Total amount: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index
Online ISSN 1827-1650
HEREDITARY GENITAL AND BREAST CANCER
Nicoletta BIGLIA, Marta D‘ALONZO, Luca G. SGRO, Nicoletta TOMASI CONT, Valentina BOUNOUS, Elisabetta ROBBA
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mauriziano “Umberto I” Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
The surgical option which should be reserved for patients with BRCA1/2 mutation and breast cancer diagnosis is still debated. Several aspects should be considered before the surgical decision-making: the risk of ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR), the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), the potential survival benefit of prophylactic mastectomy, and the possible risk factors that could either increase or decrease the risk for IBR or CBC. Breast conservative treatment (BCT) does not increase the risk for IBR in BRCA mutation carriers compared to non-carriers in short term follow-up; however, an increased risk for IBR in carriers was observed in studies with long follow-up. In spite of the increased risk for IBR in patients who underwent BCT than patients with mastectomy, no significant difference in breast-cancer specific or overall survival was observed by local treatment type at 15 years. Patients with BRCA mutation had a higher risk for CBC compared with non-carriers and BRCA1-mutation carriers had an increased risk for CBC compared to BRCA2-mutation carriers. Bilateral mastectomy is intended to prevent CBC in BRCA mutation carriers, however, no difference in survival was found if a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy was performed or not. For higher-risk groups of BRCA mutated patients, a more-aggressive surgical approach may be preferable, but there are some aspects that should be considered in the surgical decision-making process. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy and performing oophorectomy are associated with a decreased risk for IBR. When considering the risk for CBC, three risk factors were associated with significantly decreased risk: the use of adjuvant tamoxifen, performing oophorectomy and older age at first breast cancer diagnosis. As a result, we could identify a group of patients that might benefit from a more aggressive surgical approach (unilateral mastectomy or unilateral therapeutic mastectomy with concomitant contralateral prophylactic mastectomy). For women with BRCA mutations candidate to mastectomy, preservation of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) may be highly important due to the generally younger age at time of surgery. Concerning the oncological safety, nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) is an acceptable option, with no evidence of compromise to oncological safety at short-term follow-up. The evaluation of surgical treatment in breast cancer patients with BRCA 1/2 mutation, should include several issues, namely the current evidence of adequate oncological safety of BCT in BRCA mutated patients; the increased risk for CBC especially in BRCA1 carriers; the feasibility on NSM with a greater patient’s satisfaction for cosmetic results with no evidence of compromised oncological safety and, finally, the awareness that breast radiotherapy might increase the risk of complications in a possible subsequent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction.