Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Royal Oak, MI, United States

Kotsopoulos J.,Familial Breast Cancer Unit | Lubinski J.,Pomeranian Medical University | Moller P.,University of Oslo | Lynch H.T.,Creighton University | And 18 more authors.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Year: 2014

It is not clear if early oral contraceptive use increases the risk of breast cancer among young women with a breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 (BRCA1) mutation. Given the benefit of oral contraceptives for the prevention of ovarian cancer, estimating age-specific risk ratios for oral contraceptive use and breast cancer is important. We conducted a case-control study of 2,492 matched pairs of women with a deleterious BRCA1 mutation. Breast cancer cases and unaffected controls were matched on year of birth and country of residence. Detailed information about oral contraceptive use was collected from a routinely administered questionnaire. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the association between oral contraceptive and breast cancer, by age at first use and by age at diagnosis. Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, oral contraceptive use was significantly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer for women who started the pill prior to age 20 (OR 1.45; 95 % CI 1.20-1.75; P = 0.0001) and possibly between ages 20 and 25 as well (OR 1.19; 95 % CI 0.99-1.42; P = 0.06). The effect was limited to breast cancers diagnosed before age 40 (OR 1.40; 95 % CI 1.14-1.70; P = 0.001); the risk of early-onset breast cancer increased by 11 % with each additional year of pill use when initiated prior to age 20 (OR 1.11; 95 % CI 1.03-1.20; P = 0.008). There was no observed increase for women diagnosed at or after the age of 40 (OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.79-1.20; P = 0.81). Oral contraceptive use before age 25 increases the risk of early-onset breast cancer among women with a BRCA1 mutation and the risk increases with duration of use. Caution should be taken when advising women with a BRCA1 mutation to take an oral contraceptive prior to age 25. © 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York. Source


Kotsopoulos J.,Womens College Research Institute | Lubinski J.,Pomeranian Medical University | Lynch H.T.,Creighton University | Kim-Sing C.,BC Cancer Agency | And 21 more authors.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention | Year: 2012

Background: To evaluate the effect of the cumulative number of ovulatory cycles and its contributing components on the risk of breast cancer among BRCA mutation carriers. Methods: We conducted a matched case-control study on 2,854 pairs of women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the association between the number of ovulatory cycles and various exposures and the risk of breast cancer. Information from a subset of these women enrolled in a prospective cohort study was used to calculate age-specific breast cancer rates. Results: The annual risk of breast cancer decreased with the number of ovulatory cycles experienced (ρ =-0.69; P = 0.03). Age at menarche and duration of breastfeeding were inversely related with risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 (Ptrend < 0.0001) but not among BRCA2 (Ptrend ≥ 0.28) mutation carriers. The reduction in breast cancer risk associated with surgical menopause [OR, 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.40-0.66; Ptrend < 0.0001] was greater than that associated with natural menopause (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.62-1.07; P trend = 0.14). There was a highly significant reduction in breast cancer risk among women who had an oophorectomy after natural menopause (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02-0.54; P = 0.006). Conclusions: These data challenge the hypothesis that breast cancer risk can be predicted by the lifetime number of ovulatory cycles in women with a BRCA mutation. Both pre- and postmenopausal oophorectomy protect against breast cancer. Impact: Understanding the basis for the protective effect of oophorectomy has important implications for chemoprevention. ©2012 AACR. Source


Petrucelli N.,Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute | Mange S.,Lifecourse Epidemiology and Genomics Division | Fulbright J.L.,Cancer Genetics Program | Dohany L.,Cancer Genetics Program | And 2 more authors.
Journal of Genetic Counseling | Year: 2015

This study determined the prevalence of non-Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/2 mutations in the Ashkenazi Jewish population in the state of Michigan, current provider testing practices, and the use of mutation probability models in determining which Ashkenazi Jewish individuals should be offered further analysis following negative BRCA1/2 founder testing. Testing patterns, mutation probabilities, and testing results were assessed for 327 Ashkenazi Jewish individuals seen for BRCA1/2 counseling in the state of Michigan who underwent testing for the Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutations. Only one (0.6 %) Ashkenazi Jewish individual with sequencing after negative founder analysis was found to have a non-founder mutation; no rearrangements were identified. Testing patterns varied by clinic, with the proportion of Ashkenazi Jewish individuals undergoing additional sequencing ranging from 22.2 to 92.9 %. In Ashkenazi Jewish individuals with a pre-test BRCAPRO risk calculation, the mean risk was significantly higher in those with follow-up sequencing compared to those who did not pursue additional testing. The low prevalence of non-founder BRCA1/2 mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish individuals does not warrant automatically reflexing to full analysis after negative mutation testing. Increased use of mutation probability models may aid in determining which cases warrant additional testing. © 2014, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. Source


Valentini A.,Womens College Research Institute | Lubinski J.,Pomeranian Medical University | Byrski T.,Pomeranian Medical University | Ghadirian P.,University of Montreal | And 23 more authors.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Year: 2013

Physicians are often approached by young women with a BRCA mutation and a recent history of breast cancer who wish to have a baby. They wish to know if pregnancy impacts upon their future risks of cancer recurrence and survival. To date, there is little information on the survival experience of women who carry a mutation in one of the BRCA genes and who become pregnant. From an international multi-center cohort study of 12,084 women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, we identified 128 case subjects who were diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant or who became pregnant after a diagnosis of breast cancer. These women were age-matched to 269 mutation carriers with breast cancer who did not become pregnant (controls). Subjects were followed from the date of breast cancer diagnosis until the date of last follow-up or death from breast cancer. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate 15-year survival rates. The hazard ratio for survival associated with pregnancy was calculated using a left-truncated Cox proportional hazard model, adjusting for other prognostic factors. Among women who were diagnosed with breast cancer when pregnant or who became pregnant thereafter, the 15-year survival rate was 91.5 %, compared to a survival of 88.6 % for women who did not become pregnant (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.76; 95 % CI 0.31-1.91; p = 0.56). Pregnancy concurrent with or after a diagnosis of breast cancer does not appear to adversely affect survival among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York. Source


Finley S.L.,Cancer Genetics Program | Veach P.M.,University of Minnesota | MacFarlane I.M.,Austin College | LeRoy B.S.,University of Minnesota | Callanan N.,University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Journal of Genetic Counseling | Year: 2016

Supervision is a primary instructional vehicle for genetic counseling student clinical training. Approximately two-thirds of genetic counselors report teaching and education roles, which include supervisory roles. Recently, Eubanks Higgins and colleagues published the first comprehensive list of empirically-derived genetic counseling supervisor competencies. Studies have yet to evaluate whether supervisors possess these competencies and whether their competencies differ as a function of experience. This study investigated three research questions: (1) What are genetic counselor supervisors’ perceptions of their capabilities (self-efficacy) for a select group of supervisor competencies?, (2) Are there differences in self-efficacy as a function of their supervision experience or their genetic counseling experience, and 3) What training methods do they use and prefer to develop supervision skills? One-hundred thirty-one genetic counselor supervisors completed an anonymous online survey assessing demographics, self-efficacy (self-perceived capability) for 12 goal setting and 16 feedback competencies (Scale: 0–100), competencies that are personally challenging, and supervision training experiences and preferences (open-ended). A MANOVA revealed significant positive effects of supervision experience but not genetic counseling experience on participants’ self-efficacy. Although mean self-efficacy ratings were high (>83.7), participant comments revealed several challenging competencies (e.g., incorporating student’s report of feedback from previous supervisors into goal setting, and providing feedback about student behavior rather than personal traits). Commonly preferred supervision training methods included consultation with colleagues, peer discussion, and workshops/seminars. © 2015, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. Source

Discover hidden collaborations