Increased financial burden asa result of cancer care costs is the strongest independent predictor of poor quality of life among cancer survivors.

There is growing consensus that multigene prognostic tests provide useful complementary information to tumor size and grade in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers. The tests primarily rely on quantification of ER and proliferation-related genes and combine these into multivariate prediction models. Since ER-negative cancers tend to have higher proliferation rates, the prognostic value of current multigene tests in these cancers is limited. First-generation prognostic signatures (Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, Genomic Grade Index) are substantially more accurate to predict recurrence within the first 5 years than in later years. This has become a limitation with the availability of effective extended adjuvant endocrine therapies. Newer tests (Prosigna, EndoPredict, Breast Cancer Index) appear to possess better prognostic value for late recurrences while also remaining predictive of early relapse. Some clinical prediction problems are more difficult to solve than others: there are no clinically useful prognostic signatures for ER-negative cancers, and drug-specific treatment response predictors also remain elusive. Emerging areas of research involve the development of immune gene signatures that carry modest but significant prognostic value independent of proliferation and ER status and represent candidate predictive markers for immune-targeted therapies. Overall metrics of tumor heterogeneity and genome integrity (for example, homologue recombination deficiency score) are emerging as potential new predictive markers for platinum agents. The recent expansion of high-throughput technology platforms including low-cost sequencing of circulating and tumor-derived DNA and RNA and rapid reliable quantification of microRNA offers new opportunities to build extended prediction models across multiplatform data.

PURPOSE To develop recommendations for management of patients with breast cancer (BC) with germline mutations in BC susceptibility genes. METHODS The American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. RESULTS Fifty-eight articles met eligibility criteria and formed the evidentiary basis for the local therapy recommendations; six randomized controlled trials of systemic therapy met eligibility criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS Patients with newly diagnosed BC and BRCA1/ 2 mutations may be considered for breast-conserving therapy (BCT), with local control of the index cancer similar to that of noncarriers. The significant risk of a contralateral BC (CBC), especially in young women, and the higher risk of new cancers in the ipsilateral breast warrant discussion of bilateral mastectomy. Patients with mutations in moderate-risk genes should be offered BCT. For women with mutations in BRCA1/ 2 or moderate-penetrance genes who are eligible for mastectomy, nipple-sparing mastectomy is a reasonable approach. There is no evidence of increased toxicity or CBC events from radiation exposure in BRCA1/ 2 carriers. Radiation therapy should not be withheld in ATM carriers. For patients with germline TP53 mutations, mastectomy is advised; radiation therapy is contraindicated except in those with significant risk of locoregional recurrence. Platinum agents are recommended versus taxanes to treat advanced BC in BRCA carriers. In the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting, data do not support the routine addition of platinum to anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib and talazoparib) are preferable to nonplatinum single-agent chemotherapy for treatment of advanced BC in BRCA1/ 2 carriers. Data are insufficient to recommend PARP inhibitor use in the early setting or in moderate-penetrance carriers. Additional information available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

PURPOSE To update the ASCO guideline on pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction and provide guidance on clinical issues that arise when deciding to use endocrine therapy for breast cancer risk reduction. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews to identify new studies. RESULTS A randomized clinical trial that evaluated the use of anastrozole for reduction of estrogen receptor–positive breast cancers in postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer provided the predominant basis for the update. UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS In postmenopausal women at increased risk, the choice of endocrine therapy now includes anastrozole (1 mg/day) in addition to exemestane (25 mg/day), raloxifene (60 mg/day), or tamoxifen (20 mg/day). The decision regarding choice of endocrine therapy should take into consideration age, baseline comorbidities, and adverse effect profiles. Clinicians should not prescribe anastrozole, exemestane, or raloxifene for breast cancer risk reduction to premenopausal women. Tamoxifen 20 mg/day for 5 years is still considered standard of care for risk reduction in premenopausal women who are at least 35 years old and have completed childbearing. Data on low-dose tamoxifen as an alternative to the standard dose for both pre- and postmenopausal women with intraepithelial neoplasia are discussed in the Clinical Considerations section of this article. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

PURPOSE Platinum compounds have activity in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in germline BRCA mutation carriers ( BRCA carriers). Limited data exist for estrogen receptor (ER)–positive (+) breast cancer among BRCA carriers. INFORM is a randomized, multicenter, phase II trial comparing pathologic complete response (pCR) rates (ypT0/is, N0) after neoadjuvant single-agent cisplatin (CDDP) versus doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC) in BRCA carriers with stage I-III human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative breast cancer. Secondary objectives included residual cancer burden scores (RCB) of 0 or 1 (combined) and toxicity. The goal was to determine whether pCR was ≥ 20% higher with CDDP than AC. PATIENTS AND METHODS BRCA carriers with cT1-3 (≥ 1.5 cm), cN0-3 HER2-negative breast cancer were randomly assigned to preoperative CDDP (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks × 4 doses) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m2; cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 every 2-3 weeks × 4 doses) followed by surgery. Pathologic responses were confirmed by central review. RESULTS A total of 118 patients were randomly assigned; 117 were included in outcome analyses. Mean age was 42 years (range, 24-73 years); 69% were BRCA1+, 30% were BRCA2+, and 2% had both mutations. Clinical stage was I for 19%, II for 63%, and III for 18%; 45% had nodal involvement at baseline. Seventy percent had TNBC. Clinical and tumor characteristics were well matched between treatment arms. The pCR rate was 18% with CDDP and 26% with AC, yielding a risk ratio (RR) of 0.70 (90% CI, 0.39 to 1.2). The risk of RCB 0 or 1 (RCB 0/1) was 33% with CDDP and 46% with AC (RR, 0.73; 90% CI, 0.50 to 1.1). Both regimens were generally well tolerated without unexpected toxicities. CONCLUSION pCR or RCB 0/1 is not significantly higher with CDDP than with AC in BRCA carriers with stage I-III HER2-negative breast cancer for both TNBC and ER+/HER2-negative disease.

A significant proportion of prostate cancer diagnoses may be associated with a strong hereditary component. Men who have multiple single-gene polymorphisms and a family history of prostate cancer have a significantly greater risk of developing prostate cancer. Numerous single-gene alterations have been confirmed to increase the risk of prostate cancer. These include breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1 and BRCA2, respectively), mutL homolog 1 (MLH1), mutS homologs 2 and 6 (MSH2 and MSH6, respectively), postmeiotic segregation increased 2 (PMS2), homeobox B13 (HOXB13), checkpoint kinase 2 (CHEK2), nibrin (NBN), BRCA1-interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1 (BRIP1), and ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM). Currently, there are no uniform guidelines on the definition of hereditary prostate cancer and genetic testing. With the advent of next-generation sequencing, which is capable of testing multiple genes simultaneously, and the approval of olaparib for BRCA1/BRCA2 or ATM-mutated, metastatic, castrate-resistant prostate cancer, it is being recognized that the results of genetic testing have an impact on therapeutic strategies. In this review, the authors examine the role of genetic counseling and testing, the challenges of insurance coverage for testing, the available germline and somatic testing panels, and the complexity of each testing method and its implications. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

PALB2 (Partner And Localizer of BRCA2) binds to and colocalizes with BRCA2 in DNA repair. Germline mutations in PALB2 have been identified in approximately 1–2% of familial breast cancer and 3–4% of familial pancreatic cancer cases. The goal of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of PALB2 mutations in women with breast cancer without BRCA1/2 mutations who also had a personal or family history of pancreatic cancer. PALB2 mutation analysis was performed in 94 non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer patients with a personal or family history of pancreatic cancer. Two truncating PALB2 mutations, c.3549C>CA and c.2962C>CT, were identified resulting in a mutation prevalence of 2.1%. The proband found to carry the c.3549C>CA PALB2 mutation had a mother diagnosed with both breast and pancreatic cancer; this relative was subsequently confirmed to carry the identical mutation. The proband with the c.2962C>CT mutation had a father and paternal aunt diagnosed with pancreatic cancer; neither relative was available for testing. Two novel PALB2 missense variants were also found, one of which was deemed potentially deleterious. The prevalence rate of PALB2 mutations in a non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer population specifically selected for a family history of pancreatic cancer does not appear to be significantly increased compared to that observed in other breast cancer populations studied thus far. Further evaluation is needed to determine the prevalence of PALB2 mutations and the clinical utility of such testing in those individuals affected with both breast and pancreatic cancers.

Patients' comfort with and desire to discuss cancer costs exceed that of oncologists, suggesting a need to educate oncologists on this important topic. A patient's desire to understand treatment-associated cost does not equate with a desire for cost to influence medical decision making.