Search

Cognitive and adaptive behaviour abilities early in life provide important clinical prognostic information. We examined stability of such skills in children at high familial risk for ASD who either met diagnostic criteria for ASD at age 7 years (HR-ASD, n = 15) or did not (HR-non-ASD, n = 24) and low-risk control children (LR, n = 37), prospectively studied from infancy. For both HR groups, cognitive skills were consistently lower across time than those of LR children. HR-ASD children showed increasing difficulties in adaptive behaviour over time compared to LR children, while the HR-non-ASD children showed no such difficulties. This pattern of change may inform our understanding of developmental profiles of HR siblings beyond core ASD symptoms.

Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.

Cognitive and adaptive behaviour abilities early in life provide important clinical prognostic information. We examined stability of such skills in children at high familial risk for ASD who either met diagnostic criteria for ASD at age 7 years (HR-ASD, n = 15) or did not (HR-non-ASD, n = 24) and low-risk control children (LR, n = 37), prospectively studied from infancy. For both HR groups, cognitive skills were consistently lower across time than those of LR children. HR-ASD children showed increasing difficulties in adaptive behaviour over time compared to LR children, while the HR-non-ASD children showed no such difficulties. This pattern of change may inform our understanding of developmental profiles of HR siblings beyond core ASD symptoms.

Background:We investigated the additional contribution of mammography to screening accuracy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers screened with MRI at different ages using individual patient data from six high-risk screening trials.Methods:Sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography and the combination of these tests were compared stratified for BRCA mutation and age using generalised linear mixed models with random effect for studies. Number of screens needed (NSN) for additional mammography-only detected cancer was estimated.Results:In BRCA1/2 mutation carriers of all ages (BRCA1=1219 and BRCA2=732), adding mammography to MRI did not significantly increase screening sensitivity (increased by 3.9% in BRCA1 and 12.6% in BRCA2 mutation carriers, P>0.05). However, in women with BRCA2 mutation younger than 40 years, one-third of breast cancers were detected by mammography only. Number of screens needed for mammography to detect one breast cancer not detected by MRI was much higher for BRCA1 compared with BRCA2 mutation carriers at initial and repeat screening.Conclusions:Additional screening sensitivity from mammography above that from MRI is limited in BRCA1 mutation carriers, whereas mammography contributes to screening sensitivity in BRCA2 mutation carriers, especially those ≤40 years. The evidence from our work highlights that a differential screening schedule by BRCA status is worth considering.

Objectives: Breast cancer screening using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited accessibility due to high costs of breast MRI. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI can be acquired within 2 minutes. We aimed to assess whether screening performance of breast radiologist using an ultrafast breast MRI-only screening protocol is as good as performance using a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol (FDP).Materials and Methods: The institutional review board approved this study, and waived the need for informed consent. Between January 2012 and June 2014, 1791 consecutive breast cancer screening examinations from 954 women with a lifetime risk of more than 20% were prospectively collected. All women were scanned using a 3 T protocol interleaving ultrafast breast MRI acquisitions in a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol consisting of standard dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, diffusion-weighted imaging, and T2-weighted imaging. Subsequently, a case set was created including all biopsied screen-detected lesions in this period (31 malignant and 54 benign) and 116 randomly selected normal cases with more than 2 years of follow-up. Prior examinations were included when available. Seven dedicated breast radiologists read all 201 examinations and 153 available priors once using the FDP and once using ultrafast breast MRI only in 2 counterbalanced and crossed-over reading sessions.Results: For reading the FDP versus ultrafast breast MRI alone, sensitivity was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.90) versus 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88) (P = 0.50), specificity was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) versus 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) (P = 0.002), positive predictive value was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.36-0.45) versus 0.45 (95% CI, 0.41-0.50) (P = 0.14), and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) versus 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) (P = 0.83). Ultrafast breast MRI reading was 22.8% faster than reading FDP (P Conclusions: Breast MRI screening using only an ultrafast breast MRI protocol is noninferior to screening with an FDP and may result in significantly higher screening specificity and shorter reading time.

// Jolien S. de Groot 1 , Paul J. van Diest 1 , Miranda van Amersfoort 1 , Eva J. Vlug 1 , Xiaojuan Pan 1 , Natalie D. ter Hoeve 1 , Hilde Rosing 2 , Jos H. Beijnen 2,3 , Sameh A. Youssef 4 , Alain de Bruin 4,5 , Jos Jonkers 6 , Elsken van der Wall 7 and Patrick W.B. Derksen 1 1 Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands 2 Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands 4 Department of Pathobiology, Dutch Molecular Pathology Center, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands 5 Department of Pediatrics, Division of Molecular Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands 6 Department of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 7 Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands Correspondence to: Patrick W.B. Derksen, email: // Keywords : breast cancer, BRCA, intraductal, cisplatin, olaparib Received : February 03, 2017 Accepted : April 06, 2017 Published : June 15, 2017 Abstract BRCA deficiency predisposes to the development of invasive breast cancer. In BRCA mutation carriers this risk can increase up to 80%. Currently, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy are the only preventive, albeit radical invasive strategies to prevent breast cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. An alternative non-invasive way to prevent BRCA1 -associated breast cancer may be local prophylactic treatment via the nipple. Using a non-invasive intraductal (ID) preclinical intervention strategy, we explored the use of combined cisplatin and poly (ADP)-ribose polymerase 1 (PARP1) inhibition to prevent the development of hereditary breast cancer. We show that ID cisplatin and PARP-inhibition can successfully ablate mammary epithelial cells, and this approach attenuated tumor onset in a mouse model of Brca1-associated breast cancer from 153 to 239 days. Long-term carcinogenicity studies in 150 syngeneic wild-type mice demonstrated that tumor incidence was increased in the ID treated mammary glands by 6.3% due to systemic exposure to cisplatin. Although this was only evident in aged mice (median age = 649 days), we conclude that ID cisplatin treatment only presents a safe and feasible local prevention option if systemic exposure to the chemotherapy used can be avoided.

Annual MRI and mammography is recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers to reduce breast cancer mortality. Less intensive screening is advised >= 60 years, although effectiveness is unknown. We identified BRCA1/2 mutation carriers without bilateral mastectomy before age 60 to determine for whom screening >= 60 is relevant, in the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic and HEBON: a nationwide prospective cohort study. Furthermore, we compared tumour stage at breast cancer diagnosis between different screening strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60. Tumours >2 cm, positive lymph nodes, or distant metastases at detection were defined as "unfavourable." Of 548 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60 years in 2012, 395 (72%) did not have bilateral mastectomy before the age of 60. Of these 395, 224 (57%) had a history of breast or other invasive carcinoma. In 136 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, we compared 148 breast cancers (including interval cancers) detected >= 60, of which 84 (57%) were first breast cancers. With biennial mammography 53% (30/57) of carcinomas were detected in unfavourable stage, compared to 21% (12/56) with annual mammography (adjusted odds ratio: 4.07, 95% confidence interval [1.79-9.28], p = 0.001). With biennial screening 40% of breast cancers were interval cancers, compared to 20% with annual screening (p = 0.016). Results remained significant for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, and first breast cancers separately. Over 70% of 60-year old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remain at risk for breast cancer, of which half has prior cancers. When life expectancy is good, continuation of annual breast cancer screening of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60 is worthwhile.

Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.

Breast cancer screening is offered to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from the age of 25 years because of their increased risk of breast cancer. As ovarian cancer screening is not effective, risk-reducing salpingho-oophorectomy (RRSO) is offered after child bearing age. RRSO before menopause reduces the breast cancer risk as well as breast density. It can be questioned whether after premenopausal RRSO, the intensive breast cancer screening program needs modification. We evaluated the effectiveness of breast cancer screening by clinical breast examination (CBE), mammography, and MRI in a population of 88 BRCA1 and 51 BRCA2 mutation carriers who had RRSO before the age of 52. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each screening modality. During 422 women years, 14 breast cancers were diagnosed; 2 prevalent, 10 screen detected and 2 interval breast cancers (12 in BRCA1 and 2 in BRCA2 mutation carriers). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for the combined screening were 85.7%, 97.6%, 30.0%, and 99.8%, respectively. No tumors were found with CBE, MRI had a sensitivity of 60.0% and mammography of 55.6%. Off all the tumors, 60% were node positive. Effectiveness of CBE and mammography was comparable to earlier findings. MRI screening seemed less effective than earlier findings. After RRSO, the breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is still high enough to justify intensive breast cancer screening with MRI and mammography.

Contains fulltext : 69016.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The appearance of malignant lesions in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-MCs) on mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was evaluated. Thus, 29 BRCA-MCs with breast cancer were retrospectively evaluated and the results compared with an age, tumor size and tumor type matched control group of 29 sporadic breast cancer cases. Detection rates on both modalities were evaluated. Tumors were analyzed on morphology, density (mammography), enhancement pattern and kinetics (MRI). Overall detection was significantly better with MRI than with mammography (55/58 vs 44/57, P=0.021). On mammography, lesions in the BRCA-MC group were significantly more described as rounded (12//19 vs 3/13, P=0.036) and with sharp margins (9/19 vs 1/13, P=0.024). On MRI lesions in the BRCA-MC group were significantly more described as rounded (16/27 vs 7/28, P=0.010), with sharp margins (20/27 vs 7/28, P

Purpose There is no consensus on whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be included in breast screening protocols for women with BRCA1/2 mutations age ≥ 50 years. Therefore, we investigated the evidence on age-related screening accuracy in women with BRCA1/2 mutations using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Patients and Methods IPD were pooled from six high-risk screening trials including women with BRCA1/2 mutations who had completed at least one screening round with both MRI and mammography. A generalized linear mixed model with repeated measurements and a random effect of studies estimated sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography, and the combination in all women and specifically in those age ≥ 50 years. Results Pooled analysis showed that in women age ≥ 50 years, screening sensitivity was not different from that in women age < 50 years, whereas screening specificity was. In women age ≥ 50 years, combining MRI and mammography significantly increased screening sensitivity compared with mammography alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 38.1%; 95% CI, 22.4% to 56.7%; P < .001). The combination was not significantly more sensitive than MRI alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 84.4%; 95% CI, 61.8% to 94.8%; P = .28). Combining MRI and mammography in women age ≥ 50 years resulted in sensitivity similar to that in women age < 50 years (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 93.2%; 95% CI, 79.3% to 98%; P = .79). Conclusion Addition of MRI to mammography for screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers age ≥ 50 years improves screening sensitivity by a magnitude similar to that observed in younger women. Limiting screening MRI in BRCA1/2 carriers age ≥ 50 years should be reconsidered.

Contains fulltext : 49322.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 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, >/=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 >/=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.

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 ≤1 cm (58 vs. 31%; P = 0.11). MRI was more sensitive than mammography for a wide spectrum of invasive tumor characteristics i.e., size, nodal status, histology, grade and ER status. Half of the breast cancers detected in this study were visible by MRI only and these tumors were smaller and significantly more often node-negative than other screen-detected tumors, suggesting that MRI makes an important contribution to the early detection of hereditary breast cancer.

Annual MRI and mammography is recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers to reduce breast cancer mortality. Less intensive screening is advised >= 60 years, although effectiveness is unknown. We identified BRCA1/2 mutation carriers without bilateral mastectomy before age 60 to determine for whom screening >= 60 is relevant, in the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic and HEBON: a nationwide prospective cohort study. Furthermore, we compared tumour stage at breast cancer diagnosis between different screening strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60. Tumours >2 cm, positive lymph nodes, or distant metastases at detection were defined as "unfavourable." Of 548 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60 years in 2012, 395 (72%) did not have bilateral mastectomy before the age of 60. Of these 395, 224 (57%) had a history of breast or other invasive carcinoma. In 136 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, we compared 148 breast cancers (including interval cancers) detected >= 60, of which 84 (57%) were first breast cancers. With biennial mammography 53% (30/57) of carcinomas were detected in unfavourable stage, compared to 21% (12/56) with annual mammography (adjusted odds ratio: 4.07, 95% confidence interval [1.79-9.28], p = 0.001). With biennial screening 40% of breast cancers were interval cancers, compared to 20% with annual screening (p = 0.016). Results remained significant for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, and first breast cancers separately. Over 70% of 60-year old BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remain at risk for breast cancer, of which half has prior cancers. When life expectancy is good, continuation of annual breast cancer screening of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers >= 60 is worthwhile.

Premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers effectively reduces ovarian cancer risk, but also reduces breast cancer risk. Breast cancer risk reductions up to 50% have been reported for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, but recent prospective studies were not able to reproduce this finding for BRCA1 mutation carriers. Breast cancer incidence after RRSO was assessed in a consecutive series of 104 BRCA1 and 58 BRCA2 mutation carriers. On the basis of data from our own centre, and assuming a 50% risk reduction through RRSO at premenopausal age, we expected to find 8 breast cancers (range 6–10) in this population for the reported screening period (532 women-years). In 162 carriers with a median age of 41 years at RRSO, 13 incident breast cancers were diagnosed. In BRCA1 mutation carriers, 12 incident breast cancers were found compared with 5 (range 3–6) expected and in BRCA2 mutation carriers 1 breast cancer was found compared with 3 (range 2–5) expected. Breast cancer incidence after premenopausal RRSO is still high, especially in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Previously reported breast cancer risk reductions up to 50% were not confirmed. As a consequence, continued intensive screening for breast cancer is warranted in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers after RRSO. Cancer Prev Res; 5(11); 1291–7. ©2012 AACR.

Introduction: For women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation or a strong family history of breast cancer, there is no clear estimation of the risk of tumour induction versus the beneficial effects of mammography screening available. This study aims to validate the Simulation Model on Radiation Risk and breast cancer Screening (SiMRiSc) model in these women, which can provide information on the benefits and risks of screening for breast cancer for various screening scenarios.Methods: The simulation model for breast cancer screening was developed and the values for model parameters including cancer induction due to radiation were derived from the literature. The simulation model was validated by comparing the outcome data of the model with the data from three published screening studies of women with an increased hereditary breast cancer risk. A sensitivity analysis was used to estimate the error margins of the outcome data and to analyse the sensitivity of the simulation model to each parameter.Results: The model predicted 71 +/- 4% of the reported tumours. When excluding the excess number of incident tumours detected in the first screening round, the model predicted 85 +/- 6% of the tumours reported. The model was most sensitive to changes in the parameters related to lifetime breast cancer risk and sensitivity of mammography.Conclusions: We conclude that the simulation model is suitable for the provision of accurate benefits' and risks' estimations necessary for the refinement of the screening guidelines for women at an increased risk of breast cancer. Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.