Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2024 Sep 25:63:736-745.
doi: 10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40829.

Prevalence, prognosis, and health care resource utilization in carriers of pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1/2 with incident early-stage breast cancer: a Finnish population-based study

Affiliations
Observational Study

Prevalence, prognosis, and health care resource utilization in carriers of pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1/2 with incident early-stage breast cancer: a Finnish population-based study

Peeter Karihtala et al. Acta Oncol. .

Abstract

Background and purpose: Data on real-world prevalence and outcomes in patients diagnosed with pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCAm) breast cancer is sparse.

Material and methods: An observational cohort study including all patients diagnosed with incident early-stage breast cancer and recorded in Helsinki University Hospital data lake 2012-2022, accounting for one-third of the Finnish breast cancer patient population.

Results: Among 14,696 incident early-stage breast cancer patients, 11.2% (n = 1,644) were tested for gBRCAm. Of the tested population, 7.4% (n = 122) carried gBRCAm. Of the 122 gBRCAm patients, 95.1% (n = 116) were women, with a median age at diagnosis of 46.4 years. Among the same patient group, HER2 status was available for 87.7% (n = 107) of the patients. Among these, 49.5% (n = 53) had hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative breast cancer, 13.1% were (n = 14) HER2-positive, and 37.3% (n = 40) of patients had triple-negative breast cancer. The tested patients were significantly younger compared with non-tested patients. No significant differences in overall survival or healthcare resource utilization between the tested patients with gBRCAm and gBRCA wild-type (gBRCAwt) were observed.

Interpretation: This comprehensive observational study supports previous findings of gBRCAm prevalence in the Western early-stage breast cancer population. While no differences in survival were observed between patients with gBRCAm and gBRCAwt, it is important to consider the potential influence of selection bias, particularly due to the younger gBRCAm testing target population and the overall low frequency of testing. Therefore, a substantial proportion of the patients carrying gBRCAm likely remained undiagnosed, and wider screening criteria are warranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

PK has received a grant from AstraZeneca for this project. TÅ and RE are employees of AstraZeneca.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the tested and non-tested patients with early-stage breast cancer.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A) Overall survival (OS), (B) distant disease-free survival (DDFS) in all pathogenic germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm) tested patients according to the gBRCAm status (pathogenic or non-gBRCAm/negative for gBRCA1/2 mutation), and (C) invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) in patients with gBRCAm and early-stage breast cancer.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Multivariable Cox model for overall survival (OS) among patients with pathogenic germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm) and early-stage breast cancer during the study period.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and related costs among patients with pathogenic gBRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm) overall, according to the biological subtype of breast cancer and among the patients without pathogenic gBRCAm.

Similar articles

References

    1. Breast Cancer Association Consortium, Dorling L, Carvalho S, Allen J, González-Neira A, Luccarini C, et al. . Breast cancer risk genes – Association analysis in more than 113,000 women. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:428–39. 10.1056/NEJMoa1913948 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mavaddat N, Peock S, Frost D, Ellis S, Platte R, Fineberg E, et al. . Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:812–22. 10.1093/jnci/djt095 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Feng Y, Spezia M, Huang S, Yuan C, Zeng Z, Zhang L, et al. . Breast cancer development and progression: Risk factors, cancer stem cells, signaling pathways, genomics, and molecular pathogenesis. Genes Dis. 2018;5:77–106. 10.1016/j.gendis.2018.05.001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tschernichovsky R, Goodman A. Risk-reducing strategies for ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers: a balancing act. Oncologist. 2017;22:450–9. 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0444 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, Evans DG, Lynch HT, Isaacs C, et al. . Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA. 2010;304:967–75. 10.1001/jama.2010.1237 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types