Search

Background: An increased risk of breast cancer for relatives of breast cancer patients has been demonstrated in many studies, and having a relative diagnosed with breast cancer at an early age is an indication for breast cancer screening. This indication has been derived from estimates based on data from cancer-prone families or from BRCA1/2 mutation families, and might be biased because BRCA1/2 mutations explain only a small proportion of the familial clustering of breast cancer. The aim of the current study was to determine the predictive value of a family history of cancer with regard to early onset of female breast cancer in a population based setting.Methods: An unselected sample of 1,987 women with and without breast cancer was studied with regard to the age of diagnosis of breast cancer.Results: The risk of early-onset breast cancer was increased when there were: (1) at least 2 cases of female breast cancer in first-degree relatives (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.09; 95% CI: 128-7.44), (2) at least 2 cases of female breast cancer in first or second-degree relatives under the age of 50 (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.36; 95% CI: 1.12-10.08), (3) at least 1 case of female breast cancer under the age of 40 in a first- or second-degree relative (yes/no; HR at age 30: 2.06; 95% CI: 0.83-5.12) and (4) any case of bilateral breast cancer (yes/no; HR at age 30: 3.47; 95%: 1.33-9.05). The positive predictive value of having 2 or more of these characteristics was 13% for breast cancer before the age of 70, 11% for breast cancer before the age of 50, and 1% for breast cancer before the age of 30.Conclusion: Applying family history related criteria in an unselected population could result in the screening of many women who will not develop breast cancer at an early age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to investigate the occurrence and determinants of non-publication of clinical drug trials in the Netherlands.All clinical drug trials reviewed by the 28 Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in the Netherlands in 2007 were followed-up from approval to publication. Candidate determinants were the sponsor, phase, applicant, centers, therapeutic effect expected, type of trial, approval status of the drug(s), drug type, participant category, oncology or other disease area, prospective registration, and early termination. The main outcome was publication as peer reviewed article. The percentage of trials that were published, crude and adjusted odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to quantify the associations between determinants and publication. In 2007, 622 clinical drug trials were reviewed by IRBs in the Netherlands. By the end of follow-up, 19 of these were rejected by the IRB, another 19 never started inclusion, and 10 were still running. Of the 574 trials remaining in the analysis, 334 (58%) were published as peer-reviewed article. The multivariable logistic regression model identified the following determinants with a robust, statistically significant association with publication: phase 2 (60% published; adjusted OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-5.9), phase 3 (73% published; adjusted OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.7-10.0), and trials not belonging to phase 1-4 (60% published; adjusted OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.5 to 6.5) compared to phase 1 trials (35% published); trials with a company or investigator as applicant (63% published) compared to trials with a Contract Research Organization (CRO) as applicant (50% published; adjusted OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.8); and multicenter trials also conducted in other EU countries (68% published; adjusted OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.4) or also outside the European Union (72% published; adjusted OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.0-4.0) compared to single-center trials (45% published). Trials that were not prospectively registered (48% published) had a lower likelihood of publication compared to prospectively registered trials (75% published; adjusted OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8), as well as trials that were terminated early (33% published) compared to trials that were completed as planned (64% published; adjusted OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.3). The non-publication rate of clinical trials seems to have improved compared to previous inception cohorts, but is still far from optimal, in particular among phase 1, single-center, not prospectively registered, and early terminated trials., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction: Responsible conduct of research implies that results of clinical trials should be completely and adequately reported. This article describes the design of a cohort study that aims to investigate the occurrence and the determinants of selective reporting in an inception cohort of all clinical drug trials that were reviewed by the Dutch Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in 2007. It also describes the characteristics of the study cohort., Methods and Analysis: In 2007, Dutch IRBs reviewed 622 clinical drug trials. For each trial, we assessed the stages of progress. We discriminated five intermediate stages and five definite stages. Intermediate stages of progress are: approved by an IRB; started inclusion; completed as planned; terminated early; published as article. The definite stages of progress are: rejected by an IRB; never started inclusion; not published as article; completely reported; selectively reported. We will use univariate and multivariate Cox regression models to identify trial characteristics associated with non-publication. We will identify seven trial-specific discrepancy items, including the objectives, inclusion and exclusion criteria, end points, sample size, additional analyses, type of population analysis and sponsor acknowledgement. The percentage of trials with discrepancies between the protocol and the publication will be scored. We will investigate the association between trial characteristics and the occurrence of discrepancies., Ethics and Dissemination: No IRB-approval is required for this study. Access to confidential research protocols was provided by the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects. We plan to finish data collection in June 2015, and expect to complete data cleaning, analysis and manuscript preparation within the next 3 months. Hence, a first draft of an article containing the results is expected before the end of October 2015., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

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.

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.

Background: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women from a hereditary breast(/ovarian) cancer family have a highly increased risk of developing breast cancer (BC). Prophylactic mastectomy (PM) results in the greatest BC risk reduction. Long-term data on the efficacy and sequels of PM are scarce., Methods: From 358 high-risk women (including 236 BRCA1/2 carriers) undergoing PM between 1994 and 2004, relevant data on the occurrence of BC in relation to PM, complications in relation to breast reconstruction (BR), mutation status, age at PM and preoperative imaging examination results were extracted from the medical records, and analyzed separately for women without (unaffected, n = 177) and with a BC history (affected, n = 181)., Results: No primary BCs occurred after PM (median follow-up 4.5 years). In one previously unaffected woman, metastatic BC was detected almost 4 years after PM (primary BC not found). Median age at PM was younger in unaffected women (P < .001), affected women more frequently were 50% risk carriers (P < .001). Unexpected (pre)malignant changes at PM were found in 3% of the patients (in 5 affected, and 5 unaffected women, respectively). In 49.6% of the women opting for BR one or more complications were registered, totaling 215 complications, leading to 153 surgical interventions (71%). Complications were mainly related to cosmetic outcome (36%) and capsular formation (24%)., Conclusions: The risk of developing a primary BC after PM remains low after longer follow-up. Preoperative imaging and careful histological examination is warranted because of potential unexpected (pre)malignant findings. The high complication rate after breast reconstruction mainly concerns cosmetic issues.

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are offered gynaecological screening with the intention to reduce mortality by detecting ovarian cancer at an early stage. We examined compliance and efficacy of gynaecological screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. In this multicentre, observational, follow-up study we examined medical record data of a consecutive series of 888 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who started annual screening with transvaginal ultrasonography and serum CA125 between 1993 and 2005. The women were annually screened for 75% of their total period of follow-up. Compliance decreased with longer follow-up. Five of the 10 incident cancers were interval tumours, diagnosed in women with a normal screening result within 3-10 months before diagnosis. No difference in stage distribution between incident screen-detected and interval tumours was found. Eight of the 10 incident cancers were stage III/IV (80%). Cancers diagnosed in unscreened family members had a similar stage distribution (77% in stage III/IV). The observed number of cases detected during screening was not significantly higher than expected (Standardized Incidence Ratio (SIR): 1.5, 95% confidence interval: 0.7-2.8). For the subgroup that was fully compliant to annual screening, a similar SIR was found (1.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.5-3.6). Despite annual gynaecological screening, a high proportion of ovarian cancers in BRCA1/2 carriers are interval cancers and the large majority of all cancers are diagnosed in advanced stages. Therefore, it is unlikely that annual screening will reduce mortality from ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

In the MRISC study, women with an inherited risk for breast cancer were screened by a 6-month clinical breast examination (CBE) and yearly MRI and mammography. We found that the MRISC screening scheme could facilitate early breast cancer diagnosis and that MRI was a more sensitive screening method than mammography, but less specific. In the current study we investigated the contribution of MRI in the early detection of breast cancer in relation to tumor characteristics. From November 1999 to October 2003, 1909 women were included and 50 breast cancers were detected, of which 45 were evaluable and included in the current study. We compared the characteristics of tumors detected by MRI-only with those of all other (non-palpable) screen-detected tumors. Further, we compared the sensitivity of mammography and MRI within subgroups according to different tumor characteristics. Twenty-two (49%) of the 45 breast cancers were detected by MRI and not visible at mammography, of which 20 (44%) were also not palpable (MRI-only detected tumors). MRI-only detected tumors were more often node-negative than other screen-detected cancers (94 vs. 59%; P=0.02) and tended to be more often

Aim of the Study: Results on tumour characteristics and survival of hereditary breast cancer (BC), especially on BRCA2-associated BC, are inconclusive. The prognostic impact of the classical tumour and treatment factors in hereditary BC is insufficiently known., Methods: We selected 103 BRCA2-, 223 BRCA1- and 311 non-BRCA1/2 BC patients (diagnosis 1980-2004) from the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. To correct for longevity bias, analyses were also performed while excluding index patients undergoing DNA testing 2 years after BC diagnosis. As a comparison group, 759 sporadic BC patients of comparable age at and year of diagnosis were selected. We compared tumour characteristics, the occurrence of ipsilateral recurrence (LRR) and contralateral BC (CBC) as well as distant disease-free (DDFS), BC-specific (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) between these groups. By multivariate modelling, the prognostic impact of tumour and treatment factors was investigated separately in hereditary BC., Results: We confirmed the presence of the particular BRCA1-phenotype. In contrast, tumour characteristics of BRCA2-associated BC were similar to those of non-BRCA1/2 and sporadic BC, with the exception of a high risk of CBC (3.1% per year) and oestrogen-receptor (ER)-positivity (83%). No significant differences between BRCA2-associated BC and other BC subgroups were found with respect to LRR, DDFS, BCSS and OS. Independent prognostic factors for BC-specific survival in hereditary BC (combining the three subgroups) were tumour stage, adjuvant chemotherapy, histologic grade, ER status and a prophylactic (salpingo-)oophorectomy., Conclusions: Apart from the frequent occurrence of contralateral BC and a positive ER-status, BRCA2-associated BC did not markedly differ from other hereditary or sporadic BC. Our observation that tumour size and nodal status are prognostic factors also in hereditary BC implies that the strategy to use these factors as a proxy for ultimate mortality appears to be valid also in this specific group of patients.

Background: The MRISC study is a screening study, in which women with an increased risk of hereditary breast cancer are screened by a yearly mammography and MRI, and half-yearly clinical breast examination. The sensitivity found in this study was 40% for mammography and 71% for MRI and the specificity was 95 and 90%, respectively. In the current subsequent study we investigated whether these results are influenced by age, a BRCA1/2 mutation, menopausal status and breast density., Patients and Methods: From November 1999 to October 2003, 1909 eligible women were screened and 50 breast cancers were detected. For the current analysis, data of 4134 screening rounds and 45 detected breast cancers were used. For both imaging modalities, screening parameters, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and uni- and multivariate odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. All analyses were separately performed for age at entry (< 40, 40-49, > or =50), mutation status, menopausal status and breast density., Results: Sensitivity of MRI was decreased in women with high breast density (adjusted OR 0.08). False-positive rates of both mammography (OR(adj) 1.67) and MRI (OR(adj) 1.21) were increased by high breast density, that of MRI by pre-menopausal status (OR(adj) 1.70), young age (OR(adj) 1.58 for women 40-49 years versus women > or =50 years) and decreased in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (OR(adj) 0.74). In all investigated subgroups the discriminating capacity (measured by the area under the ROC-curve) was higher for MRI than for mammography, with the largest differences for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (0.237), for women between 40 and 49 years (0.227) and for women with a low breast density (0.237)., Conclusions: This report supports the earlier recommendation that MRI should be a standard screening method for breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Background: A higher incidence of contralateral breast cancer and ipsilateral recurrence has been reported in familial breast cancer than in sporadic cancer. This study investigated the influence of contralateral cancer and tumour stage on survival in patients with familial non-BRCA1/BRCA2-associated breast cancer., Methods: The incidences of contralateral breast cancer, ipsilateral recurrence, distant disease-free and overall survival were assessed in 327 patients from families with three or more breast and/or ovarian cancers, but no BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation (familial non-BRCA1/2), and in 327 control subjects with sporadic breast cancer, matched for year and age at detection., Results: Mean follow-up was 7.3 years for patients with familial-non-BRCA1/2 cancers and 6.5 years for patients with sporadic breast cancer. Tumours were stage T1 or lower in 62.1 per cent of familial non-BRCA1/2 cancers versus 49.9 per cent in sporadic breast cancers (P = 0.003), and node negative in 55.8 versus 52.1 per cent, respectively (P = 0.477). After 10 years the incidence of metachronous contralateral breast cancer was 6.4 per cent for familial non-BRCA1/2 tumours versus 5.4 per cent for sporadic cancers. The rate of ipsilateral recurrence was not significantly increased (17.0 versus 14.2 per cent, respectively, at 10 years; P = 0.132). Tumour size (hazard ratio (HR) 1.02 per mm increase, P = 0.016) and node status (HR 2.6 for three or more involved nodes versus node negative, P = 0.017) were independent predictors of overall survival in the familial non-BRCA1/2 group, and in the whole group, whereas contralateral breast cancer (HR 0.7, P = 0.503) and risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy (HR 0.4, P = 0.163) were not., Conclusion: Stage at detection was a key determinant of prognosis in familial non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer, whereas contralateral cancer was not. Risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy did not significantly improve survival, but early detection can. Decisions on breast-conserving treatment can be made on the same grounds in patients with familial and sporadic breast cancer.

Background: Within the Dutch MRI Screening (MRISC) study, a Dutch multicenter screening study for hereditary breast cancer, the authors investigated whether previously reported increased diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared with mammography would be maintained during subsequent screening rounds., Methods: From November 1999 to October 2003, 1909 eligible women were included in the study. Screening parameters and tumor characteristics of different rounds were calculated and compared. The authors defined 3 different types of imaging screening rounds: first round in women never screened by imaging before, first round in women screened by imaging (mainly mammography) before, and subsequent rounds., Results: The difference in sensitivity for invasive cancers between mammography and MRI was largest in the first round of women previously screened with mammography (20.0 vs. 93.3%; P=.003), but also in subsequent rounds, there was a significant difference in favor of MRI (29.4 vs. 76.5%; P=.02). The difference in false-positive rate between mammography and MRI was also largest in the first round of women previously screened with mammography (5.5 vs. 14.0%; P<.001), and it remained significant in subsequent rounds (4.6 vs. 8.2%; P<.001). Screen-detected tumors were smaller and more often lymph node negative than symptomatic tumors in age-matched control patients, but no major differences in tumor stage were found between tumors detected at subsequent rounds compared with those in the first round., Conclusions: In subsequent rounds, a significantly higher sensitivity and better discriminating capacity of MRI compared with mammography was maintained, and a favorable tumor stage compared with age-matched symptomatic controls. As results of these subsequent screening rounds were most predictive for long-term effects, the authors expect that this screening program will contribute to a decrease of breast cancer mortality in these high-risk women., (Copyright (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Prophylactic mastectomy with breast reconstruction is a risk-reducing strategy for women at increased risk of breast cancer. It remains a very radical intervention, and long-term data on satisfaction are insufficiently available. In the present follow-up study, the authors assess satisfaction with prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction and its impact on sexual relationships., Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective study using a short self-report questionnaire administered to 114 genetically predisposed women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction mainly by subpectorally implanted silicone prostheses performed at one institution., Results: The median follow-up time between prophylactic mastectomy/breast reconstruction and completion of the questionnaire was 3 years. Sixty percent of all participants were satisfied with the result of prophylactic mastectomy/breast reconstruction. Satisfaction was significantly and negatively correlated with perceived lack of information, experienced complications, ongoing complaints, whether or not the reconstructed breasts feel "like your own," and not choosing this type of breast reconstruction again. Adverse effects in the patient's sexual relationship were strongly correlated with perceived lack of information, discrepant expectations, ongoing complaints and limitations, whether or not the reconstructed breasts feel "like your own," altered feelings of femininity, partner's negative perception on femininity and sexuality, and not choosing this type of breast reconstruction again., Conclusions: A majority of women would choose the procedure again, but adverse effects and untoward changes in the perception of the sexual relationship need to be addressed in the counselling of women at high risk, to optimize an informed choice and enable adequate adjustment postoperatively.

Background: Studies comparing survival in BRCA1-associated and sporadic breast cancer (BC) report inconsistent results and frequently concern small sample sizes. Further, the prognostic impact of the classical tumour and treatment factors is unclear in BRCA1-associated BC., Patients and Methods: We selected 223 BC patients diagnosed between 1980 and 2001 within families with a deleterious germline BRCA1-mutation ascertained at the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. To correct for ascertainment bias, the group of index patients undergoing DNA testing more than 2 years after BC diagnosis (n = 53) was separated from the other BRCA1-patients (n = 170). All BRCA1-associated patients were matched in a 1:2 ratio for age and year of diagnosis to sporadic BC patients. We compared the occurrence of ipsi- and contralateral BC (CBC) as well as distant disease-free (DDFS), BC-specific (BCSS) and overall survival (OS). By multivariate modelling, the prognostic impact of tumour and treatment factors was investigated separately in BRCA1-associated and sporadic breast cancers., Results: For the total group of 669 cases, the median follow-up was 5.1 years, the median age at diagnosis 39 years. We confirmed the existence of the typical BRCA1-associated tumour type and the high CBC incidence. No significant differences between BRCA1-associated and sporadic tumours were found with respect to ipsilateral BC recurrence (HR(mult) 0.7; P = 0.24), DDFS (HR(mult) 1.2; P = 0.37) or BC-specific survival (HR(mult) 1.3; P = 0.23). A trend towards a worse survival was found for BRCA1-associated ductal BC (HR(mult) 1.5, P = 0.07). Prognostic factors for BRCA1-associated BC were age at diagnosis, tumour size and morphology, and nodal status. Further, survival was non-significantly improved by systemic treatment and a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. No effect on survival of a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy was seen., Conclusions: BRCA1-associated BC is characterised by specific tumour characteristics, a high incidence of CBC and a trend towards a worse survival for the ductal tumour type. Our observation that tumour size and nodal status are also prognostic factors for BRCA1-associated BC implies that the strategy to use these factors as a proxy for ultimate mortality, for instance in BC screening programmes or the consideration of (contralateral) preventive mastectomy, appears to be valid in this specific group of patients.

Purpose: The results of studies comparing survival in familial and sporadic breast cancer (BC) are inconsistent. A higher incidence of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) has been reported in familial BC. Ascertainment bias may influence both the reported familial CBC and survival., Design: We assessed CBC incidence, distant disease free (DDFS) and overall survival (OS) in 327 BC patients who had > or =3 breast and/or ovarian cancers in the family but no BRCA1/2 gene mutation (non-BRCA1/2). They were matched to 327 sporadic controls for year and age at detection. To correct for ascertainment bias, we analyzed also separately the results (1) Of the 250 non-BRCA1/2 patients with DNA testing performed before diagnosis or within 2 years ('unselected') and (2) Of the 77 with testing > or =2 years after diagnosis (late-tested)., Results: Median follow-up of non-BRCA1/2 patients was 6.1 yrs. Ten years CBC incidence was 11% in non-BRCA1/2 versus 6% in sporadic patients (p = 0.002). At multivariate analysis CBC incidence was increased in late-tested non-BRCA1/2 (HR 4.6; p = 0.001) not in 'unselected' (HR 1.8; p = 0.1). Increased CBC occurred in non-BRCA1/2 patients mainly before genetic testing, suggesting ascertainment bias. Tumors were < or =T1 in 62% of non-BRCA1/2 versus 50% of sporadic patients (p = 0.003), node-negative in 55% versus 52% respectively (p = 0.5). After correction for stage and therapy, OS did not differ between 'unselected' non-BRCA1/2 and sporadic patients (HR 0.8; p = 0.3), but was improved in late-tested non-BRCA1/2., Conclusion: Overall survival and contralateral breast cancer incidence were similar in 'unselected' non-BRCA1/2- and sporadic patients. Reports of higher CBC incidence and better survival in non-BRCA1/2 patients may substantially be caused by DNA testing selection-bias.

Already published data were further analyzed regarding the association between the CHEK2*1100delC germ line mutation and estrogen receptor (ER) status in patients with breast cancer. The CHEK2*1100delC mutation was more prevalent among the patients with a positive ER status (4.2% versus 1.0%). An ER-negative status was beside CHEK2*1100delC mutation and independently associated with an earlier of age onset of breast cancer. There was a trend that an ER-negative status, beside the presence of a CHEK2*1100delC mutation, was associated with a worse disease-free survival. There might be an association between ER status and a CHEK2*1100delC mutation. More studies with larger number of patients are needed to further investigate the relation between CHEK2*1100delC and ER status.

Imaging is often performed yearly for the surveillance of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at high familial breast cancer risk. Growth of cancers in carriers may be faster as these tumours are predominantly high grade. Quantitative data on tumour growth rates in these 2 groups are lacking. Here, we have examined 80 high-risk women under surveillance for tumour size at diagnosis and preceding examinations at mammography and/or MRI. Tumour volume doubling time (DT) was assessed in 30 cancers in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and 25 non-carriers. Impact of age and menopausal status were also evaluated. Mean DT of all invasive cancers was shorter in carriers (45 days CI: 26-73) than non-carriers (84 days CI: 58-131) (P = 0.048). Mean age at diagnosis was lower in carriers (40 years) than non-carriers (45 years) (P = 0.007). At multivariable analysis only age (P = 0.03), not risk-group (P = 0.26) nor menopause (P = 0.58) correlated significantly with DT. The mean growth rate slowed down to half in each successive 10 years-older group. In conclusion, age at detection indicated the growth rates of hereditary and familial breast cancers. It is recommended that the screening frequency should be adjusted according to a woman's age and a high-sensitive biannual test may be appropriate before the age of 40 years.

Objective: Women at high risk of ovarian cancer are currently offered two options: either surveillance or prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The efficacy and outcome of surveillance remain unclear., Methods: We performed a retrospective study. Between 1994 and 2000, we screened 383 high-risk women, of which 152 were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Surveillance consisted of annual gynecological examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and serum CA125 measurement. Exploratory or prophylactic surgery was performed in selected cases., Results: There were no screen-detected primary ovarian cancers. Abnormal results at surveillance were observed in 74 (19.3%) of women; in 47 (63.5%), the abnormalities disappeared spontaneously. Exploratory surgery was performed in 20 (27.0%) women in whom one malignancy was found (metastatic breast cancer in the ovary). A rising CA125 value prompted further (non-surgical) evaluation in three women with a history of breast cancer: recurrent breast cancer was diagnosed in two women; in the third, a chondrosarcoma was found. 133 women opted for prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, whereby two unexpected malignancies were found (fallopian tube cancer and metastatic breast cancer). One interval primary ovarian cancer occurred, presenting as papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum 14 months after prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Complications of prophylactic surgery were encountered in 15 (11.5%) women., Conclusions: Ovarian cancer surveillance has limited sensitivity, and a high number of false positive findings. This can lead to unnecessary surgical interventions, possibly resulting in surgery-related complications. It is important to inform high-risk women of these limitations. For now, prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy remains the optimal risk-reducing strategy for women at high risk.

Background: The germline CHEK2*1100delC variant has been associated with breast cancer in multiple case families where involvement of BRCA1 and BRCA2 has been excluded., Methods: We have investigated the tumour characteristics and prognosis of carriers of this germline variant by means of a prospective cohort study in an unselected cohort of 1084 consecutive patients with primary breast cancer. Data were collected for 34 patients with a germline CHEK2*1100delC mutation and for 102 patients without this mutation, stratified by age and date of diagnosis of the first primary breast cancer (within 1 year)., Results: Carriers developed steroid receptor positive tumours (oestrogen receptor (ER): 91%; progesterone receptor (PR): 81%) more frequently than non-carriers (ER: 69%; PR: 53%; p = 0.04). Mutation carriers more frequently had a female first or second degree relative with breast cancer (p = 0.03), or had any first or second degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer (p = 0.04). Patients with the CHEK2 variant had a more unfavourable prognosis regarding the occurrence of contralateral breast cancer (relative risk (RR) = 5.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67 to 19.65), distant metastasis-free survival (RR = 2.81; 95% CI 1.20 to 6.58), and disease-free survival (RR = 3.86; 95% CI 1.91 to 7.78). As yet, no difference with respect to overall survival has been found at a median follow up of 3.8 years., Conclusion: We conclude that carrying the CHEK2*1100delC mutation is an adverse prognostic indicator for breast cancer. If independently confirmed by others, intensive surveillance, and possibly preventive measures, should be considered for newly diagnosed breast cancer cases carrying the CHEK2*1100delC variant.

Background: The value of regular surveillance for breast cancer in women with a genetic or familial predisposition to breast cancer is currently unproven. We compared the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with that of mammography for screening in this group of high-risk women., Methods: Women who had a cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of 15 percent or more were screened every six months with a clinical breast examination and once a year by mammography and MRI, with independent readings. The characteristics of the cancers that were detected were compared with the characteristics of those in two different age-matched control groups., Results: We screened 1909 eligible women, including 358 carriers of germ-line mutations. Within a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, 51 tumors (44 invasive cancers, 6 ductal carcinomas in situ, and 1 lymphoma) and 1 lobular carcinoma in situ were detected. The sensitivity of clinical breast examination, mammography, and MRI for detecting invasive breast cancer was 17.9 percent, 33.3 percent, and 79.5 percent, respectively, and the specificity was 98.1 percent, 95.0 percent, and 89.8 percent, respectively. The overall discriminating capacity of MRI was significantly better than that of mammography (P<0.05). The proportion of invasive tumors that were 10 mm or less in diameter was significantly greater in our surveillance group (43.2 percent) than in either control group (14.0 percent [P<0.001] and 12.5 percent [P=0.04], respectively). The combined incidence of positive axillary nodes and micrometastases in invasive cancers in our study was 21.4 percent, as compared with 52.4 percent (P<0.001) and 56.4 percent (P=0.001) in the two control groups., Conclusions: MRI appears to be more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women with an inherited susceptibility to breast cancer., (Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society)

The overall rate of an ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) ranges from 1% to 2% per year. Risk factors include young age but data on the impact of BRCA1/2 mutations or a definite positive family history for breast cancer are scarce. We investigated IBTR after BCT in patients with hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Through our family cancer clinic we identified 87 HBC patients, including 26 BRCA1/2 carriers, who underwent BCT between 1980 and 1995 (cases). They were compared to 174 patients with sporadic breast cancer (controls) also treated with BCT, matched for age and year of diagnosis. Median follow up was 6.1 years for the cases and 6.0 years for controls. Patient and tumour characteristics were similar in both groups. An IBTR was observed in 19 (21.8%) hereditary and 21 (12.1%) sporadic patients. In the hereditary patients more recurrences occurred elsewhere in the breast (21% versus 9.5%), suggestive of new primaries. Overall, the actuarial IBTR rate was similar at 2 years, but higher in hereditary as compared to sporadic patients at 5 years (14% versus 7%) and at 10 years (30% versus 16%) (P=0.05). Post-relapse and overall survival was not different between hereditary and sporadic cases. Hereditary breast cancer was therefore associated with a higher frequency of early (2-5 years) and late (>5 years) local recurrences following BCT. These data suggest an indication for long-term follow up in HBC and should be taken into account when additional 'risk-reducing' surgery after primary BCT is eventually considered.

Possible effects of consistently applying published guidelines on healthy women with breast cancer in their family history were analysed. We investigated 1060 unrelated breast cancer patients and calculated the numbers of first-degree relatives that would be referred to a familial cancer clinic if the guidelines were consistently applied. A first-degree relative was considered a candidate for referral if she was female, without breast cancer at the moment of the interview, alive and over the age of 24. The criteria for referral were based on one Dutch and two British guidelines. According to the Dutch guideline, for one affected woman with breast cancer, 0.25 (95% CI 0.22-0.28) healthy first-degree female relatives should be offered a consultation at a familial cancer clinic (FCC). Application of the British guidelines would lead to a similar number of referrals. Of all healthy first-degree female relatives, who should be referred to an FCC, 34-37% had an index case among their family who was already known at a genetic department. If current guidelines are consistently applied, a sharp increase in referrals to FCCs may be expected. These guidelines, however, are arbitrary and only limited data are available on the efficacy of this surveillance for high-risk healthy women.

Purpose: To analyze the use of genetic testing, prophylactic mastectomy, and oophorectomy among women with breast and/or ovarian cancer from families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation., Patients and Methods: We examined prospectively the use of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in all women with a primary breast or ovarian cancer from a consecutive series of 112 high-risk families in which a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation eventually was identified. The rate of prophylactic bilateral and contralateral mastectomy and prophylactic oophorectomy was analyzed in the women who carried a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation and who had no metastatic disease at the time of the genetic test disclosure. We examined predictors for genetic test uptake and prophylactic surgery using univariate and multivariate analysis., Results: Overall, 192 of 220 women (87%) with primary tumors underwent genetic testing. Eleven of these 192 tested women (6%) appeared not to carry the family-specific BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation. Genetic testing occurred significantly more frequently at ages younger than 50 years (P =.04) and in persons with multiple primary tumors (P =.02). Among eligible women, 35 of 101 (35%) requested bilateral or contralateral mastectomy, and 47 of 95 (49%) requested oophorectomy. Women aged younger than 50 years and women who developed their first tumor after the initial identification of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation in the family were significantly (both P =.01) more likely to opt for prophylactic bilateral or contralateral mastectomy., Conclusion: In a clinical setting, we show a high demand for BRCA1/BRCA2 testing and for prophylactic surgery by women with breast and/or ovarian cancer from high-risk families.

