Brustkrebsfrüherkennung bei Frauen mit erhöhten Erkrankungsrisiken

Zusammenfassung

Für Patientinnen und gesunde Ratsuchende mit einem erhöhten Erkrankungsrisiko für Brustkrebs besteht ein langjährig etabliertes Programm zur intensivierten Früherkennung und Nachsorge in den spezialisierten Zentren des Deutschen Konsortiums Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs (https://www.konsortium-familiaerer-brustkrebs.de/). Dabei kommt der MR-Mammografie aufgrund der sehr hohen Sensitivität beim Tumornachweis eine besondere Bedeutung zu.

Abstract

For patients and healthy advice seekers with an increased risk of breast cancer, there is a long-established program for intensified early detection and follow-up in the specialized centers of the German Consortium for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer (https://www.konsortium-familiaerer-brustkrebs.de/). MR mammography is of particular importance in this context due to its very high sensitivity in tumor detection.

Schlüsselwörter

Mammakarzinom - BRCA1-Mutation - BRCA2-Mutation

Key words

breast cancer - BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation

• Literatur

• 1 Rhiem K, Bücker-Nott HJ, Hellmich M. et al. Benchmarking of a checklist for the identification of familial risk for breast and ovarian cancers in a prospective cohort. Breast J 2019; 25: 455-460
• 2 Kast K, Rhiem K, Wappenschmidt B. et al. Prevalence of BRCA1/2 germline mutations in 21 401 families with breast and ovarian cancer. J Med Genet 2016; 53: 465-471
• 3 Kuchenbaecker KB, Hopper JL, Barnes DR. et al. Risks of Breast, Ovarian, and Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers. JAMA 2017; 317: 2402-2416
• 4 Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF. Interdisziplinäre S3-Leitlinie für die Früherkennung, Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms, Kurzversion 4.1. Leitlinienprogr Onkol. 2018. Im Internet (Stand: 03.03.2021): https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/032-045OLk_S3_Mammakarzinom_2020-02.pdf
• 5 Engel C, Rhiem K, Hahnen E. et al. Prevalence of pathogenic BRCA1/2 germline mutations among 802 women with unilateral triple-negative breast cancer without family cancer history. BMC Cancer 2018; 18: 265
• 6 Bick U, Engel C, Krug B. et al. High-risk breast cancer surveillance with MRI: 10-year experience from the German consortium for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 175: 217-228
• 7 Foulkes WD, Grainge MJ, Rakha EA. et al. Tumor size is an unreliable predictor of prognosis in basal-like breast cancers and does not correlate closely with lymph node status. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009; 117: 199-204
• 8 Møller P, Stormorken A, Jonsrud C. et al. Survival of patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancer diagnosed in an MRI-based surveillance program. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 139: 155-161
• 9 Hahnen E, Lederer B, Hauke J. et al. Germline mutation status, pathological complete response, and disease-free survival in triple-negative breast cancer: Secondary analysis of the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1378-1385
• 10 Rhiem K, Engel C, Graeser M. et al. The risk of contralateral breast cancer in patients from BRCA1/2 negative high risk families as compared to patients from BRCA1 or BRCA2 positive families: A retrospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14: R156
• 11 Quante AS, Engel C, Kiechle M. et al. Umstrukturierung der Risikoberechnung für die intensivierte Früherkennung im Deutschen Konsortium für Brust- und Eierstockkrebs. Gynakologe 2020; 53: 259-264
• 12 Schellong G, Riepenhausen M, Ehlert K. et al. Brustkrebs bei jungen Frauen nach Therapie eines Hodgkin-Lymphoms im Kindes- und Jugendalter: Eine Beobachtungsstudie mit bis zu 33 Jahren Follow-up. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2014; 111: 3-9
• 13 Grinstein O, Krug B, Hellmic M. et al. Residual glandular tissue (RGT) in BRCA1/2 germline mutation carriers with unilateral and bilateral prophylactic mastectomies. Surg Oncol 2019; 29: 126-133
• 14 Schrading S, Kuhl CK. Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology 2008; 246: 58-70
• 15 Krammer J, Pinker-Domenig K, Robson ME. et al. Breast cancer detection and tumor characteristics in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 163: 565-571
• 16 Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S. et al. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: The EVA trial. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 1450-1457
• 17 Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F. et al. Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk italian 1 study): Final results. Invest Radiol 2011; 46: 94-105
• 18 Riedl CC, Luft N, Bernhart C. et al. Triple-Modality Screening Trial for Familial Breast Cancer Underlines the Importance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Questions the Role of Mammography and Ultrasound Regardless of Patient Mutation Status, Age, and Breast density. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 1128-1135
• 19 Van Zelst JCM, Mus RDM, Woldringh G. et al. Surveillance of women with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by using biannual automated breast US, MR imaging, and mammography. Radiology 2017; 285: 376-388
• 20 Chiarelli AM, Blackmore KM, Muradali D. et al. Performance Measures of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Plus Mammography in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112: 136-144
• 21 Spick C, Baltzer PAT. Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 2014; 273: 401-409
• 22 Obdeijn IM, Winter-Warnars GAO, Mann RM. et al. Should we screen BRCA1 mutation carriers only with MRI? A multicenter study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2014; 144: 577-582
• 23 Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E. et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1773-1783
• 24 Fallenberg EM, Schmitzberger FF, Amer H. et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI – clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation. Eur Radiol 2017; 27: 2752-2764