http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/5086/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/40024/ 2013-07-01T00:00:00Z Women from high-risk families consider preventive measures for breast cancer including screening. Guidelines on screening differ considerably regarding starting age. We investigated whether age at diagnosis in affected relatives is predictive for age at diagnosis. We analyzed the age of breast cancer detection of 1,304 first- and second-degree relatives of 314 BRCA1, 164 BRCA2 and 244 high-risk participants of the Dutch MRI-SCreening study. The within- and between-family variance in the relative's age at diagnosis was analyzed with a random effect linear regression model. We compared the starting age of screening based on risk-group (25 years for BRCA1, 30 years for BRCA2 and 35 years for familial risk), on family history, and on the model, which combines both. The findings were validated in 63 families from the UK-MARIBS study. Mean age at diagnosis in the relatives varied between families; 95% range of mean family ages was 35-55 in BRCA1-, 41-57 in BRCA2- and 44-60 in high-risk families. In all, 14% of the variance in age at diagnosis, in BRCA1 even 23%, was explained by family history, 7% by risk group. Determining start of screening based on the model and on risk-group gave similar results in terms of cancers missed and years of screening. The approach based on familial history only, missed more cancers and required more screening years in both the Dutch and the United Kingdom data sets. Age at breast cancer diagnosis is partly dependent on family history which may assist planning starting age for preventive measures. What's new? Our study shows, that beside risk group also age at diagnosis in family members is predictive for age at onset in BRCA1 and 2 mutation carriers and women with familial risk. 14% of the variance in age at diagnosis, and in BRCA1 even 23%, was explained by family history versus 7% by risk group. This may be taken into account when determining the starting age for screening or other preventive measures. Copyright http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27752/ 2010-02-01T00:00:00Z BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Differences in penetrance indicate that this risk may be influenced by lifestyle factors. Because physical activity is one of the few modifiable risk factors, it may provide a target to add to breast cancer prevention in this high-risk population. We examined the association between self-reported lifetime sports activity and breast cancer risk in a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 725 carriers, of whom 218 had been diagnosed with breast cancer within 10 years prior to questionnaire completion. We found a nonsignificantly decreased risk for ever engaging in sports activity (HR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.57-1.24). Among women who had participated in sports, a medium versus low level of intensity and duration (i.e., between 11.0 and 22.7 mean MET hours/week averaged over a lifetime) reduced the risk of breast cancer (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.36-0.95); no dose-response trend was observed. For mean hours/week of sports activity, a nonsignificant trend was observed (HRlow versus never= 0.93, 95%CI = 0.60-1.43; HRmedium versus never= 0.81, 95%CI = 0.51-1.29; HRhigh versus never= 0.78, 95%CI = 0.48-1.29; ptrend overall= 0.272; ptrend active women= 0.487). For number of years of sports activity no significant associations were found. Among women active in sports before age 30, mean MET hours/week showed the strongest inverse association of all activity measures (HRmedium versus low= 0.60, 95%CI = 0.38-0.96; HRhigh versus low= 0.58, 95%CI = 0.35-0.94; ptrend= 0.053). Engaging in sports activity after age 30 was also inversely associated with breast cancer risk (HR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.44-0.91). Our results indicate that sports activity may reduce the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20928/ 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Obesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer in the general population. However, it is still unclear whether this association also exists in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We investigated the association between self-reported anthropometric measures and breast cancer risk in a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 719 BRCA1/2 carriers, of whom 218 had been diagnosed with breast cancer within 10 years prior to questionnaire completion. All time-varying Cox proportional hazards analyses were stratified by menopausal status. For premenopausal breast cancer, no statistically significant associations were observed for any of the anthropometric measures. The association between body mass index (BMI) at age 18 and premenopausal breast cancer risk suggested a trend of decreasing risk with increasing BMI (HR22.50-24.99 vs. 18.50-22.49 = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.47-1.44 and HR≥25.00 vs. 18.50-22.49 = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.13-1.27). For postmenopausal breast cancer, being 1.67 m and taller increased the risk 1.7-fold (HR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.01-2.74) when compared to a height <1.67 m. Compared with a current body weight <72 kg, a current body weight of ≥72 kg increased the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer 2.1-fold (95% CI = 1.23-3.59). A current BMI of ≥25.0 kg/m2, an adult weight gain of 5 kg or more, and a relative adult weight gain of 20% or more were all non-significantly associated with a 50-60% increased risk of postmenopausal breast cancer [HR = 1.46 (0.86-2.51), HR = 1.56 (95% CI = 0.85-2.87), and HR = 1.60 (95% CI = 0.97-2.63), respectively], when compared with having a healthy or stable weight. No associations for body weight or BMI at age 18 were observed. In conclusion, menopausal status seemed to modify the association between body weight and breast cancer risk among BRCA1/2 carriers. We observed no clear association between body weight and premenopausal breast cancer, while overweight and weight gain increased postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Carriers may reduce their risk of postmenopausal breast cancer by maintaining a healthy body weight throughout life. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/28979/ 2008-04-11T00:00:00Z Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 confer high risks of breast cancer. However, evidence suggests that these risks are modified by other genetic or environmental factors that cluster in families. A recent genome-wide association study has shown that common alleles at single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in FGFR2 (rs2981582), TNRC9 (rs3803662), and MAP3K1 (rs889312) are associated with increased breast cancer risks in the general population. To investigate whether these loci are also associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we genotyped these SNPs in a sample of 10,358 mutation carriers from 23 studies. The minor alleles of SNP rs2981582 and rs889312 were each associated with increased breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.20-1.45, ptrend= 1.7 × 10-8and HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.24, ptrend= 0.02) but not in BRCA1 carriers. rs3803662 was associated with increased breast cancer risk in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20, ptrend= 5 × 10-5in BRCA1 and BRCA2 combined). These loci appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. The differences in the effects of the FGFR2 and MAP3K1 SNPs between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers point to differences in the biology of BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer tumors and confirm the distinct nature of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/9823/ 2002-01-16T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its inhibitor (PAI-1) play essential roles in tumor invasion and metastasis. High levels of both uPA and PAI-1 are associated with poor prognosis in breast cancer patients. To confirm the prognostic value of uPA and PAI-1 in primary breast cancer, we reanalyzed individual patient data provided by members of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Receptor and Biomarker Group (EORTC-RBG). METHODS: The study included 18 datasets involving 8377 breast cancer patients. During follow-up (median 79 months), 35% of the patients relapsed and 27% died. Levels of uPA and PAI-1 in tumor tissue extracts were determined by different immunoassays; values were ranked within each dataset and divided by the number of patients in that dataset to produce fractional ranks that could be compared directly across datasets. Associations of ranks of uPA and PAI-1 levels with relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox multivariable regression analysis stratified by dataset, including the following traditional prognostic variables: age, menopausal status, lymph node status, tumor size, histologic grade, and steroid hormone-receptor status. All P values were two-sided. RESULTS: Apart from lymph node status, high levels of uPA and PAI-1 were the strongest predictors of both poor RFS and poor OS in the analyses of all patients. Moreover, in both lymph node-positive and lymph node-negative patients, higher uPA and PAI-1 values were independently associated with poor RFS and poor OS. For (untreated) lymph node-negative patients in particular, uPA and PAI-1 included together showed strong prognostic ability (all P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis of the EORTC-RBG datasets confirmed the strong and independent prognostic value of uPA and PAI-1 in primary breast cancer. For patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer, uPA and PAI-1 measurements in primary tumors may be especially useful for designing individualized treatment strategies.