Genetic testing enables women at risk for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer to find out whether they have inherited the gene mutation (BRCA1/BRCA2), and if so, to opt for frequent surveillance and/or prophylactic surgery (bilateral mastectomy and/or oophorectomy). Here, a follow-up is described for 63 healthy women at 50% risk of being a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carrier who underwent genetic testing. The course of distress and problems regarding body image and sexuality up to 1 year after disclosure of the test-outcome were described separately for mutation carriers undergoing mastectomy (n = 14), for mutation carriers opting for surveillance (n = 12) and for non-mutation carriers (n = 37). Furthermore, we analyzed whether women opting for prophylactic mastectomy differed from those opting for close surveillance with respect to biographical characteristics, experiences with cancer in relatives and personality. Women opting for prophylactic mastectomy had significantly higher distress levels than mutation carriers who opted for surveillance, and the non-mutation carriers. This difference in levels of distress was highest at pre- and post-test and had almost disappeared at 1-year follow-up. Besides, mutation carriers opting for prophylactic mastectomy were more often in their thirties, more often had young children and had a longer awareness of the genetic nature of cancer in the family than those opting for regular surveillance. Adverse effects were observed in women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy (mostly in combination with immediate breast reconstruction) regarding the perception of how their breast region looked like and felt, the intimate relationship and physical wellbeing whereas women opting for prophylactic mastectomy reported more distress than the other women in the study, their distress levels had significantly decreased 6 months or longer after surgery, possibly due to the significant risk reduction of developing breast cancer. This might explain, why most women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy were satisfied with this decision, despite a perceived negative impact on body image, the intimate relationship and physical wellbeing.

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.

Purpose: Women with a high breast cancer risk due to a familial predisposition may choose between preventive surgery and regular surveillance. The effectiveness of surveillance in high-risk women and especially BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown. We present first results from a single large family cancer clinic., Patients and Methods: Women with breast cancer risk over 15% were examined by physical examination every 6 months and mammography every year. Detection rates and screening parameters were calculated for the total group and separately for different age and genetic risk groups., Results: At least one examination was performed in 1,198 women: 449 moderate and 621 high-risk women and 128 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Within a median follow-up of 3 years, 35 breast cancers were detected (four ductal carcinoma-in-situ; 31 invasive tumors); the average detection rate was 9.7 per 1,000. Detection rates (95% confidence interval) for moderate and high-risk women and BRCA1/2 carriers were 3.3 (1.1 to 8.6), 8.4 (5.4 to 13.2), and 33 (17 to 63) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. The ratio of observed cases versus breast cancers expected in an average-risk population of comparable age was 2.7, 7.0 and 23.7 respectively. Overall, node negativity was 65%; 34% of primary tumors were less than 10 mm; sensitivity was 74%. Results with respect to tumor stage and sensitivity were less favorable in BRCA1/2 carriers and in women under the age of 40., Conclusion: It is possible to identify young women at high risk for breast cancer. The number of cancers detected was significantly greater than expected in an age-matched average-risk population and related to the risk category. Overall, screening parameters were comparable to population screening data, with less favorable results in the youngest age group (< 40) and BRCA1/2 carriers.

Mammography screening of women aged 50-70 years for breast cancer has proven to be effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. There is no consensus about the value of breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years. Five to ten per cent of all breast cancers are hereditary. One of the options to reduce the risk of breast cancer mortality for women with a familial or genetic predisposition is intensive surveillance. However, the effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in these women, who are mainly younger than 50 years, is unproven. MRI might increase the effectiveness of screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. This paper describes the design of the Dutch national study for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. The aims of this study are to investigate: the value of regular surveillance in women with a familial or genetic predisposition for breast cancer, the efficacy of MRI as compared to mammography, cost-effectiveness of regular screening and quality of life during surveillance. Included are women with a lifetime risk of familial breast cancer of 15% or more or BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, who visit one of the Dutch family cancer clinics. The aim is to include 2,500 women. The study started on 1 November 1999. On 1 January 2002, more than 1,700 women, including 210 proven carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, were included in the study.

Purpose: Breast cancer in BRCA2 gene mutation carriers differs from BRCA1-associated breast cancer or so-called sporadic breast cancer in clinical features and behavior. These differences may be of importance for the prevention, screening, and ultimately treatment of breast cancer in women with such germline mutations., Methods: We reviewed the few studies that have reported on survival in patients with BRCA2-associated breast cancer. In this article we discuss why family history is no substitute for hereditary breast cancer with regard to studying survival and possible reasons why studies using family history yield contradictory results, why BRCA2-associated breast cancer should be considered a unique entity, and what methodological problems may exist, especially with regard to family-based studies., Results: Five studies have reported on survival in BRCA2-associated breast cancer. Two studies showed a statistically significant worse survival for BRCA2 patients, but the patients from one of these studies were later claimed to have a trend toward better prognosis when controls were matched for age and year of diagnosis. The other study found that the unfavorable prognosis of BRCA2 patients was, to a great extent, due to a worse stage of the disease at time of diagnosis. The remaining three studies showed no significant effect of germline BRCA2 mutations on survival. The numbers of BRCA2 patients investigated in these studies were 42, 20, 23, 28, and 54 patients. Five-year overall survival in these patients varied from 65% to 74%., Conclusion: No definite conclusion can be made with regard to the prognosis of BRCA2-associated breast cancer, but large differences in comparison with sporadic breast cancer are not likely to exist. Breast cancer caused by BRCA2 mutations is also a distinct entity with its own features when compared with BRCA1-associated breast cancer. In contrast with BRCA1-associated breast cancer, BRCA2 tumors tend to be more often steroid receptor-positive.

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers diagnosed with breast cancer have a strongly elevated life-time risk of developing a contralateral tumour. We studied the contralateral breast cancer risk in 164 patients from 83 families with a proven BRCA1 mutation in relation to the age at diagnosis of the first primary breast cancer. In the actuarial outcomes after 10 years' follow-up, 40% of the 124 BRCA1-patients diagnosed with breast cancer < 50 years had developed contralateral breast cancer, vs 12% of the 40 patients > 50 years at first diagnosis (Plogrank = 0.02). These data suggest that age at diagnosis of the first tumour should be taken into account when prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1-patients is considered.

Background: Germline mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes highly predispose to breast and ovarian cancer. In families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, identification of mutation carriers is clinically relevant in view of the options for surveillance and prevention., Methods: We assessed presymptomatic DNA testing and prophylactic surgery in 53 consecutive families presenting to the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic with a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. We identified predictors for DNA testing and prophylactic surgery with univariate and multivariate analysis., Findings: 682 unaffected individuals with a 50% risk (275 women and 271 men) or with a 25% risk (136 women) for carrying a mutation were identified and offered a DNA test. Presymptomatic DNA testing was requested by 48% (198 of 411) of women and 22% (59 of 271) of men (odds ratio for difference between sexes 3.21 [95% CI 2.27-4.51]; p<0.001). In women, DNA testing was significantly more frequent at young age, in the presence of children, and at high pre-test genetic risk for a mutation. Of the unaffected women with an identified mutation who were eligible for prophylactic surgery, 51% (35 of 68) opted for bilateral mastectomy and 64% (29 of 45) for oophorectomy. Parenthood was a predictor for prophylactic mastectomy but not for prophylactic oophorectomy. Age was significantly associated with prophylactic oophorectomy, but not with prophylactic mastectomy, although there was a tendency towards mastectomy at younger ages., Interpretation: In a clinical setting, we show a high demand for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing by unaffected women at risk, and of prophylactic surgery by unaffected women with the mutation. Young women with children especially opt for DNA testing and prophylactic mastectomy.

Purpose: Breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene-mutation carriers may differ from so-called sporadic breast cancer in clinical features and behavior. These potential differences may be of importance for the prevention, screening, and, ultimately, treatment of breast cancer in women with such germline mutations. Thus far, there have been very few studies on the survival of BRCA2-associated breast cancer patients., Patients and Methods: We determined the disease-free and overall survival of 28 breast cancer patients from 14 consecutive families with eight different BRCA2 germline mutations. These patients' survival and tumor characteristics were compared with those of a control group of 112 sporadic breast cancer patients matched to them by age and year of diagnosis., Results: The 5-year disease-free survival was 52% for each group (P =.91); the overall survival was 74% for BRCA2 carriers and 75% for sporadic cases (P =.50). At the time of diagnosis, tumors from the BRCA2 carriers were borderline significantly larger in comparison to the tumors in sporadic cases (P =.05), but axillary nodal status was not significantly different in the two groups (node-negativity, 63% v 52. 8%, respectively; P =.34). With respect to steroid receptor status, BRCA2-associated tumors were more likely to be steroid receptor-positive, especially regarding progesterone receptor status (100% v 76.7% positive, respectively; P =.06). Stage-adjusted recurrence and death rates were nonsignificantly better for BRCA2 cases (hazard ratios of 0.84 and 0.59 [P =.61 and P =.19], respectively). In contrast, after 5 years, the rate of metachronous contralateral breast cancer in BRCA2 patients was 12% (v 2% in controls; P =.02)., Conclusion: Patients with hereditary breast cancer due to BRCA2 have a similar prognosis when compared with age-matched sporadic breast cancer patients. Contrary to our previous observation regarding BRCA1-associated breast cancer, BRCA2 tumors tended to be steroid receptor-positive, instead of steroid receptor-negative.

The impact of a family history of breast cancer on the local recurrence (LR) risk after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) was performed within the framework of a large, multicentre matched case-control study of risk factors for LR after BCT (BORST study). Family history was assessed for 218 breast cancer patients with LR (cases) and 480 patients without LR (controls). Detailed histological tumour features were determined by review of the primary tumour. The risk of LR for patients with a positive family history was similar to or less than that of non-familial patients (unadjusted odds ratio (ORunadj) 0.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40-1.08)). Familial patients were older than non-familial patients (P = 0.07) and their tumours had a lower histological grade (P = 0.07). A second primary tumour occurred significantly more often in familial patients (P = 0.02). Adjustment for these factors did not essentially alter the results (ORadj 0.71 (0.38-1.32)). Separate analyses according to age at onset (younger and older than 50 years) and time to LR/site of LR produced similar results. The sole presence of a positive family history of breast cancer does not appear to be a risk factor for local recurrence after BCT. Whilst this might be different for genetically predisposed patients, a positive family history does not appear to be a contra-indication for BCT.

Background: Hereditary breast cancer has been associated with mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and has a natural history different from sporadic breast cancer. We investigated disease-free and overall survival for patients with a proven BRCA1 alteration., Methods: We estimated disease-free and overall survival for 49 Dutch patients from 19 consecutive families with a proven specific BRCA1 mutation and one family with strong evidence for linkage to the BRCA1 gene. We compared clinical outcome and data on tumour size, histology, axillary nodal status, contralateral breast cancer, and oestrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor status with those of 196 patients with sporadic breast cancer, matched for age and year of diagnosis., Findings: Disease-free survival for BRCA1 and sporadic patients at 5 years was 49% (95% CI 33-64) and 51% (43-59), respectively (p=0.98). Overall survival at 5 years was 63% (47-76) and 69% (62-76), respectively (p=0.88). Recurrence and death rates did not differ significantly between groups. Hazard ratios for recurrence and death among BRCA1 patients were 1.00 (0.65-1.55) and 1.04 (0.63-1.71) relative to sporadic patients (p=0.88), and these did not differ significantly after adjustment for prognostic factors. Patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancer had twice as many progesterone-receptor-negative tumours (p<0.005) and development of contralateral breast cancer was four to five times as frequent as in the sporadic group (p<0.001)., Interpretation: We showed that disease-free and overall survival were similar for sporadic and hereditary breast cancer in the presence of different tumour characteristics, which has implications for screening prophylactic therapy, and different treatments of hereditary breast cancer.

Background: Interval breast cancers are defined as carcinomas occurring within 2 years after a negative screening Distinction has to made between cancers existent at the time of screening but missed for some reason, and fast-growing incident cancers. This is important because the natural history and the implications for the treatment of the patient might differ., Methods: Radiologic and histopathologic characteristics were assembled for 104 interval cancers diagnosed within the DOM project, the Utrecht program for the early detection of breast cancer. At a mammographic review for 27 cases, signs of malignant or benign tumor were found (missed cases). For 77 cases no radiologic signs were present on review. Twenty of these cases had a mitotic rate of > 3 and a high tumor growth rate (mean doubling time: 51 days). This combination seemed implausible, therefore, it was thought hypothesized that these tumors were most likely present, although radiologically invisible (masked), at the time of screening. The remaining cases (n = 57) were classified as true interval cancers and further divided into 14 fast-growing cases (mitotic rate > or = 3/high-power field [HPF]) and 43 cases with an intermediate growth rate (mitotic rate < 3/HPF)., Results: Factors associated with the masking of tumors were the histologic tumor type, absence of microscopic calcifications, and presence of dense breast tissue. Fast-growing tumors were characterized by a young patient age, absence of microscopic calcifications, and a high percentage of regional lymph node positive tumors. The 5-year survival probability was 100% for missed cases, 70% for masked cases, 80% for cases with an intermediate growth rate, and 54% for fast-growing cases., Conclusions: It is possible to separate interval breast cancers in true interval cases and cases (most likely) existent at the time of screening. Part of this last group is invisible by mammography (masked).

Study Objective: To estimate age dependent sensitivity and sojourn time in a breast cancer screening programme by different methods., Population and Methods: The study population comprised women participating in the DOM project--the Utrecht screening programme for the early detection of breast cancer. Breast cancer screening prevalence data and incidence rates after a negative screen were used to estimate age specific sensitivity and mean sojourn time by different methods., Main Results: Maximum likelihood estimates of the mean sojourn time varied from one year for women aged 40-49 years to three years for women over the age of 54. Sensitivity was calculated by two different methods. Both pointed to a high sensitivity (around 100%) in the age groups 40-49 and over 55 years. For women aged 50-54, the sensitivity varied from 63% to 100%, depending on the method used and the value of the baseline incidence rate., Conclusions: Different methods of estimating sensitivity pointed at an acceptable level in women over and under 50 years of age. Sojourn time, and thus the tumour growth rate, seemed to be age dependent. This could mean that the until now disappointing screening results in women under 50 years of age are not so much a result of low sensitivity as of a relatively high tumour growth rate in younger women.

The study describes breast cancer survival of 75 interval cancer cases (cancer occurring within 2 years of a negative screen) detected in women who participated in the DOM screening programme. After mammographic revision, this group was divided into 17 so-called 'missed' cases and 58 'true' interval cases. Ten year survival of these 58 'true' interval cases was 58%, which was not significantly different from that of 219 cancers detected in a non-screened, control group of women, diagnosed with breast cancer before the start of screening (63%; log rank chi 2 test, P = 0.98). Results remained essentially the same after correction for age at diagnosis, tumour size, axillary status and year of diagnosis. Ten year survival of 'true' interval cancers (58%) was slightly worse than that of 'missed' cases (67%; log rank chi 2 test: P = 0.38). This difference could largely be explained by differences in tumour size and axillary status. We conclude that there was no important difference in survival between 'true' interval cancers and non-screened historical controls. This could mean that either this subgroup of interval cancers does not constitute an excess of rapidly growing tumours, or if it does, that a fast growth rate is not associated with an exceptionally poor prognosis.

Risk factors for breast cancer were compared in 107 women with interval breast cancer (cancers occurring within 2 years after a negative screen) and 258 women with breast cancer detected at 1st screening. All women (aged 40-67) were screened in the DOM project (the Utrecht programme for the early detection of breast cancer). Women with an interval cancer reported more often a history of benign breast disease (OR 4.66, 95% C.I. 2.08-10.41) and an artificial menopause (OR 4.07; 95% C.I. 1.74-9.55) than women with a screen detected cancer. Women with an interval cancer were taller than women with a screen detected cancer; this was seen most clearly in women with an artificial menopause (chi 2 for trend = 5.88; p = 0.02) and to a lesser extent in premenopausal women (chi 2 for trend = 1.70; p = 0.19). Premenopausal women with an interval cancer were heavier than women with a screen detected cancer (chi 2 for trend = 4.66; p = 0.03); whereas natural postmenopausal women with an interval cancer were leaner than women with a screen detected cancer (chi 2 for trend = 1.57; p = 0.21). All analyses were done while correcting for age and selected other risk factors for breast cancer. These results suggest that the epidemiological profile of pre- and post-menopausal women with an interval cancer differs from that of women with a screen detected cancer, which might imply a different natural history of these two types of breast tumours.

First-round screening results for women participating in the DOM project (a screening programme for early detection of breast cancer) are described for the age groups 40-49 and 50-64 at entry. In the younger age group, a low pick-up rate (1.96 per 1000) in proportion to the expected incidence rate in the absence of screening (1.46 per 1000) was found. For the older age group, these rates were 4.25 and 2.03, respectively, per 1000. Interval cancers occurred (relatively) more frequently in younger women. After 2 years the ratio between interval-cancers and screen-detected tumours was about 1:1 in the younger age group and 1:2.5 in the older age group. These different results can be caused by too low a sensitivity of mammography and/or a higher tumour growth rate at a young age. The sensitivity of the screen at various periods of follow-up, was compared: a rapidly decreasing sensitivity of mammography was seen for women under the age of 50, in contrast to a slower decrease for women over this age. This rapid decrease may be caused by a relatively high tumour growth rate in younger women.