-up of 2.9+/-1.4 years, whereas eight breast cancers developed in women under regular surveillance after a mean follow-up of 3.0+/-1.5 years (P=0.003; hazard ratio, 0; 95 percent confidence interval, 0 to 0.36). The actuarial mean five-year incidence of breast cancer among all women in the surveillance group was 17+/-7 percent. On the basis of an exponential model, the yearly incidence of breast cancer in this group was 2.5 percent. The observed number of breast cancers in the surveillance group was consistent with the expected number (ratio of observed to expected cases, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.4 to 3.7; P=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, prophylactic bilateral total mastectomy reduces the incidence of breast cancer at three years of follow-up.