Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2022; 44(08): 761-770
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1743103
Original Article
Mastology

Histological and Immunohistochemical Characteristics for Hereditary Breast Cancer Risk in a Cohort of Brazilian Women

Características histológicas e imunohistoquímicas para risco hereditário de câncer de mama em uma coorte de mulheres brasileiras
Renata Mendes de Freitas 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
2   Epidemiology of Congenital Malformations Laboratory, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
,
Maximiliano Ribeiro Guerra 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Vívian Assis Fayer 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Angélica Atala Lombelo Campos 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Jane Rocha Duarte Cintra 
3   Oncology Institute, Hospital 9 de Julho, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Joan Warren 
4   Independent Researcher, Washington, United States
,
Rafaela Russi Ervilha 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Camila Damasceno de Paula 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
,
Maria Teresa Bustamante-Teixeira 
1   Department of Public Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The study aimed to characterize the clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical profile of women with invasive breast cancer, according to the risk for Hereditary Predisposition Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome in a Brazilian population.

Methods This is a retrospective study performed from a hospital-based cohort of 522 women, diagnosed with breast cancer treated at an oncology referral center in the Southeast region of Brazil, between 2014 and 2016.

Results Among the 430 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer who composed the study population, 127 (29.5%) were classified as at increased risk for hereditary predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. There was a lower level of education in patients at increased risk (34.6%) when compared with those at usual risk (46.0%). Regarding tumor characteristics, women at increased risk had higher percentages of the disease diagnosed at an advanced stage (32.3%), and with tumors > 2cm (63.0%), with increased prevalence for both characteristics, when compared with those at usual risk. Furthermore, we found higher percentages of HG3 (43.3%) and Ki-67 ≥ 25% (64.6%) in women at increased risk, with prevalence being about twice as high in this group. The presence of triple-negative tumors was observed as 25.2% in women at increased risk and 6.0% in women at usual risk, with the prevalence of absence of biomarkers being 2.5 times higher among women in the increased risk group.

Conclusion From the clinical criteria routinely used in the diagnosis of breast cancer, the care practice of genetic counseling for patients at increased risk of hereditary breast cancer in contexts such as Brazil is still scarce.

Resumo

Objetivo O presente estudo buscou caracterizar o perfil clínico, histológico e imunohistoquímico de mulheres com câncer de mama invasivo segundo o risco para a Síndrome de Predisposição Hereditária ao Câncer de Mama e Ovário em uma população brasileira.

Métodos Trata-se de um estudo retrospectivo realizado a partir de uma coorte hospitalar composta por 522 mulheres diagnosticadas com câncer de mama entre 2014 e 2016 assistidas em um centro de referência oncológica localizado na região sudeste brasileira.

Resultados Entre as 430 mulheres diagnosticadas com câncer de mama invasivo que compuseram a população de estudo, 127 (29,5%) foram classificadas como de risco aumentado para a síndrome de predisposição hereditária ao câncer de mama e ovário. Verificou-se menor nível de escolaridade nas pacientes com risco aumentado (34,6%) quando comparadas àquelas consideradas como de risco habitual (46,0%). Quanto às características do tumor, as mulheres de risco aumentado apresentaram maiores percentuais de doença diagnosticada em estádio avançado (32,3%) e com tumores > 2cm (63,0%), com prevalência aumentada para ambas as características, quando comparadas àquelas de risco habitual. Ainda nas mulheres de risco aumentado, foram encontrados maiores percentuais de GH3 (43,3%) e Ki-67 ≥ 25% (64,6%), com prevalência cerca de duas vezes maior neste grupo. A presença de tumores triplo-negativos foi observada em 25,2% nas mulheres de risco aumentado e 6,0% nas mulheres de risco habitual, com prevalência de ausência de biomarcadores 2,5 vezes maior entre as mulheres do grupo de risco aumentado.

Conclusão A partir dos critérios clínicos rotineiramente utilizados no diagnóstico do câncer de mama, a prática assistencial do aconselhamento genético para as pacientes com risco aumentado de câncer de mama hereditário em contextos como o do Brasil ainda é escarça.

Keywords

breast cancer - hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome - cohort studies - immunohistochemistry - genetic counseling

Palavras-chave

câncer de mama - síndrome hereditária de câncer de mama e ovário - estudos de coorte - imuno-histoquímica - aconselhamento genético

Contributions

Freitas analyzed the data, and promoted the conception and design of the article. Guerra helped in the analysis and writing of the article. Fayer and Campos participated in data collection. Cintra contributed to the screening of patients in the cohort and the collection of clinical information. Warren contributed substantially to the interpretation of the data and performed a critical review of its intellectual content. Ervilha participated in the data collection and writing of the article. De Paula acted in the graphic presentation of the results, and Teixeira performed a relevant critical review of the intellectual content presented with approval of the final version to be published.




Publication History

Received: 29 October 2021

Accepted: 01 December 2021

Article published online:
25 April 2022

© 2022. Federação Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Pollán M. Epidemiology of breast cancer in young women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010; 123 (Suppl. 01) 3-6 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-010-1098-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Gobbi H. Classificação dos tumores da mama: atualização baseada na nova classificação da Organização Mundial da Saúde de 2012. J Bras Patol Med Lab 2012; 48 (06) 463-474 DOI: 10.1590/S1676-24442012000600013.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA. et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000; 406 (6797): 747-752 DOI: 10.1038/35021093.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Aquino RG, Vasques PH, Cavalcante DI, Oliveira AL, Oliveira BM, Pinheiro LG. Carcinoma ductal invasor: relação de características anatomopatológicas com a presença de metástases axilares em 220 casos. Rev Col Bras Cir 2017; 44 (02) 163-170 DOI: 10.1590/0100-69912017002010.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gong P, Wang Y, Liu G, Zhang J, Wang Z. New insight into Ki67 expression at the invasive front in breast cancer. PLoS One 2013; 8 (01) e54912 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054912.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Achatz MI, Caleffi M, Guindalini R, Marques RM, Nogueira-Rodrigues A, Ashton-Prolla P. Recommendations for advancing the diagnosis and management of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in Brazil. JCO Glob Oncol 2020; 6: 439-452 DOI: 10.1200/JGO.19.00170.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Heisey R, Carroll JC. Identification and management of women with a family history of breast cancer: Practical guide for clinicians. Can Fam Physician 2016; 62 (10) 799-803
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lee TC, Reyna C, Shaughnessy E, Lewis JD. Screening of populations at high risk for breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2019; 120 (05) 820-830 DOI: 10.1002/jso.25611.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Daly MB, Pal T, Berry MP, Buys SS, Dickson P, Domchek SM. et al; Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19 (01) 77-102 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0001.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB. et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA 2019; 322 (07) 652-665 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.10987.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kne A, Zierhut H, Baldinger S, Swenson KK, Mink P, Veach PM. et al. Why is cancer genetic counseling underutilized by women identified as at risk for hereditary breast cancer? Patient perceptions of barriers following a referral letter. J Genet Couns 2017; 26 (04) 697-715 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-0040-0.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Fernandes GC, Michelli RA, Galvão HC, Paula AE, Pereira R, Andrade CE. et al. Prevalence of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in a Brazilian population sample at-risk for hereditary breast cancer and characterization of its genetic ancestry. Oncotarget 2016; 7 (49) 80465-80481 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.12610.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Delpech Y, Wu Y, Hess KR, Hsu L, Ayers M, Natowicz R. et al. Ki67 expression in the primary tumor predicts for clinical benefit and time to progression on first-line endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 135 (02) 619-627 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2194-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Allison KH, Harvey BE, Mangu PB, Bartlett JM. et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline focused update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2018; 142 (11) 1364-1382 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2018-0902-SA.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Flória-Santos M, Lopes-Júnior LC, Alvarenga LdeM, Ribeiro MS, Ferraz VE, Nascimento LC. et al. Self-reported cancer family history is a useful tool for identification of individuals at risk of hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome at primary care centers in middle-income settings: a longitudinal study. Genet Mol Biol 2016; 39 (02) 178-183 DOI: 10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2014-0362.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Nelson HD, Zakher B, Cantor A, Fu R, Griffin J, O'Meara ES. et al. Risk factors for breast cancer for women aged 40 to 49 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156 (09) 635-648 DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-9-201205010-00006.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Scott LC, Mobley LR, Kuo TM, Il'yasova D. Update on triple-negative breast cancer disparities for the United States: A population-based study from the United States Cancer Statistics database, 2010 through 2014. Cancer 2019; 125 (19) 3412-3417 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32207.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Fejerman L, Haiman CA, Reich D, Tandon A, Deo RC, John EM. et al. An admixture scan in 1,484 African American women with breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18 (11) 3110-3117 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0464.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Suarez-Kurtz G, Pena SD, Struchiner CJ, Hutz MH. Pharmacogenomic diversity among Brazilians: influence of ancestry, self-reported color, and geographical origin. Front Pharmacol 2012; 3: 191 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2012.00191.