PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

F Lalloo

Publications and source records attributed to F Lalloo.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Phenocopies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: evidence for modifier genes and implications for screening.

BACKGROUND: The identification of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in familial breast cancer kindreds allows genetic testing of at-risk relatives. Those who test negative are usually reassured and additional breast cancer surveillance is discontinued. However, we postulated that in high-risk families, such as those seen in clinical genetics centres, the risk of breast cancer might be influenced not only by the BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation but also by modifier genes. One manifestation of this would be the presence of phenocopies in BRCA1/BRCA2 kindreds. METHODS: 277 families with pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations were reviewed and 28 breast cancer phenocopies identified. The relative risk of breast cancer in those testing negative was assessed using incidence rates from our cancer registry based on local population. RESULTS: Phenocopies constituted up to 24% of tests on women with breast cancer after the identification of the mutation in the proband. The standardised incidence ratio for women who tested negative for the BRCA1/BRCA2 family mutation was 5.3 for all relatives, 5.0 for all first-degree relatives (FDRs) and 3.2 (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 4.9) for FDRs in whose family all other cases of breast and ovarian cancer could be explained by the identified mutation. 13 of 107 (12.1%) FDRs with breast cancer and no unexplained family history tested negative. CONCLUSION: In high-risk families, women who test negative for the familial BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation have an increased risk of breast cancer consistent with genetic modifiers. In light of this, such women should still be considered for continued surveillance.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Inherited association of breast and colorectal cancer: limited role of CHEK2 compared with high-penetrance genes.

We assessed the association between breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) from referral pattern to the Regional Genetics Service including molecular analysis. Hospital computer records and/or department referral books were used to identify cases referred to the Regional Genetic Service during a 16-year period (1990-2005 inclusive). All files were reviewed along with associated demographic data, risk assessments, referral details and results from mutation testing. Families were assessed for hereditary breast and colorectal cancer (HBCC) criteria, and all families with eligible individuals were tested for the 1100delC mutation in CHEK2. A total of 8,612 families were identified. One hundred and sixteen of 1,631 (7.5%) families with a primary referral for CRC fulfilled the criteria for HBCC, whereas only 68/6981 (1%) BC referrals fulfilled these criteria. Blood samples were obtained from 113 individuals from 83/184 families. Only 1/113 (1%) has screened positive for the CHEK2 mutation, whereas 14 (17%) families segregate BRCA1/2 mutations and at least 7 (8.5%) carry MLH1/MSH2 mutations. HBCC syndrome, if it exists as a separate entity, is not likely to be due to CHEK2 mutations. Many families are explicable by existing high-penetrance genes, and further work is necessary to elucidate whether the remainder is due to chance or as yet undiscovered genes.

Base Sequence↗
PubMed2005

Surgical decisions made by 158 women with hereditary breast cancer aged <50 years.

AIM: To establish the uptake of contralateral risk reducing mastectomy in women informed of their risks and options at time of diagnosis of their primary unilateral breast cancer. METHODS: We have assessed the surgical choices of 70 women diagnosed with breast cancer <50 years as part of a family history surveillance program and fully informed about their contralateral risks and surgical options. We have compared this to women from other surgical clinics who were subsequently found to harbour a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent (13/20) of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and 59% (n=20/34) of those at the highest level of risk pre-diagnosis (33+% lifetime risk) opted for contra-lateral mastectomy in the study sample. In contrast only 10% (n=9/88) women identified as mutation carriers from other clinics opted for such surgery. CONCLUSIONS: We would suggest that women with a significant family history and therefore a high contra-lateral breast cancer risk, should have these risks and management options discussed at the time of diagnosis of breast cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Breast and ovarian cancer risks to carriers of the BRCA1 5382insC and 185delAG and BRCA2 6174delT mutations: a combined analysis of 22 population based studies.

A recent report estimated the breast cancer risks in carriers of the three Ashkenazi founder mutations to be higher than previously published estimates derived from population based studies. In an attempt to confirm this, the breast and ovarian cancer risks associated with the three Ashkenazi founder mutations were estimated using families included in a previous meta-analysis of populatrion based studies. The estimated breast cancer risks for each of the founder BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were similar to the corresponding estimates based on all BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations in the meta-analysis. These estimates appear to be consistent with the observed prevalence of the mutations in the Ashkenazi Jewish population.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Molecular stool screening for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mass screening for colorectal cancer reduces mortality and, with recent advances in molecular genetics, molecular stool-based tests have produced promising results. This article reviews this innovation and discusses its clinical significance. METHODS: Medline searches were used to identify recent key articles relating to stool-based testing. Further articles were obtained by manual scanning of the reference lists of identified papers. RESULTS: Current screening methods are based on endoscopic, radiological and stool-based testing. Recent recognition of the adenoma-carcinoma sequence and pathophysiological studies of colonic epithelium have enabled tumour markers to be used in the screening setting. Non-invasive molecular stool testing has now been shown to have a high sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: Recent studies on molecular stool-based testing have shown higher sensitivity and specificity than earlier studies, but larger clinical trials are required. Laboratory methods are still undergoing research, with the aim of improving sensitivity to allow large-scale testing.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗
PubMed2004

A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO.

PURPOSE: To develop a simple scoring system for the likelihood of identifying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: DNA samples from affected subjects from 422 non-Jewish families with a history of breast and/or ovarian cancer were screened for BRCA1 mutations and a subset of 318 was screened for BRCA2 by whole gene screening techniques. Using a combination of results from screening and the family history of mutation negative and positive kindreds, a simple scoring system (Manchester scoring system) was devised to predict pathogenic mutations and particularly to discriminate at the 10% likelihood level. A second separate dataset of 192 samples was subsequently used to test the model's predictive value. This was further validated on a third set of 258 samples and compared against existing models. RESULTS: The scoring system includes a cut-off at 10 points for each gene. This equates to >10% probability of a pathogenic mutation in BRCA1 and BRCA2 individually. The Manchester scoring system had the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity at 10% prediction for the presence of mutations as shown by its highest C-statistic and was far superior to BRCAPRO. CONCLUSION: The scoring system is useful in identifying mutations particularly in BRCA2. The algorithm may need modifying to include pathological data when calculating whether to screen for BRCA1 mutations. It is considerably less time-consuming for clinicians than using computer models and if implemented routinely in clinical practice will aid in selecting families most suitable for DNA sampling for diagnostic testing.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2003

Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies.

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 confer high risks of breast and ovarian cancer, but the average magnitude of these risks is uncertain and may depend on the context. Estimates based on multiple-case families may be enriched for mutations of higher risk and/or other familial risk factors, whereas risk estimates from studies based on cases unselected for family history have been imprecise. We pooled pedigree data from 22 studies involving 8,139 index case patients unselected for family history with female (86%) or male (2%) breast cancer or epithelial ovarian cancer (12%), 500 of whom had been found to carry a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Breast and ovarian cancer incidence rates for mutation carriers were estimated using a modified segregation analysis, based on the occurrence of these cancers in the relatives of mutation-carrying index case patients. The average cumulative risks in BRCA1-mutation carriers by age 70 years were 65% (95% confidence interval 44%-78%) for breast cancer and 39% (18%-54%) for ovarian cancer. The corresponding estimates for BRCA2 were 45% (31%-56%) and 11% (2.4%-19%). Relative risks of breast cancer declined significantly with age for BRCA1-mutation carriers (P trend.0012) but not for BRCA2-mutation carriers. Risks in carriers were higher when based on index breast cancer cases diagnosed at <35 years of age. We found some evidence for a reduction in risk in women from earlier birth cohorts and for variation in risk by mutation position for both genes. The pattern of cancer risks was similar to those found in multiple-case families, but their absolute magnitudes were lower, particularly for BRCA2. The variation in risk by age at diagnosis of index case is consistent with the effects of other genes modifying cancer risk in carriers.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate individualised breast cancer risk assessment is essential to provide risk-benefit analysis prior to initiating interventions designed to lower breast cancer risk. Several mathematical models for the estimation of individual breast cancer risk have been proposed. However, no single model integrates family history, hormonal factors, and benign breast disease in a comprehensive fashion. A new model by Tyrer and Cuzick has addressed these deficiencies. Therefore, this study has assessed the goodness of fit and discriminatory value of the Tyrer-Cuzick model against established models namely Gail, Claus, and Ford. METHODS: The goodness of fit and discriminatory accuracy of the models was assessed using data from 1933 women attending the Family History Evaluation and Screening Programme, of whom 52 developed cancer. All models were applied to these women over a mean follow up of 5.27 years to estimate risk of breast cancer. RESULTS: The ratios (95% confidence intervals) of expected to observed numbers of breast cancers were 0.48 (0.37 to 0.64) for Gail, 0.56 (0.43 to 0.75) for Claus, 0.49 (0.37 to 0.65) for Ford, and 0.81 (0.62 to 1.08) for Tyrer-Cuzick. The accuracy of the models for individual cases was evaluated using ROC curves. These showed that the area under the curve was 0.735 for Gail, 0.716 for Claus, 0.737 for Ford, and 0.762 for Tyrer-Cuzick. CONCLUSION: The Tyrer-Cuzick model is the most consistently accurate model for prediction of breast cancer. The Gail, Claus, and Ford models all significantly underestimate risk, although the accuracy of the Claus model may be improved by adjustments for other risk factors.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Risk assessment and management of high risk familial breast cancer.

The demand for genetic services by women with a family history of breast cancer has increased exponentially over the last few years. It is important that risks to women are accurately assessed and that processes are in place for appropriate counselling and management. The classification of risk into average, moderate, and high, depending upon the assessed lifetime risk of breast cancer, allows for the management of moderate risk women within cancer units and high risk women within the regional genetic centres. Management of high risk women includes discussion of options including screening, chemoprevention, and preventive surgery. The majority of these options are still unproven in the long term and continuing research is needed for their evaluation. Mutation screening and predictive testing are now a reality for a minority of families, allowing for a more informed basis for decisions regarding management options.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2001

Uptake of screening and prevention in women at very high risk of breast cancer.

Management of women at high lifetime risk of familial breast cancer is hampered because of limited data concerning the appropriateness of treatment options. Over the past 8 years women at very high (>40%) lifetime risk of breast cancer have had the option of entering two chemoprevention treatment trials, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) breast screening study, or a risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) study. Only 10% of eligible women have entered one of the chemotherapy trials with a similar proportion opting for RRM (>50% in mutation carriers) compared with 60% opting for MRI screening. Future chemotherapy trials will have to be designed to address this poor recruitment.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Familial breast cancer: an investigation into the outcome of treatment for early stage disease.

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of treatment in 304 women with familial and sporadic breast cancer to clarify the options for the primary management of familial breast cancer. The majority of women were consecutively ascertained on the basis of either breast cancer diagnosed at age < 40 years or bilateral breast cancer. In addition, known BRCA1 mutation carriers were identified through the genetics services in participating centres. These patients were subdivided into those with a significant family history of breast cancer or known BRCA1 mutation (FH+) and those with no significant family history (FH-). There were no significant differences in age, surgical treatment or adjuvant treatment between the two groups, but there were significantly more women whose nodal status was unknown in the FH+ group. Ipsilateral recurrence occurred in 22.2% of FH+ patients compared with 24.1% of FH- patients (p = 0.774) who underwent breast conserving surgery. There was a striking excess of contralateral breast cancers in the FH+ group (35.9% v 16%, p = 0.0007), with a cumulative risk of contralateral cancer of 36% at 10 years. This was reflected in a non-significant trend toward worse relapse free survival in the FH+ group (p = 0.0563), but no difference was observed in overall survival between the two patient groups (p = 0.142). Similarly, for patients with known BRCA1 mutations, contralateral recurrence occurred more frequently, but other outcomes were not significantly different from the FH- group. Breast conserving treatment is not associated with an increased risk of local recurrence in women with familial breast cancer and the prognosis of these women appears to be similar to that of young women with apparently sporadic breast cancer. However, the risk of contralateral breast cancer is significant in the FH+ group and should be considered in planning primary treatment and follow up.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

High detection rate for BRCA2 mutations in male breast cancer families from North West England.

33 families with a history of male breast cancer aged 60 or less or with a family history of male and female breast cancer were screened for the presence of BRCA2 mutations. 12 pathogenic BRCA2 mutations were identified (36%) in samples from an affected family member. All mutations segregated with disease where it was possible to check. Of the 14 families fulfilling BCLC criteria, 9 (64%) had mutations whilst only 3/16 (19%) of male breast cancer patients with less significant female breast cancer family history having a mutation. All 3 families with ovarian cancer and 3 families with multiple male breast cancer cases had BRCA2 mutations. These data are a further guide to how to prioritise samples for BRCA2 mutation analysis.

Adult↗