These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.

BACKGROUNDLong-term effects of ovarian stimulation for IVF on the risk of ovarian malignancies are unknown.METHODSWe identified a nationwide historic cohort of 19 146 women who received IVF treatment in the Netherlands between 1983 and 1995, and a comparison group of 6006 subfertile women not treated with IVF. In 1997–1999, data on reproductive risk factors were obtained from 65% of women and data on subfertility (treatment) were obtained from the medical records. The incidence of ovarian malignancies (including borderline ovarian tumours) through 2007 was assessed through linkage with disease registries. The risk of ovarian malignancies in the IVF group was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile comparison group.RESULTSAfter a median follow-up of 14.7 years, the risk of borderline ovarian tumours was increased in the IVF group compared with the general population [standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 1.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16–2.56]. The overall SIR for invasive ovarian cancer was not significantly elevated, but increased with longer follow-up after first IVF (P = 0.02); the SIR was 3.54 (95% CI = 1.62–6.72) after 15 years. The risks of borderline ovarian tumours and of all ovarian malignancies combined in the IVF group were significantly increased compared with risks in the subfertile comparison group (hazard ratios = 4.23; 95% CI = 1.25–14.33 and 2.14; 95% CI = 1.07–4.25, respectively, adjusted for age, parity and subfertility cause).CONCLUSIONSOvarian stimulation for IVF may increase the risk of ovarian malignancies, especially borderline ovarian tumours. More large cohort studies are needed to confirm these findings and to examine the effect of IVF treatment characteristics.

Data on survival of BRCA1/2-associated primary breast cancer (PBC) patients who opt for subsequent contralateral riskreducing mastectomy (CRRM) are scarce and inconsistent. We examined the efficacy of CRRM on overall survival in mutation carriers with a history of PBC. From a Dutch multicentre cohort, we selected 583 BRCA-associated PBC patients, being diagnosed between 1980 and 2011. Over time, 242 patients (42%) underwent CRRM and 341 patients (58%) remained under surveillance. Survival analyses were performed using Cox models, with CRRM as a time-dependent covariate. The median follow-up after PBC diagnosis was 11.4 years. In the CRRM group, four patients developed contralateral breast cancer (2%), against 64 patients (19%) in the surveillance group (p < 0.001). The mortality was lower in the CRRM group than in the surveillance group (9.6 and 21.6 per 1000 person-years of observation, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.82). Survival benefit was especially seen in young PBC patients (<40 years), in patients having a PBC with differentiation grade 1/2 and/or no triple-negative phenotype, and in patients not treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are offered gynaecological screening with the intention to reduce mortality by detecting ovarian cancer at an early stage. We examined compliance and efficacy of gynaecological screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. In this multicentre, observational, follow-up study we examined medical record data of a consecutive series of 888 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who started annual screening with transvaginal ultrasonography and serum CA125 between 1993 and 2005. The women were annually screened for 75% of their total period of follow-up. Compliance decreased with longer follow-up. Five of the 10 incident cancers were interval tumours, diagnosed in women with a normal screening result within 3–10 months before diagnosis. No difference in stage distribution between incident screen-detected and interval tumours was found. Eight of the 10 incident cancers were stage III/IV (80%). Cancers diagnosed in unscreened family members had a similar stage distribution (77% in stage III/IV). The observed number of cases detected during screening was not significantly higher than expected (Standardized Incidence Ratio (SIR): 1.5, 95% confidence interval: 0.7–2.8). For the subgroup that was fully compliant to annual screening, a similar SIR was found (1.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.5–3.6). Despite annual gynaecological screening, a high proportion of ovarian cancers in BRCA1/2 carriers are interval cancers and the large majority of all cancers are diagnosed in advanced stages. Therefore, it is unlikely that annual screening will reduce mortality from ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.