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Dos-Santos-Silva I, De Stavola BL, Renna Junior NL, Nogueira MC, Aquino EM, Bustamante-Teixeira MT. et al. Ethnoracial and social trends in breast cancer staging at diagnosis in Brazil, 2001-14: a case only analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2019; 7 (06) e784-e797 DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30151-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mavaddat N, Barrowdale D, Andrulis IL, Domchek SM, Eccles D, Nevanlinna H. et al; HEBON, EMBRACE, GEMO Study Collaborators, kConFab Investigators, SWE-BRCA Collaborators, Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. Pathology of breast and ovarian cancers among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012; 21 (01) 134-147 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0775.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Amendola LC, Vieira R. A contribuição dos genes BRCA na predisposição hereditária ao câncer de mama. Rev Bras Cancerol 2005; 51 (04) 325-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Spurdle AB, Couch FJ, Parsons MT, McGuffog L, Barrowdale D, Bolla MK. et al; ABCTB Investigators, EMBRACE Group, GENICA Network, HEBON Group, kConFab Investigators. Refined histopathological predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status: a large-scale analysis of breast cancer characteristics from the BCAC, CIMBA, and ENIGMA consortia. Breast Cancer Res 2014; 16 (06) 3419 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-014-0474-y.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mangia A, Malfettone A, Simone G, Darvishian F. Old and new concepts in histopathological characterization of familial breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2011; 22 (Suppl. 01) i24-i30 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq662.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 De Lima Vazquez F, Silva TB, Da Costa Vieira RA, Da Costa AM, Scapulatempo C, Fregnani JH. et al. Retrospective analysis of breast cancer prognosis among young and older women in a Brazilian cohort of 738 patients, 1985-2002. Oncol Lett 2016; 12 (06) 4911-4924 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2016.5360.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Costa NCD, Morsch DM, Opperman CP, Spritzer PM, Rosa DD. Biological features of breast cancer according to age at diagnosis in southern Brazil: An analysis of retrospective data of 1128 women. Breast J 2019; 25 (04) 760-762 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.13327.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Buitrago F, Uemura G, Sena MC. Fatores prognósticos em câncer de mama. Comun Ciênc Saúde. 2011; 22 (Supl 1): S69-S81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Sarioglu S. Tumor deposits in breast carcinomas. In: Sarioglu S. Tumor deposits. Berlin: Springer; 2018: 171-185
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Gnant M, Harbeck N, Thomssen C. St. Gallen 2011: summary of the consensus discussion. Breast Care (Basel) 2011; 6 (02) 136-141 DOI: 10.1159/000328054.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Foulkes WD, Metcalfe K, Sun P, Hanna WM, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P. et al. Estrogen receptor status in BRCA1- and BRCA2-related breast cancer: the influence of age, grade, and histological type. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10 (06) 2029-2034 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-03-1061.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Newman LA. Disparities in breast cancer and african ancestry: a global perspective. Breast J 2015; 21 (02) 133-139 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12369.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Tun NM, Villani G, Ong K, Yoe L, Bo ZM. Risk of having BRCA1 mutation in high-risk women with triple-negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Genet 2014; 85 (01) 43-48 DOI: 10.1111/cge.12270.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Fernandes GC, Felicio PS, Michelli RAD, Coelho AS, Scapulatempo-Neto C, Palmero EI. Differential profile of BRCA1 vs. BRCA2 mutated families: a characterization of the main differences and similarities in patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2019; 20 (06) 1655-1660 DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.6.1655.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Young SR, Pilarski RT, Donenberg T, Shapiro C, Hammond LS, Miller J. et al. The prevalence of BRCA1 mutations among young women with triple-negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2009; 9: 86 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-86.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Liang Q, Ma D, Gao RF, Yu KD. Effect of Ki-67 expression levels and histological grade on breast cancer early relapse in patients with different immunohistochemical-based subtypes. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 7648 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-64523-1.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Pérez-López ME, García-Gómez J, Alves MT, Paradela A, García-Mata J, García-Caballero T. Ki-67 is a prognostic marker for hormone receptor positive tumors. Clin Transl Oncol 2016; 18 (10) 996-1002 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-015-1472-y.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Felix GE, Abe-Sandes C, Machado-Lopes TM, Bomfim TF, Guindalini RS, Santos VC. et al. Germline mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and TP53 in patients at high-risk for HBOC: characterizing a Northeast Brazilian Population. Hum Genome Var 2014; 1: 14012 DOI: 10.1038/hgv.2014.12.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Schayek H, De Marco L, Starinsky-Elbaz S, Rossette M, Laitman Y, Bastos-Rodrigues L. et al. The rate of recurrent BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 mutations in the general population, and unselected ovarian cancer cases, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Cancer Genet 2016; 209 (1-2): 50-52 DOI: 10.1016/j.cancergen.2015.11.003.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Horovitz DD, de Faria Ferraz VE, Dain S, Marques-de-Faria AP. Genetic services and testing in Brazil. J Community Genet 2013; 4 (03) 355-375 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-012-0096-y.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Llerena Jr JC. Genética médica, Sistema Único de Saúde brasileiro (SUS) e integralidade na atenção e no cuidado à saúde. Cien Saude Colet 2002; 7 (01) 21-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar