Yerushalmi, Rinat

Abstract Background: Oncofertility counseling in BRCA carriers has unique challenges due to a possible negative impact of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) on reproductive potential and the indication to undergo risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. While previous studies demonstrated the safety of pregnancy in women with prior breast cancer (BC) history, limited evidence exists in BRCA carriers specifically. We report the results of the largest study to date investigating likelihood of pregnancy after BC, reproductive and disease outcomes specifically in BRCA carriers. Methods: This was an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study including young BRCA carriers with history of BC (NCT03673306). Eligible patients were women harboring germline PVs in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 and diagnosed with stage I-III invasive BC at the age of ≤ 40 years between January 2000 and December 2020. BRCA healthy carriers or patients with BRCA variants of unknown significance, non-invasive BC, lack of follow-up, prior ovarian cancer or other malignancies without history of BC were excluded. Primary endpoints were pregnancy rate and disease-free survival (DFS). Overall survival (OS), BC specific survival (BCSS), pregnancy, fetal and obstetric outcomes were secondary endpoints. To mitigate the impact of guaranteed time bias, two survival analyses were performed: 1) Extended Cox model with occurrence of pregnancy as a time-varying covariate; 2) Case-control analysis by matching 1:3 patients with and without a pregnancy for type of BRCA PV, hormone receptor status, nodal status and year at diagnosis; moreover, each control had to have a disease-free interval longer than the time occurring between BC diagnosis and conception of the matched case. Results: From 78 centers worldwide, 4,732 patients were included, of whom 659 had at least one pregnancy after BC (pregnancy cohort) and 4,073 did not (non-pregnancy cohort). Patients in the pregnancy cohort were significantly more likely to carry BRCA1 PVs, to be younger at BC diagnosis, to have node-negative and hormone receptor-negative (HR-) BC (all p< 0.01). Pregnancy rate at 10 years was 22% (95% CI 21%-24%) overall, 18% (95% CI 16%-21%) and 26% (95% CI 24%-26%) in patients with HR+ and HR- BC, respectively (p< 0.01). Median time from BC diagnosis to conception was 3.5 years (IQR 2.2-5.3 years), significantly longer in patients with HR+ than HR- BC (4.3 vs 3.2 years, p< 0.01). Among 659 patients with a pregnancy after BC, 45 (6.8%) and 63 (9.6%) experienced an induced abortion or a miscarriage, respectively. Of the 517 (78.5%) patients with completed pregnancy, 54 (10.4%) had twins and 406 (78.5%) delivered at term (delivery ≥37 weeks). Among the 571 babies born, 5 (0.9%) had congenital anomalies. Median follow-up was 7.8 years (IQR, 4.5-12.6 years). No significant difference in DFS was observed between the pregnancy and non-pregnancy cohorts (unadjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82-1.15, p=0.74; adjusted HR [aHR] 0.99, 95% CI 0.81-1.20, p=0.90). Patients in the pregnancy cohort showed significantly better BCSS (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.74, p< 0.01; aHR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41-0.86, p< 0.01) and OS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38-0.72, p< 0.01; aHR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.85, p< 0.01). Similar results were obtained in the case-control analysis. Subgroup analyses of survival endpoints according to patient, tumor and treatment characteristics will be presented at the conference. Conclusions: In this global study, 1 out of 5 young BRCA carriers conceived within 10 years after a BC diagnosis, higher than rates previously reported in unselected young BC populations. Pregnancy following BC in BRCA carriers did not appear to adversely impact maternal prognosis or fetal outcomes. These findings should be incorporated into oncofertility counseling of young BRCA carriers with BC. Citation Format: Matteo Lambertini, Eva Blondeaux, Elisa Agostinetto, Anne-Sophie Hamy-Petit, Hee Jeong Kim, Camila Chiodi, Rinat Bernstein-Molho, Florentine Hilbers, Katarzyna Pogoda, Estela Carrasco Lopez, Kevin Punie, Jyoti Bajpai, Michail Ignatiadis, Halle Moore, Kelly-Anne Phillips, Angela Toss, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Fedro Alessandro Peccatori, Tiphaine Renaud, Alberta Ferrari, Shani Paluch-Shimon, Robert Fruscio, Wanda Cui, Stephanie Wong, Claudio Vernieri, Kathryn Ruddy, Maria Vittoria Dieci, Alexios Matikas, Mariya Rozenblit, Cynthia Villareal Garza, Laura De Marchis, Lucia Del Mastro, Fabio Puglisi, Maria Del Pilar Estevez-Diz, Kenny A. Rodriguez-Wallberg, Bela Mrinakova, Sarah Meister, Luca Livraghi, Florian Clatot, Rinat Yerushalmi, Carmine De Angelis, Rodrigo Sánchez-Bayona, Icro Meattini, Natalia Cichowska-Cwalińska, Martine Berlière, Mahmoud Salama, Ugo De Giorgi, Amir Sonnenblick, Hatem Azim, Ann Partridge. Pregnancy after breast cancer in young women with germline BRCA pathogenic variants: results from an international cohort study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS02-13.

ImportanceYoung women with breast cancer who have germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 face unique challenges regarding fertility. Previous studies demonstrating the feasibility and safety of pregnancy in breast cancer survivors included limited data regarding BRCA carriers.ObjectiveTo investigate cumulative incidence of pregnancy and disease-free survival in young women who are BRCA carriers.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsInternational, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study conducted at 78 participating centers worldwide. The study included female participants diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at age 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020 carrying germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2. Last delivery was October 7, 2022; last follow-up was February 20, 2023.ExposurePregnancy after breast cancer.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary end points were cumulative incidence of pregnancy after breast cancer and disease-free survival. Secondary end points were breast cancer–specific survival, overall survival, pregnancy, and fetal and obstetric outcomes.ResultsOf 4732 BRCA carriers included, 659 had at least 1 pregnancy after breast cancer and 4073 did not. Median age at diagnosis in the overall cohort was 35 years (IQR, 31-38 years). Cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 10 years was 22% (95% CI, 21%-24%), with a median time from breast cancer diagnosis to conception of 3.5 years (IQR, 2.2-5.3 years). Among the 659 patients who had a pregnancy, 45 (6.9%) and 63 (9.7%) had an induced abortion or a miscarriage, respectively. Of the 517 patients (79.7%) with a completed pregnancy, 406 (91.0%) delivered at term (≥37 weeks) and 54 (10.4%) had twins. Among the 470 infants born with known information on pregnancy complications, 4 (0.9%) had documented congenital anomalies. Median follow-up was 7.8 years (IQR, 4.5-12.6 years). No significant difference in disease-free survival was observed between patients with or without a pregnancy after breast cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81-1.20). Patients who had a pregnancy had significantly better breast cancer–specific survival and overall survival.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this global study, 1 in 5 young BRCA carriers conceived within 10 years after breast cancer diagnosis. Pregnancy following breast cancer in BRCA carriers was not associated with decreased disease-free survival.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03673306

Background Polygenic risk score (PRS), calculated based on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), can improve breast cancer (BC) risk assessment. To date, most BC GWASs have been performed in individuals of European (EUR) ancestry, and the generalisation of EUR-based PRS to other populations is a major challenge. In this study, we examined the performance of EUR-based BC PRS models in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods We generated PRSs based on data on EUR women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We tested the performance of the PRSs in a cohort of 2161 AJ women from Israel (1437 cases and 724 controls) from BCAC (BCAC cohort from Israel (BCAC-IL)). In addition, we tested the performance of these EUR-based BC PRSs, as well as the established 313-SNP EUR BC PRS, in an independent cohort of 181 AJ women from Hadassah Medical Center (HMC) in Israel. Results In the BCAC-IL cohort, the highest OR per 1 SD was 1.56 (±0.09). The OR for AJ women at the top 10% of the PRS distribution compared with the middle quintile was 2.10 (±0.24). In the HMC cohort, the OR per 1 SD of the EUR-based PRS that performed best in the BCAC-IL cohort was 1.58±0.27. The OR per 1 SD of the commonly used 313-SNP BC PRS was 1.64 (±0.28). Conclusions Extant EUR GWAS data can be used for generating PRSs that identify AJ women with markedly elevated risk of BC and therefore hold promise for improving BC risk assessment in AJ women.

Abstract Background: Approximately 1% of all new cases of breast cancer (BC) occur in men. Care of male BC is largely based on extrapolation from treatment strategies and management of symptoms in women. The impact of BC diagnosis and therapy on Quality of Life (QoL) in women with BC is well documented. Comprehensive, prospective data about QoL in men treated for BC are sparse. Due to the lack of a validated male BC QoL questionnaire, we previously evaluated the QoL of the male BC using the original EORTC QLQ-C30 and breast module QLQ BR23 with “female” items replaced by male-specific items from the EORTC QoL prostate module (EORTC QLQ-PR25). The development of a validated worldwide questionnaire for male BC is sponsored by EORTC QoL Group and will be completed in cooperation with EORTC Breast Group and the International Male BC Program (a cooperation between EORTC-BCG, TBCRC, within the BIG and NABCG networks) Trial design: The evaluation of the QoL issues relevant for male BC, as well as the translation of issues into items to build the tool for QoL assessment in male BC will be carried out through four phases: 1. A systematic Literature review 2. Interviews with patients 3. Interviews with Health Care Professionals (HCP) 4. Consultation of experts in Oncology and QoL Inclusion criteria: • Histologically proven early BC or metastatic BC in male patients • Age ≥ 18 years • Ability to understand and fill out questionnaires • Written informed consent Exclusion criteria: • Other cancer in the past 5 years except non-melanotic skin cancer • Patients participating in interventional clinical studies with QoL as primary endpoint • Any condition potentially hampering compliance with the study protocol Aims: The study proposes to carry out an evaluation of the QoL issues relevant for male patients with BC, and translating the issues into questions to build the tool for an adequate QoL assessment in these patients. The specific aims are: 1) To carry out an evaluation of the existing EORTC QLQ-BR 45 (adapting for male BC) and for suitability of use in male BC patients 2) To carry out an evaluation of the EORTC QLQ-PR25 (adapting for male BC) for suitability of use in male BC patients 3) To provide recommendations to the EORTC on a suitable assessment approach to assess QOL in male BC Statistical methods: A systematic literature review to assess what factors are unique to male BC patients in influencing their QoL and what QoL measures exist for them will be performed. This will be conducted by reviewing all studies with male BC participants and including investigator brochures describing side effects in male BC patients, as well as by evaluating issues captured by other existing EORTC modules. The final list of potential QoL issues relevant to the male BC will be tested for relevance and importance in semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients and HCP. A total of 2-5 patients per year will be recruited from collaborating hospitals/countries. At least 40 in total will be interviewed before, during, or after treatment for male BC. At least 2 experts/country from the all collaborating centres will be included in the interview to discuss and consider the potential issues. Finally, the issue list will be translated into questions to build the tool for a QoL assessment in male BC patients. Present accrual and target accrual This study started in October 2019. A systematic literature review has been completed. Seventeen centres from worldwide are participating in the study. New centers may still join. Contact information for people with a specific interest in the trial Vesna Bjelic-Radisic E-Mail: Vesna.Bjelic-Radisic@helios-gesundheit.de Fatima Cardoso e-mail: fatimacardoso@fundacaochampalimaud.pt Citation Format: Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Fatima Cardoso, Joachim Weis, Eveline Bleiker, David Cameron, Galina Velikova, Karatzyna Pogoda, Samantha Serpentini, Kevin Punie, Rinat Yerushalmi, Erika Matos, Birgit Carly, Ivana Bozovic-Spasojevic, Markus Fleisch, Zoe Luisa Probst, Sina Maria Schafer, Nicola Russell, Sofie Tombeur, Joanna Vermeij, Heidi Roelstraete, Kathryn Ruddy, Juan I Arraras, Andrew Bottomley. Adaption of the EORTC quality of life breast cancer module for male breast cancer - phase I [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT-14-01.

Abstract Background: Based on recent breast cancer literature, we hypothesized that there could be substantive differences in apparent efficacy estimates using a log-normal (LN) survival model rather than with standard Kaplan-Meier (K-M) or Cox model methods. While both Cox and LN survival analyses offer greater specification by individual patient characteristics, the LN model may more robustly estimate survival under model misspecification. Methods: We recently pooled data for 5 NCIC CTG primary breast cancer trials: MA.5, MA.12, MA.14, MA.21, and MA.27. The total patient count for patients who received at least 1 dose of trial therapy is 11,253. Compilation included definition of STEEP endpoints (C Hudis, JCO, 2008) and standardized factor categorizations. The primary endpoint is Breast Cancer Free Interval (BCFI) defined as the time from randomization until recurrence: first local invasive or DCIS; regional, or distant; contralateral invasive or DCIS; or death from breast cancer. We found substantive evidence of non-proportionality for 7 factors compiled for the meta-analyses. In this work, we fit multivariate Cox and LN models with these 7 factors, lymph node status and pathologic T status. We then compare BCFI efficacy estimates for patient and tumour characteristics at 1-, 3-, and 5-years obtained with K-M, Cox, and LN models. Results: There was evidence that the Cox assumption of proportional hazards was violated for 7 factors: age, menopausal status, hormone receptor status, anthracycline use, chemotherapy use, race, and ECOG performance status. Differences between models were intrinsically affected by timing and extent of non-proportionality; there was no consistent pattern. In particular, investigations to date indicate efficacy estimates with absolute differences between K-M, Cox and LN estimates which varied by time of assessment: at 1-year 0.0 to 6.7%, at 3-years 0.4 to 18.6%, and at 5-years 0.2 to 17.0%. BCFI estimates with the K-M were inconsistently closer to those with the LN or Cox model: for K-M to Cox at 1-year 0.4 to 5.2%, at 3-years 0.4 to 15%, at 5-years 0.4 to 14.3%; for K-M to LN at 1-year 0.0 to 6.7%, at 3-years 0.5 to 18.6%, at 5-years 0.2 to 17.0%; for Cox to LN at 1-year 0.8 to 1.8%, at 3-years 1.9 to 6.0%, at 5-years 0.6 to 5.7%. K-M and Cox models have step-wise adjustments at events for K-M and Cox, rather than smooth modeling with the LN. Discussion: Even with reasonably large population subgroups, there were substantive differences in apparent survival (0.0 to 18.6%) between K-M, Cox and LN model types. The magnitude of differences in survival estimates was large enough to be clinically relevant and warrant further consideration as we evaluate new therapies and prognostic/predictive factors. We will be statistically investigating framework robustness under differing levels of model misspecification. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-14-01.