Clinical behavior and outcomes of breast cancer in young women with germline BRCA pathogenic variants

Matteo Lambertini, Marcello Ceppi, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Olivier Caron, Philip D Poorvu, Estela Carrasco, Albert Grinshpun, Kevin Punie, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Alberta Ferrari, Shani Paluch-Shimon, Angela Toss, Claire Senechal, Fabio Puglisi, Katarzyna Pogoda, Jose Alejandro Pérez-Fidalgo, Laura De Marchis, Riccardo Ponzone, Luca Livraghi, Maria Del Pilar Estevez-Diz, Cynthia Villarreal-Garza, Maria Vittoria Dieci, Florian Clatot, Francois P Duhoux, Rossella Graffeo, Luis Teixeira, Octavi Córdoba, Amir Sonnenblick, Arlindo R Ferreira, Ann H Partridge, Antonio Di Meglio, Claire Saule, Fedro A Peccatori, Marco Bruzzone, Marie Daphne t'Kint de Roodenbeke, Lieveke Ameye, Judith Balmaña, Lucia Del Mastro, Hatem A Azim Jr, Matteo Lambertini, Marcello Ceppi, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Olivier Caron, Philip D Poorvu, Estela Carrasco, Albert Grinshpun, Kevin Punie, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Alberta Ferrari, Shani Paluch-Shimon, Angela Toss, Claire Senechal, Fabio Puglisi, Katarzyna Pogoda, Jose Alejandro Pérez-Fidalgo, Laura De Marchis, Riccardo Ponzone, Luca Livraghi, Maria Del Pilar Estevez-Diz, Cynthia Villarreal-Garza, Maria Vittoria Dieci, Florian Clatot, Francois P Duhoux, Rossella Graffeo, Luis Teixeira, Octavi Córdoba, Amir Sonnenblick, Arlindo R Ferreira, Ann H Partridge, Antonio Di Meglio, Claire Saule, Fedro A Peccatori, Marco Bruzzone, Marie Daphne t'Kint de Roodenbeke, Lieveke Ameye, Judith Balmaña, Lucia Del Mastro, Hatem A Azim Jr

Abstract

Young breast cancer (BC) patients carrying a germline BRCA pathogenic variant (mBRCA) have similar outcomes as non-carriers. However, the impact of the type of gene (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2) and hormone receptor status (positive [HR+] vs. negative [HR-]) on clinical behavior and outcomes of mBRCA BC remains largely unknown. This is an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study that included mBRCA patients diagnosed, between January 2000 and December 2012, with stage I-III invasive early BC at age ≤40 years. From 30 centers worldwide, 1236 young mBRCA BC patients were included. Among 808 and 428 patients with mBRCA1 or mBRCA2, 191 (23.6%) and 356 (83.2%) had HR+tumors, respectively (P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 7.9 years. Second primary BC (P = 0.009) and non-BC malignancies (P = 0.02) were more frequent among mBRCA1 patients while distant recurrences were less frequent (P = 0.02). Irrespective of hormone receptor status, mBRCA1 patients had worse disease-free survival (DFS; adjusted HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.60-0.96), with no difference in distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) and overall survival (OS). Patients with HR+ disease had more frequent distant recurrences (P < 0.001) and less frequent second primary malignancies (BC: P = 0.005; non-BC: P = 0.18). No differences in DFS and OS were observed according to hormone receptor status, with a tendency for worse DRFI (adjusted HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.94-2.05) in patients with HR+ BC. Type of mBRCA gene and hormone receptor status strongly impact BC clinical behavior and outcomes in mBRCA young patients. These results provide important information for patients' counseling on treatment, prevention, and surveillance strategies.

Conflict of interest statement

M.L. acted as a consultant for Roche, AstraZeneca, Lilly and Novartis, and received honoraria from Sandoz, Roche, Novartis, Takeda, Pfizer and Lilly outside the submitted work. O.C. acted as a consultant for AstraZeneca, and received travel grants from Ipsen outside the submitted work. C.R.J. acted as a consultant for Mylan medical, and received honoraria from Theramex and Bayer outside the submitted work. F.P. acted as a consultant for Astrazeneca, Daichii Sankyo, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, and Roche, received honoraria from Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda, and received research grants from Astrazeneca, EISAI, and Roche outside the submitted work. K.P. acted as a consultant, received speaker honoraria and travel grants from Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Egis, Amgen, Angelini and Teva outside the submitted work. J.A.P.F. acted as a consultant for Amgem, Astrazeneca, Clovis, and G.S.K., received honoraria from Roche, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Clovis, and G.S.K. and travel expenses by Roche, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, and G.S.K. outside the submitted work. C.V.G. acted as a consultant for Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, and Lilly, received honoraria from Myriad Genetics, Roche and Novartis, research funding from Roche and AstraZeneca, and travel expenses by Roche, MSD Oncology and Pfizer outside the submitted work. F.C. acted as a consultant for Lilly, BMS and Roche, received speaker honoraria from Merck Serono and BMS, research funding to his institution from AstraZeneca, and travel grants from Roche, Merck Serono, and BMS outside the submitted work. F.P.D. acted as a consultant for Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Amgen, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, and Daiichi Sankyo, and received travel grants from Roche, Pfizer, Teva, and Amgen outside the submitted work. L.T. acted as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, received speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Lilly, Novartis, Roche, research funding to his institution from Pfizer and Novartis, and travel grants from Roche, Merck Serono, and AstraZeneca, Novartis and Roche outside the submitted work. A.S. acted as a consultant for Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, and Lilly, received speaker honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, Medison, Lilly, and Novartis, research funding from Novartis, and travel grants from Medison and Roche outside the submitted work. A.R.F. received travel grants from Novartis and Roche outside the submitted work. A.D.M. received honoraria from ThermoFisher outside of the submitted work. J.B. acted as a consultant and received travel grants from Pfizer and Astra Zeneca outside the submitted work. L.D.M. acted as a consultant for Roche, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Lilly, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, and Daiichi Sankyo, received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Lilly and MSD, and travel grants from Roche, Pfizer and Celgene outside the submitted work. H.A.A. Jr acted as a consultant for Roche, received honoraria from Novartis outside the submitted work, and reported employment at Innate Pharma at the end of this study; this employment is not related in any sort to the subject of the current study. All the other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1. Comparison between patients with germline…
Fig. 1. Comparison between patients with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants.
a Epanechnikov Kernel-Smoothed annual hazards of recurrence overall; b Disease-free survival; c Distant recurrence-free interval; d Overall survival.
Fig. 2. Comparison between patients with germline…
Fig. 2. Comparison between patients with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants and hormone receptor-positive disease.
a Epanechnikov Kernel-Smoothed annual hazards of recurrence overall; b Disease-free survival; c Distant recurrence-free interval; d Overall survival.
Fig. 3. Comparison between patients with germline…
Fig. 3. Comparison between patients with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants and hormone receptor-negative disease.
a Epanechnikov Kernel-Smoothed annual hazards of recurrence overall; b Disease-free survival; c Distant recurrence-free interval; d Overall survival.
Fig. 4. Comparison between patients with hormone…
Fig. 4. Comparison between patients with hormone receptor-positive and negative disease.
a Epanechnikov Kernel-Smoothed annual hazards of recurrence overall; b Disease-free survival; c Distant recurrence-free interval; d Overall survival. HR+ hormone receptor-positive; HR− hormone receptor-negative.

References

    1. Fidler MM, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality among young adults aged 20-39 years worldwide in 2012: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18:1579–1589. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30677-0.
    1. Azim HA, Partridge AH. Biology of breast cancer in young women. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16:427. doi: 10.1186/s13058-014-0427-5.
    1. Partridge AH, et al. Subtype-dependent relationship between young age at diagnosis and breast cancer survival. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016;34:3308–3314. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.8013.
    1. Paluch-Shimon, S. et al. ESO-ESMO 4th International Consensus Guidelines for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4). Ann. Oncol.31, 674–696 (2020).
    1. Rosenberg SM, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing in young women with breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:730–736. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5941.
    1. Copson ER, et al. Germline BRCA mutation and outcome in young-onset breast cancer (POSH): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:169–180. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30891-4.
    1. Paluch-Shimon S, et al. Prevention and screening in BRCA mutation carriers and other breast/ovarian hereditary cancer syndromes: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for cancer prevention and screening. Ann. Oncol. 2016;27:v103–v110. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw327.
    1. Tung NM, et al. Management of Hereditary Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020;38:2080–2106. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00299.
    1. Eerola H, et al. Histopathological features of breast tumours in BRCA1, BRCA2 and mutation-negative breast cancer families. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7:R93–R100. doi: 10.1186/bcr953.
    1. Atchley DP, et al. Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008;26:4282–4288. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6231.
    1. Goodwin PJ, et al. Breast cancer prognosis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: an International Prospective Breast Cancer Family Registry population-based cohort study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012;30:19–26. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.0068.
    1. Spurdle AB, et al. Refined histopathological predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status: a large-scale analysis of breast cancer characteristics from the BCAC, CIMBA, and ENIGMA consortia. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16:3419. doi: 10.1186/s13058-014-0474-y.
    1. van den Broek AJ, Schmidt MK, van’t Veer LJ, Tollenaar RAEM, van Leeuwen FE. Worse breast cancer prognosis of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: what’s the evidence? A systematic review with meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0120189. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120189.
    1. Evans DG, et al. Low prevalence of HER2 positivity amongst BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and in primary BRCA screens. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2016;155:597–601. doi: 10.1007/s10549-016-3697-z.
    1. Vocka, M. et al. Estrogen receptor status oppositely modifies breast cancer prognosis in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers versus non-carriers. Cancers11, 738 (2019).
    1. Jonasson JG, et al. Oestrogen receptor status, treatment and breast cancer prognosis in Icelandic BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br. J. Cancer. 2016;115:776–783. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.249.
    1. Schmidt, M. K. et al. Breast cancer survival of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers in a hospital-based cohort of young women. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 109 (2017).
    1. Metcalfe K, et al. Oestrogen receptor status and survival in women with BRCA2-associated breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer. 2019;120:398–403. doi: 10.1038/s41416-019-0376-y.
    1. Kuchenbaecker KB, et al. Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. JAMA. 2017;317:2402–2416. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.7112.
    1. Mavaddat N, et al. Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2013;105:812–822. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt095.
    1. Graeser MK, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009;27:5887–5892. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.9430.
    1. Berkowitz Z, Rim SH, Peipins LA. Characteristics and survival associated with ovarian cancer diagnosed as first cancer and ovarian cancer diagnosed subsequent to a previous cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 2011;35:112–119. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2010.07.001.
    1. van den Broek AJ, et al. Impact of age at primary breast cancer on contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016;34:409–418. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.3942.
    1. Hartmann LC, Lindor NM. The role of risk-reducing surgery in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016;374:454–468. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1503523.
    1. Dullens, B. et al. Cancer Surveillance in Healthy Carriers of Germline Pathogenic Variants in BRCA1/2: A Review of Secondary Prevention Guidelines. J. Oncol. 9873954 (2020).
    1. Baek HJ, et al. Inhibition of Estrogen Signaling Reduces the Incidence of BRCA1-associated Mammary Tumor Formation. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2018;14:1755–1768. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.28142.
    1. Wang C, et al. Estrogen promotes estrogen receptor negative BRCA1-deficient tumor initiation and progression. Breast Cancer Res. 2018;20:74. doi: 10.1186/s13058-018-0996-9.
    1. Tung N, et al. Estrogen receptor positive breast cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers: clinical risk factors and pathologic features. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R12. doi: 10.1186/bcr2478.
    1. Lips EH, et al. BRCA1-mutated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer shows BRCAness, suggesting sensitivity to drugs targeting homologous recombination deficiency. Clin. Cancer Res. 2017;23:1236–1241. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0198.
    1. Lewin R, et al. Oncotype-DX recurrence score distribution in breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2 mutations. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2016;157:511–516. doi: 10.1007/s10549-016-3836-6.
    1. Shah PD, et al. Twenty-one-gene recurrence score assay in BRCA-associated versus sporadic breast cancers: differences based on germline mutation status. Cancer. 2016;122:1178–1184. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29903.
    1. Halpern N, et al. Oncotype Dx recurrence score among BRCA1/2 germline mutation carriers with hormone receptors positive breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer. 2017;140:2145–2149. doi: 10.1002/ijc.30616.
    1. Huzarski T, et al. Ten-year survival in patients with BRCA1-negative and BRCA1-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013;31:3191–3196. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.3571.
    1. Jiang T, et al. Predictors of chemosensitivity in triple negative breast cancer: an integrated genomic analysis. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002193. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002193.
    1. Tung N, et al. TBCRC 031: Randomized phase II study of neoadjuvant cisplatin versus doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide in germline BRCA carriers with HER2-negative breast cancer (the INFORM trial) J. Clin. Oncol. 2020;38:1539–1548. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.03292.
    1. Lambertini M, Blondeaux E, Perrone F, Del, Mastro L. Improving adjuvant endocrine treatment tailoring in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020;38:1258–1267. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02242.
    1. Burstein HJ, et al. Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Ovarian Suppression. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016;34:1689–1701. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.9573.
    1. Burstein HJ, et al. Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019;37:423–438. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01160.
    1. Lambertini M, et al. Pregnancy after breast cancer in patients with germline BRCA mutations. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020;38:3012–3023. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02399.
    1. von Elm E, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453–1457. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X.
    1. Lambertini, M. et al. Metadata record for the manuscript: clinical behavior and outcomes of breast cancer in young women with germline BRCA pathogenic variants. figshare 10.6084/m9.figshare.13507422 (2020).

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa