Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Screening Syndrome Profile in Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer from Paraná State Southwest

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective This study evaluated the risk of the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome in patients with breast cancer by using the Family History Screening 7 (FHS-7) tool, a validated low-cost questionnaire with high sensitivity able to screen the HBOC risk in the population.

Methods Women diagnosed with breast cancer (n = 101) assisted by the Unified Health System at the 8th Regional Health Municipal Office of the state of Paraná answered the FHS-7, and the results were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

Results The risk of HBOC was 19.80% (n = 20). Patients at risk exhibited aggressive tumor characteristics, such as high-grade tumors (30%), presence of angiolymphatic emboli (35%), and premenopausal at diagnosis (50%). Significant associations between the prevalence of high-grade tumors were observed in women younger than 50 years at diagnosis with HBOC (p = 0.003).

Conclusion Our findings suggest a possible family inheritance associated with worse clinical features in women with breast cancer in this population, indicating that HBOC investigation can be initially performed with low-cost instruments such as FHS-7.

Resumo

Objetivo Este estudo avaliou o risco da síndrome hereditária de câncer de mama e ovário (HBOC, na sigla em inglês) em pacientes com câncer de mama utilizando a ferramenta Familial History Screening 7 (FHS-7), um questionário validado de baixo custo e com alta sensibilidade capaz de rastrear o risco de HBOC na população.

Métodos Mulheres diagnosticadas com câncer de mama (n = 101) assistidas pelo Sistema Único de Saúde da 8ª Regional de Saúde do estado do Paraná responderam ao questionário FHS-7, e os resultados foram analisados pelo software IBM SPSS for Windows, Version 25.0. (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, EUA).

Resultados A ocorrência do risco de HBOC foi de 19,80% (n = 20). Pacientes em risco exibiram características agressivas do tumor como tumores de alto grau (30%), presença de êmbolos angiolinfáticos (35%) e pré-menopausa ao diagnóstico (50%). Associações significantes foram observadas entre a prevalência de tumores de alto grau e diagnóstico abaixo de 50 anos no grupo HBOC (p = 0.003).

Conclusão Nossos achados sugerem uma possível herança familiar associada a piores características clínicas em mulheres com câncer de mama nessa população, indicando que a investigação de HBOC pode ser realizada, inicialmente, com instrumentos de baixo custo, como o FHS-7.

Contributors

C. P. and D. R. conceived and planned the study. The other authors performed the interviews and interpretation of the results. All authors wrote the manuscript and provided critical feedback.

Publication History

Received: 07 July 2020

Accepted: 27 May 2021

Article published online:
21 September 2021

© 2021. Federação Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

• References

• 1 Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva. Estimativa 2020: incidência de câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2019
  Google Scholar
• 2 Nielsen FC, van Overeem Hansen T, Sørensen CS. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: new genes in confined pathways. Nat Rev Cancer 2016; 16 (09) 599-612 DOI: 10.1038/nrc.2016.72.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Eleje GU, Eke AC, Ezebialu IU, Ikechebelu JI, Ugwu EO, Okonkwo OO. Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 8 (08) CD012464 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012464.pub2.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Palmero EI. Identificação e caracterização de pacientes em risco para câncer de mama hereditário no sul do Brasil [tese]. Porto Alegre: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; 2007
  Google Scholar
• 5 Arpino G, Milano M, De Placido S. Features of aggressive breast cancer. Breast 2015; 24 (05) 594-600 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.06.001.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Schneider IJ, d'Orsi E. Sobrevida em cinco anos e fatores prognósticos em mulheres com câncer de mama em Santa Catarina, Brasil. Cad Saude Publica 2009; 25 (06) 1285-1296 DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2009000600011.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Curtit E, Mansi L, Maisonnette-Escot Y, Sautière JL, Pivot X. Prognostic and predictive indicators in early-stage breast cancer and the role of genomic profiling: Focus on the Oncotype DX^® Breast Recurrence Score Assay. Eur J Surg Oncol 2017; 43 (05) 921-930 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.11.016.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Reis-Filho JS, Tutt AN. Triple negative tumours: a critical review. Histopathology 2008; 52 (01) 108-118 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2007.02889.x.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Wang YA, Jian JW, Hung CF. et al. Germline breast cancer susceptibility gene mutations and breast cancer outcomes. BMC Cancer 2018; 18 (01) 315 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4229-5.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Ashton-Prolla P, Giacomazzi J, Schmidt AV. et al. Development and validation of a simple questionnaire for the identification of hereditary breast cancer in primary care. BMC Cancer 2009; 9: 283 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-283.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Sinn HP, Kreipe H. A brief overview of the WHO Classification of Breast Tumors, 4th edition, focusing on issues and updates from the 3rd edition. Breast Care (Basel) 2013; 8 (02) 149-154 DOI: 10.1159/000350774.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS. et al; Panel members. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 2013; 24 (09) 2206-2223 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt303.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CE, Ellis IO. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1992; 22 (03) 207-219 DOI: 10.1007/BF01840834.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Greenup R, Buchanan A, Lorizio W. et al. Prevalence of BRCA mutations among women with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in a genetic counseling cohort. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20 (10) 3254-3258 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3205-1.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Loizzi V, Cicinelli E, Santamaria F. et al. BRCAmut and “founder effect”: a prospective study in a single academic institution. Oncotarget 2018; 9 (32) 22353-22358 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24959.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Baehner F. et al. Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010; 12 (04) 207 DOI: 10.1186/bcr2607.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Amendola LC, Vieira R. A contribuição dos genes BRCA na predisposição hereditária ao câncer de mama. Rev Bras Cancerol 2005; 51 (04) 325-330
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Song YJ, Shin SH, Cho JS, Park MH, Yoon JH, Jegal YJ. The role of lymphovascular invasion as a prognostic factor in patients with lymph node-positive operable invasive breast cancer. J Breast Cancer 2011; 14 (03) 198-203 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2011.14.3.198.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Calle EE, Kaaks R. Overweight, obesity and cancer: epidemiological evidence and proposed mechanisms. Nat Rev Cancer 2004; 4 (08) 579-591 DOI: 10.1038/nrc1408.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Kim JY, Lee DW, Lee KH. et al. Prognostic role of body mass index is different according to menopausal status and tumor subtype in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 176 (02) 453-460 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-019-05249-1.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Inumaru LE, Silveira EA, Naves MM. [Risk and protective factors for breast cancer: a systematic review]. Cad Saude Publica 2011; 27 (07) 1259-1270 DOI: 10.1590/s0102-311X2011000700002. Portuguese
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Guinan EM, Hussey J, McGarrigle SA. et al. A prospective investigation of predictive and modifiable risk factors for breast cancer in unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene carriers. BMC Cancer 2013; 13: 138 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-138.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Benz CC, Yau C. Ageing, oxidative stress and cancer: paradigms in parallax. Nat Rev Cancer 2008; 8 (11) 875-879 DOI: 10.1038/nrc2522.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Freedman RA, Partridge AH. Management of breast cancer in very young women. Breast 2013; 22 (Suppl. 02) S176-S179 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2013.07.034.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Fridlich R, Annamalai D, Roy R, Bernheim G, Powell SN. BRCA1 and BRCA2 protect against oxidative DNA damage converted into double-strand breaks during DNA replication. DNA Repair (Amst) 2015; 30: 11-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2015.03.002.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Dufloth RM, Carvalho S, Heinrich JK. et al. Analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Brazilian breast cancer patients with positive family history. Sao Paulo Med J 2005; 123 (04) 192-197 DOI: 10.1590/s1516-31802005000400007.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Hussein IA, Ahmed ST, Hameedi AD. et al. Immunohistochemical expression of BRCA1 protein, ER, PR and Her2/neu in breast cancer: a clinicopathological study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2020; 21 (04) 1025-1029 DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.4.1025.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Huszno J, Kołosza Z, Grzybowska E. BRCA1 mutation in breast cancer patients: Analysis of prognostic factors and survival. Oncol Lett 2019; 17 (02) 1986-1995 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.9770.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar