Abstract
Hereditary ovarian cancer, approximately 20% of epithelial ovarian cancers, occurs as part of several genetically distinct syndromes, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, HNPCC), and so on. HBOC are caused by mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, and the penetrance of the genes for ovarian cancer was estimated to be 8–62% in different populations. A high-grade serous carcinoma is a major histological subtype, although endometrioid and clear cell carcinomas also have been reported in the BRCA-related ovarian cancers. Germline mutations in BRCA1/2 are responsible for approximately 15% of epithelial ovarian cancers. BRCA1/2 mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer showed more favorable survival outcomes compared with mutation-negative women due to higher response rates to platinum regimens.
Ovarian cancer screening with transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 has not been shown to be sufficiently sensitive or specific, so risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) after completion of childbearing has been recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. RRSO for ovarian and breast cancer was associated with 80% and 50% risk reduction in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, respectively. An oral contraceptive significantly reduced the risk for ovarian cancer by approximately 50% for the mutation carriers. So far, more than 20 genes are known to be involved in pathogenesis of hereditary ovarian cancer. The NCCN Guidelines recommend RRSO in BRCA1/2, MMR genes, BRIP1, and RAD51C/D mutation carriers.
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors cause cancer cell death in BRCA-mutated cancers by synthetic lethality. Olaparib was the first PARP inhibitor approved in the EU and USA for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer patients with a germline BRCA mutation. Several trials are ongoing for the inhibitors in other populations such as patients with homologous recombination deficiency.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- BRCA1
- BRCA2
- Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC)
- Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO)
- Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)
- Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors
2.1 Introduction
Ovarian cancer is the most lethal disease in gynecological malignancy. A positive family history of ovarian cancer is one of the strongest and most consistent of the risk factors for the development of the disease. It has been reported that first-degree relatives of ovarian cancer patients were found to be at a two- to fourfold increased risk for developing the disease [1, 2].
Now, approximately 20% of ovarian cancers have been related to hereditary conditions [3]. Hereditary ovarian cancer occurs as part of several genetically distinct syndromes, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), and so on. HBOC caused by inherited mutations of BRCA1/2 and HNPCC caused by the mismatch repair genes are predicted to be responsible for about 65–75% and 10–15% of hereditary ovarian cancer, respectively. Furthermore, other suppressor genes and oncogenes have been related with hereditary ovarian cancer [4,5,6,7]. So far, more than 20 genes are known to be involved in pathogenesis of hereditary ovarian cancer; however, unknown susceptibility genes and their mutations appear to exist [8].
We reviewed the available published data regarding clinical and molecular features and management (i.e., surveillance, chemoprevention, risk-reducing surgery, and molecular targeting agents) of hereditary ovarian cancer, especially BRCA-related hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.
2.2 Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC): BRCA-Related Breast and Ovarian Cancer
2.2.1 Clinical and Molecular Features of HBOC
Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is caused by mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes [9, 10]. BRCA1/2 genes are tumor suppresser genes and involved in DNA repair of double-strand DNA breaks and the regulation of cell-cycle checkpoints in response to DNA damage [11, 12]. The BRCA1 gene is located on short arm of chromosome 17, and the BRCA2 gene on long arm of chromosome 13. The frequency of pathogenic mutations in BRCA1/2 genes has been estimated to be 1/300 and 1/800, respectively [13,14,15].
It has been estimated that more than 90% of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families are related to germline mutation of BRCA1/2 genes in Western countries [16]; on the other hand, approximately 80% of breast and ovarian cancer families in Japan are based on the mutation [17]. In analysis of hereditary ovarian cancer families, BRCA1/2 mutations were detected in 41.9% of families in which there were at least two ovarian cancer cases [18]. In Japanese population, among the 55 ovarian cancer families without breast cancer patients, 24 families were carrying germline mutations in BRCA1/2 (24/55, 43.6%); however, in 27 breast-ovarian cancer families, 21 families were positive with the mutation (21/27, 77.8%) [17]. About half of families showing a genetic predisposition to ovarian cancer did not have identifiable BRCA1/2 mutations, so other gene mutations predisposing a patient to ovarian cancer are likely to exist [19, 20].
Germline mutations in BRCA1/2 are responsible for more than 10% of epithelial ovarian cancers [21, 22]. Among 1915 patients with ovarian cancer, 280 (15%) had mutations in BRCA1 (n = 182) or BRCA2 (n = 98) [22]. Histological characteristics by BRCA1/2 mutation status in this large mutational analysis were summarized in Table 2.1 [22]. The BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence was 11–16% in high-grade serous carcinoma [22, 23]. In analysis of invasive ovarian cancer, 13–20% of the patients have a germline mutation of BRCA1/2 [24,25,26,27]. In Japan, Sakamoto et al. reported that 12 of the 95 unselected women with ovarian cancer (12.6%), including 5 in the BRCA1 (5.3%) and 7 in the BRCA2 (7.4%), had deleterious mutations and all cases with BRCA mutation were diagnosed at advanced stage and had high-grade serous carcinoma [28]. Table 2.2 demonstrates histological and molecular subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer [29].
Several founder mutations have been observed in the specific population, for example, the 187delAG and 5385insC mutations in BRCA1 and the 6174delT mutation in BRCA2 have been identified in the Ashkenazi Jewish population [30, 31]. In Japanese population, it was reported that the L63X and Q934X mutations in BRCA1 were the founder mutations with high frequency in hereditary ovarian cancer families [17], and it has been reported that the L63X is a founder mutation with the highest frequency in Japanese breast cancer families [32, 33].
The penetrance of BRCA1/2 gene mutation in ovarian cancer is lower than that in breast cancer. A lifetime risk for ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers was estimated to be 8–62% in different populations; however, that for breast cancer was 41–90%. A meta-analysis of these published data showed the average cumulative risks for breast and ovarian cancer by age 70 years for BRCA1 mutation carriers were 57% and 40%, respectively. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, they were 49% and 18%, respectively, in the meta-analysis [5, 24, 34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42]. In a recent prospective study, the estimated average cumulative risks for breast and ovarian cancer by age 70 years for BRCA1 mutation carriers were 60% and 59%, respectively. In addition, for BRCA2 mutation carriers, they were 55% and 16.5%, respectively [39]. A subsequent alteration or silencing in the second copy of the gene without the hereditary mutation is believed to be necessary for the initiation of cancer development, so the risk of breast and ovarian cancer with BRCA1/2 mutations is various, even within families with the same mutation. In an international observational study of 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations in 33 countries on 6 continents, 12% of the BRCA1 mutation carriers and 6% of the BRCA2 mutation carriers were diagnosed with ovarian cancer, and 46% of the BRCA1 mutation carriers and 52% of the BRCA2 mutation carriers were diagnosed with breast cancer [43]. As described above, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have a high risk for both breast cancer and an ovarian cancer, so there was a need to consider more intensive screening and prevention strategies such as chemoprevention and prophylactic surgery.
It has been reported that some pathological features are observed more frequently in breast and ovarian cancer patients with BRCA1/2 mutation. For example, breast cancers with BRCA1/2 mutation are characterized as ER/PR and HER2 negative: triple negative [44,45,46,47,48,49]. In ovarian cancers with BRCA1/2 mutation, high-grade serous carcinoma is a major histological subtype, although endometrioid and clear cell carcinomas also have been reported in the BRCA-related ovarian cancers [21, 25,26,27, 50,51,52,53]. Mucinous type is very rare in the population [25, 27]. In Japanese hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families, the major histological type of BRCA-associated ovarian cancers was serous carcinoma in 81% of tumors, and only one case was clearcell carcinoma. No tumor with mucinous carcinoma occurred in these families [17]. Mucinous carcinomas appear to be related to other gene mutations; KRAS and TP53 [54]. Borderline epithelial ovarian tumors are not associated with a BRCA1/2 mutation [21]. Although non-epithelial ovarian carcinomas are not significantly associated with a BRCA1/2 mutation, sex cord tumors may be associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and Sertoli-Leydig cell tumors are caused by germline mutations in the DICER1 gene [55,56,57,58,59,60,61].
Several studies have reported that BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer showed more favorable survival outcomes compared with mutation-negative women [62,63,64,65,66,67]. Figure 2.1 indicates that BRCA1/2 mutation carriers showed a more favorable survival than noncarriers (for BRCA1, HR = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68–0.89], P < 0.001, and for BRCA2, HR = 0.61 [95% CI, 0.50–0.76], P < 0.001) in a pooled analysis from 26 observational studies that included invasive epithelial ovarian cancer cases from BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (n = 1213) and noncarriers (n = 2666) [63]. The 5-year overall survival was 36% for noncarriers, 44% for BRCA1 carriers, and 52% for BRCA2 carriers. In a population-based case-control study of women with invasive epithelial (non-mucinous) ovarian cancer (n = 1001), patients carrying germline mutations of BRCA1/2 had improved rates of progression-free survival (median, 20 months vs 16 months; not statistically significant) and overall survival (median, 62 months vs 55.5 months; P = 0.031) [62]. Survival outcomes appear to be most favorable for BRCA2 mutation carriers [63]. An observational study of 1915 women with ovarian cancer from the University of Washington (UW) gynecologic tissue bank and from the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) phase III clinical trials (n = 1345) showed that patients with a BRCA2 mutation from the GOG trials had significantly longer progression-free survival (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45–0.79; P < 0.001) and OS (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.25–0.60; P < 0.001), compared with those without mutations [22].
BRCA mutation carriers appeared to be more responsive to cytotoxic chemotherapy compared with noncarrier patients [68]. Several studies have shown a higher response rate to platinum regimens and longer treatment-free intervals between relapses in BRCA mutation carriers compared with noncarriers [62, 63, 66, 69,70,71]. These clinical features of BRCA-associated ovarian cancer are attributed to homologous recombination repair deficiency in the absence of BRCA1/2 function, which results in an impaired ability of tumor cells to repair platinum-induced double-strand breaks [66, 70, 72]. Thereby conferring increased chemosensitivity and increased sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) enzyme inhibition and other DNA-damaging chemotherapeutic agents such as pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) [68].
2.2.2 Ovarian Cancer Screening for Surveillance
Ovarian cancer screening with transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 has not been shown to be sufficiently sensitive or specific. So far, there is no evidence that these screening are appropriate methods of substituting for ovarian cancer risk-reducing surgery [73, 74]. In recent large randomized controlled trial, the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), which assessed multimodality screening with ultrasound and CA-125 versus either ultrasound alone or no screening, showed that a significant mortality reduction was not observed after a median of 11 years of follow-up; however, a prespecified analysis of death from ovarian cancer of multimodality screening versus no screening with exclusion of prevalent cases showed significantly different death rates (P = 0.021) [75, 76]. In this trial, the cases with increased risk of familial ovarian cancer were included in exclusion criteria. The NCCN Guidelines recommend that ovarian cancer screening with transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 may be considered starting at age 30–35 years by the doctor’s discretion for women who have not selected the risk-reducing surgery [13]. GOG-0199 is a two-arm, prospective, nonrandomized study for managing the risk of ovarian cancer in high-risk women. One arm is women who elected RRSO, and the other is those who chose the ROCA (risk of ovarian cancer algorithm) surveillance using transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125. This 5-year follow-up period ended in November 2011 and the data has been analyzed [77].
2.2.3 Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy (RRSO)
The risk for ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is generally considered to be lower than the risk for breast cancer. However, due to the absence of reliable methods of early detection and the poor prognosis associated with advanced ovarian cancer, RRSO after completion of childbearing has been recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. The NCCN Guidelines recommend RRSO for women with BRCA1/2 mutation, typically between ages 35 and 40 years for women with a BRCA1 mutation [13]. For women with a BRCA2 mutation who have undergone efforts to maximize their breast cancer prevention (i.e., bilateral mastectomy), it is reasonable to delay RRSO until between ages 40 and 45 years since ovarian cancer onset tends to be later in women with a BRCA2 mutation [78]. RRSO should only be considered upon completion of childbearing.
The effectiveness of RRSO in reducing the risk for ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers has been reported in various studies. In a meta-analysis including ten studies, RRSO was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of BRCA-associated ovarian or fallopian tube cancer (HR = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.12–0.39) [78]. In an international observational study of 5783 women with a BRCA1/2 mutation, risk-reducing oophorectomy was associated with an 80% reduction (HR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13–0.30) in the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer in BRCA1/2 carriers and a 77% reduction in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.13–0.39) [78]. RRSO reduces mortality at all ages in BRCA1 mutation carriers; however, RRSO is not associated with reduced mortality in those at the ages of more than 61 in BRCA2 mutations carriers [78]. Furthermore, in prospective, multicenter cohort study of 2482 women with BRCA1/2 mutations, RRSO was associated with lower all-cause mortality (10% vs 3%; HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.26–0.61]), breast cancer-specific mortality (6% vs 2%; HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26–0.76]), and ovarian cancer-specific mortality (3% vs 0.4%; HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.06–0.80]) [79]. We have to take care that 1–4.3% risk of a primary peritoneal cancer has remained after RRSO [80,81,82,83,84]. The ovarian cancer risk and management were shown in Table 2.3 [13].
Many studies have reported that RRSO reduced the risk for breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers [80, 81, 83, 85, 86]. In a meta-analysis of all reports of RRSO published between 1999 and 2007, RRSO was associated with a statistically significant reduction in risk of breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.37–0.65), BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.35–0.64), and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.26–0.84) [80]. Results of a prospective cohort study suggest that RRSO may be associated with a greater reduction in breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers compared with BRCA1 mutation carriers [87]. Reductions in breast cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers following RRSO may be associated with decreased hormonal exposure due to resection of the ovaries. In an international case-control study of 1439 patients with breast cancer and 1866 matched controls derived from a registry of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, the risk reduction was greater if the oophorectomy was performed before age 40 (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20–0.64 for BRCA1 carriers) than after age 40 (OR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30–0.91), and no significant reduction was found for women aged 51 years or older in breast cancer risk [86]. However, the hazard ratio for breast cancer-specific mortality in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.32–1.78; P = 0.53) for women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer and 0.07 (95% CI, 0.01–0.51; P = 0.009) for women with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer [88].
RRSO is an opportunity for occult gynecologic cancer detection in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. In studies of women with a BRCA1/2 mutation who underwent RRSO, occult gynecologic carcinomas and ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer were identified in 4.5–9% of cases, and tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (TIC) was detected in 5–8% of cases [84, 89,90,91,92]. The fimbriae or distal tube was reported to be the predominant site of origin for these early malignancies found in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations [89, 92, 93].
In a prospective cohort of 462 women with BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, short-term hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in women undergoing RRSO does not negate the protective effect of bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy on subsequent breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers [94]. Moreover, results of a case-control study of BRCA1 mutation carriers showed no association between use of HRT and increased breast cancer risk in postmenopausal BRCA1 mutation carriers [95]. However, there is no randomized study of the issue, so the use of HRT in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers undergoing RRSO should be carried out carefully [96, 97].
Salpingectomy has been performed in premenopausal women, and there have been some evidence regarding the safety and feasibility of this procedure [98, 99]. However, there is limited data regarding its efficacy in reducing the risk for ovarian cancer [100, 101]. In addition, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers undergoing salpingectomy alone may not get the 50% reduction in breast cancer risk of BRCA1/2 carriers following oophorectomy. Hence, the salpingectomy alone has not been recommended as the standard risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at this time.
The NCCN Guidelines recommend RRSO protocol [102]: (1) Perform operative laparoscopy. (2) Survey upper abdomen, bowel surfaces, omentum, appendix (if present), and pelvic organs. (3) Biopsy any abnormal peritoneal findings. (4) Obtain pelvic washing for cytology. (5) Perform total BSO, removing 2 cm of proximal ovarian vasculature/IP ligament, all tube up to the cornua, and all peritoneum surrounding the ovaries and tubes, especially peritoneum underlying areas of adhesion between tube and/or ovary and the pelvic sidewall. (6) Engage in minimal instrument handling of the tubes and ovaries to avoid traumatic exfoliation of cells. (7) Both ovaries and tubes should be placed in an endobag for retrieval from the pelvis. (8) Both ovaries and tubes should be processed according to SEE-FIM protocol [103]. (9) If occult malignancy or STIC is identified, provide referral to gynecologic oncologist. (10) The prevention benefits of salpingectomy alone are not yet proven. If considered, the fallopian tube from the fimbria to its insertion into the uterus should be removed.
Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2015 for the treatment of ovarian cancer described procedures for the examination and management of HBOC. In the guidelines, it was recommended that RRSO only be performed by a gynecologic oncologist who is a member of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology in cooperation with a clinical geneticist at a medical facility with an established genetic counseling system and cooperative pathologists, after review and approval by the institutional ethics committee [104]. In addition, the Gynecologic Oncology Committee of Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology have proposed the requirement of RRSO for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in more detail [105].
2.2.4 Chemoprevention
As regards the effect of oral contraceptives (OC) in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, two meta-analyses showed significant reduction of the risk for ovarian cancer. In analysis of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with (n = 1503) and without (n = 6315) ovarian cancer, OC use significantly reduced the risk for ovarian cancer by approximately 50% for both the BRCA1 mutation carriers (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.40–0.65) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31–0.87) [106]. The other including one cohort study (N = 3181) and three case-control studies (1096 cases and 2878 controls) also showed an inverse association between OC use and ovarian cancer (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.46–0.73), and the risks appeared to decrease with longer duration of oral contraceptive use [107]. Two meta-analyses showed that OC use is not significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers [106, 108]. However, case-control studies in the analyses on the effect of OC use on breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have showed conflicting results.
2.3 Genes Other than BRCA1/2 Involved in Hereditary Ovarian Cancer
2.3.1 Mismatch Repair Genes (Lynch Syndrome)
Ovarian cancer is a component tumor of Lynch syndrome that is associated with germline mutations in mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MLH3, and PMS2) [109]. Lynch syndrome, also known as hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC), accounts for 10–15% of all hereditary ovarian cancers [109] and is at increased risk for endometrial and ovarian cancers: up to 60% and 24%, respectively [110,111,112,113]. The loss of function of one of the mismatch repair proteins results in the accumulation of repeated nucleotide sequences phenotypically expressed as microsatellite instability (MSI). Several oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes contain microsatellites; impairment of MMR could cause mutations in many genes implicated in ovarian tumorigenesis [114,115,116,117,118]. BRCA-related ovarian cancers are associated with non-mucinous tumors; on the other hand, Lynch syndrome-associated ovarian cancers appear to be associated with both non-mucinous and mucinous tumors. Ovarian cancers in Lynch syndrome are mostly endometrioid or clear cell [119,120,121,122,123]. The cumulative lifetime risk of ovarian cancer is estimated to be 6–10% in MSH2 and MLH1 mutation carriers. An average age of diagnosis was 51 years in families associated with MLH1 mutations and 45 years in families associated with MSH2 mutations [113, 124, 125]. Lynch syndrome-associated ovarian cancers were more likely at diagnosis to be of low grade and early stage and generally showed a better prognosis [124, 126, 127]. Total abdominal hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy are options that may be considered for risk reduction in women with mutation of mismatch repair genes who have completed childbearing [128,129,130,131,132]. No evidence has been showed to support routine transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 testing in these mutation carriers because they have not been shown to be sufficiently sensitive or specific [128, 133,134,135,136,137].
2.3.2 Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD)-Related Genes
Homologous recombination (HR) plays in a repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs) [29]. A lot of proteins involved in homologous recombination are recognized to also contribute to hereditary cancer risk, e.g., BRCA1/2, ATM, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, CHEK2, BARD1, Mre11, RAD50, NBS1, BRIP1, and Fanconi anemia proteins [3]. These proteins interact with BRCA1/2 proteins in the DNA repair and the maintenance of genomic stability. It has been hypothesized that genes coding for these proteins would be alternative candidates for ovarian cancer susceptibility. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) has showed that around half of high-grade serous ovarian cancers have aberrations in homologous recombination repair (See Fig. 7.1) [138, 139]. These patients with mutation of HRD-related gene are at increased risk for both ovarian and breast cancers, similar to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. In addition, these tumors present a specific phenotype similar to BRCA-related ovarian cancers [7], including sensitivity to platinum agents and improved survival rates [71, 72]. The survival was similar for women with mutations in BRCA1 and other HRD-related genes (Fig. 2.2) [22].
RAD51 genes are involved in homologous recombination, and this biallelic mutation can cause a Fanconi anemia-like phenotype [140]. RAD51C and RAD51D have been shown to be associated with increased risk for ovarian cancer [140]. In 1915 unselected ovarian cancer cases, 1.1% of patients had either a RAD51C or RAD51D mutation [22]. In cases from 1100 German families with gynecological malignancies, Meindl et al. identified six monoallelic pathogenic mutations in RAD51C that confer an increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer [141]. Loveday et al. reported that 8 inactivating RAD51D mutations were identified in unrelated individuals from 911 breast-ovarian cancer families, and the mutations confer a 6.3-fold increased risk of ovarian cancer but cause only a small increase in breast cancer risk (RR = 1.32) [142]. The analyses from the same trial including 1132 probands with a family history of ovarian cancer and 1156 controls also showed that RAD51C was associated with an increased risk for ovarian cancer (RR, 5.88; 95% CI, 2.91–11.88; P < 0.001) [143]. In a case-control analysis of 3429 ovarian cancer cases and 2772 controls, both RAD51C (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.1–24; P = 0.035) and RAD51D (OR, 12.0; 95% CI, 1.5–90; P = 0.019) were associated with an increased risk for ovarian cancer [144]. The NCCN Guidelines recommend that RRSO in RAD51C and RAD51D mutation carriers is considered beginning at ages 45–50; however, further analyses are needed to confirm recommendation age of RRSO in these mutation carriers [13].
BRIP1, BRCA1-interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1, is a DNA helicase and defective in Fanconi anemia complementation group J. In 1915 unselected ovarian cancer cases, 1.4% of patients had a mutation in BRIP1 [22]. In analysis of Icelandic 656 ovarian cancer cases and 3913 controls, BRIP1 frameshift mutation confers an increase in ovarian cancer risk (OR, 8.13; 95% CI, 4.74–13.95; P < 0.001) [145]. In addition, an analysis of 3236 invasive ovarian cancer patients, 3431 controls, and 2000 unaffected high-risk women from a clinical screening trial of ovarian cancer (UKFOCSS) showed that BRIP1 is associated with a significant increased risk for ovarian cancer and relative risks associated with BRIP1 mutations were 11.22 for invasive ovarian cancer (95% CI, 3.22–34.10; P < 0.001) and 14.09 for high-grade serous disease (95% CI, 4.04–45.02; P < 0.001) [146]. The cumulative lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer by age 80 in BRIP1 mutation carriers is estimated to be 5.8% (95% CI, 3.6–9.1) [146]. The NCCN Guidelines recommend that RRSO in BRIP1 mutation carriers be considered beginning at ages 45–50; however, their cumulative risk exceeds that of a woman with a first-degree relative with a non-BRCA-related ovarian cancer in around age 50–55 years. Further prospective trials are needed to confirm recommendation age of RRSO in these mutation carriers [13].
PALB2, partner and localizer of BRCA2, is a Fanconi anemia gene and an integral component of the BRCA complex required for homologous recombination repair [147]. PALB2 mutations have been detected in 1–4% of families negative for BRCA mutations [148]. Norquist et al. reported that 12 patients had germline mutations of PALB2 in analysis of 1915 ovarian cancer patients [22]. In sequence analysis of genomic DNA of 1144 familial breast cancer patients with wild-type sequences at BRCA1 and BRCA2, PALB2 heterozygotes were 1.3-fold more likely to have a relative with ovarian cancer (P = 0.18) [6]. Overall, significantly less ovarian cancer is seen in PALB2 families when compared with BRCA1 and BRCA2 families; therefore, it remains to be seen whether ovarian cancer risk is truly increased in individuals who are PALB2 mutation carriers or not [148].
2.4 PARP Inhibitors
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors cause cancer cell death in BRCA-mutated cancers by synthetic lethality. Olaparib was the first PARP inhibitor approved in the European Union and the USA for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer patients with a germline BRCA mutation. The FDA approved olaparib for the patients who have received treatment with three or more lines of chemotherapy [149, 150]. Recent data suggest that olaparib is especially active in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer; on the other hand, a lower response rate is observed in patients showing resistance or refractory to platinum agent [151,152,153,154,155,156].
Maintenance monotherapy with olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer. In a randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study, median PFS was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group of patients with a BRCA mutation (11.2 months [95% CI, 8.3 to not calculable] vs 4.3 months [3.0–5.4]; HR 0.18 [0.10–0.31]; P < 0.0001); however, overall survival did not significantly differ between two groups (HR 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64–1.21]; P = 0.44). Interestingly, in the patients with wild-type BRCA, median PFS was also significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (7.4 months [5.5–10.3] vs 5.5 months [3.7–5.6]; HR 0.54 [0.34–0.85]; P = 0.0075) [157]. A recent trial of monotherapy with olaparib showed that the overall response rate was 34% in women with recurrent advanced ovarian cancer [149, 158].
A combination of olaparib plus paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by maintenance monotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin alone in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer in a randomized phase 2 study. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group (median 12.2 months [95% CI, 9.7–15.0]) than in the chemotherapy-alone group (median 9.6 months [95% CI, 9.1–9.7]) (HR 0.51 [95% CI, 0.34–0.77]; P = 0.0012), especially in patients with BRCA mutations (HR 0.21 [0.08–0.55]; P = 0.0015) [159].
Multiple PARP inhibitors, olaparib, veliparib, talazoparib, rucaparib, and niraparib, have been evaluated in clinical trials. Current study is extending the use of PARP inhibitors beyond BRCA mutations, and several trials are ongoing for the inhibitors in other populations such as patients with HR deficiency [160, 161].
Conclusions
We reviewed the recent data regarding clinical and molecular features and management of hereditary ovarian cancer. RRSO after completion of childbearing has been recommended for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers due to the absence of reliable methods of early detection and the poor prognosis associated with advanced ovarian cancer. The effectiveness of RRSO in reducing the risk for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers has been reported in various studies, and RRSO was associated with lower all-cause mortality. Genetic counseling in RRSO for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers should include discussion of extent of cancer risk reduction, risks associated with surgeries, reconstructive options, and risks associated with premature menopause (e.g., osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, vasomotor symptoms, and sexual concerns), management of menopausal symptoms, and discussion of reproductive desires.
In Japan, BRCA1/2 genetic testing has been available as a routine clinical examination for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer; however, there are too few genetic counselors to do the counseling sufficiently. Therefore, genetic testing has not been widely performed in Japan. It is important to organize a system which can usually perform a genetic counseling in every cancer treatment centers.
Olaparib was the first PARP inhibitor approved in the EU and USA for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer patients with a germline BRCA mutation. Multiple PARP inhibitors, olaparib, veliparib, talazoparib, rucaparib, and niraparib, have been evaluated in clinical trials. It has been shown that around half of high-grade serous ovarian cancers have aberrations in homologous recombination repair. Current study is extending the use of PARP inhibitors beyond BRCA mutations, and several trials are ongoing for the inhibitors in other populations such as patients with HR deficiency. Further clinical studies are needed to extend the use of PARP inhibitors to non-BRCA-mutated ovarian cancers.
References
Goldgar DE, Easton DF, Cannon-Albright LA, Skolnick MH. Systematic population-based assessment of cancer risk in firstdegree relatives of cancer probands. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994;86:1600–8.
Schildkraut JM, Risch N, Thompson WD. Evaluating genetic association among ovarian, breast, and endometrial cancer: evidence for a breast/ovarian cancer relationship. Am J Hum Genet. 1989;45:521–9.
Toss A, Tomasello C, Razzaboni E, Contu G, Grandi G, Cagnacci A, Schilder RJ, Cortesi L. Hereditary ovarian cancer: not only BRCA 1 and 2 genes. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:341723.
Walsh T, Casadei S, Lee MK, et al. Mutations in 12 genes for inherited ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma identified by massively parallel sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108:18032–7.
Walsh T, Casadei S, Coats KH, et al. Spectrum of mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and TP53 in families at high risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2006;295:1379–88.
Casadei S, Norquist BM, Walsh T, et al. Contribution of inherited mutations in the BRCA2-interacting protein PALB2 to familial breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2011;71:2222–9.
Engel NJ, Gordon P, Thull DL, et al. A multidisciplinary clinic for individualizing management of patients at increased risk for breast and gynecologic cancer. Familial Cancer. 2012;11:419–27.
Liliac L, Amalinei C, Balan R, Grigoras A, Caruntu I-D. Ovarian cancer: insights into genetics and pathogeny. Histol Histopathol. 2012;27:707–19.
Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian-cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science. 1994;266:66–71.
Wooster R, Bignell G, Lancaster J, Swift S, Seal S, Mangion J, Collins N, Gregory S, Gumbs C, Micklem G. Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. Nature. 1995;378:789–92.
Yun MH, Hiom K. Understanding the functions of BRCA1 in the DNA-damage response. Biochem Soc Trans. 2009;37:597–604.
Cipak L, Watanabe N, Bessho T. The role of BRCA2 in replicationcoupled DNA interstrand cross-link repair in vitro. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2006;13:729–33.
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian Version 2.2017.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology; ACOG Committee on Genetics; Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 103: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:957–66.
Whittemore AS. Risk of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA gene mutations. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:788–9.
Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M, et al. Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62:676–89.
Sekine M, Nagata H, Tsuji S, et al. Mutational analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 and clinicopathologic analysis of ovarian cancer in 82 ovarian cancer families: two common founder mutations of BRCA1 in Japanese population. Clin Cancer Res. 2001;7:3144–50.
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;53:465–71.
Gayther SA, Russell P, Harrington P, et al. The contribution of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations to familial ovarian cancer: no evidence for other ovarian cancer-susceptibility genes. Am J Hum Genet. 1999;65:1021–9.
Sekine M, Nagata H, Tsuji S, et al. Localization of a novel susceptibility gene for familial ovarian cancer to chromosome 3p22-p25. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10:1421–9.
Jazaeri AA, Lu K, Schmandt R, et al. Molecular determinants of tumor differentiation in papillary serous ovarian carcinoma. Mol Carcinog. 2003;36:53–9.
Norquist BM, Harrell MI, Brady MF, et al. Inherited mutations in women with ovarian carcinoma. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:482–90.
Song H, Cicek MS, Dicks E, et al. The contribution of deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 and the mismatch repair genes to ovarian cancer in the population. Hum Mol Genet. 2014;23:4703–9.
Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE, et al. Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: a kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1694–706.
Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Betts JA, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations account for a large proportion of ovarian carcinoma cases. Cancer. 2005;104:2807–16.
Schrader KA, Hurlburt J, Kalloger SE, et al. Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in ovarian cancer: utility of a histology-based referral strategy. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:235–40.
Zhang S, Royer R, Li S, et al. Frequencies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among 1,342 unselected patients with invasive ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:353–7.
Sakamoto I, Hirotsu Y, Nakagomi H, Ouchi H, Ikegami A, Teramoto K, Amemiya K, Mochizuki H, Omata M. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Japanese patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. Cancer. 2016;122:84–90.
Ledermann JA, Drew Y, Kristeleit RS. Homologous recombination deficiency and ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2016;60:49–58.
Foulkes WD. Inherited susceptibility to common cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2143–53.
Metcalfe KA, Poll A, Royer R, et al. Screening for founder mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in unselected Jewish women. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:387–91.
Sugano K, Nakamura S, Ando J, et al. Cross-sectional analysis of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Japanese patients suspected to have hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:1967–76.
Nakamura S, Takahashi M, Tozaki M, Nakayama T, Nomizu T, Miki Y, Murakami Y, Aoki D, Iwase T, Nishimura S, Yamauchi H, Ohsumi S, Baba S, Shimizu T. Prevalence and differentiation of hereditary breast and ovarian cancers in Japan. Breast Cancer. 2015;22:462–8.
Anglian Breast Cancer Study Group. Prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population-based series of breast cancer cases. Br J Cancer. 2000;83:1301–8.
Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S, et al. Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72:1117–30.
Chen S, Parmigiani G. Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1329–33.
Ford D, Easton DF, Bishop DT, et al. Risks of cancer in BRCA1- mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Lancet. 1994;343:692–5.
King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB. Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science. 2003;302:643–6.
Mavaddat N, Peock S, Frost D, et al. Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:812–22.
van den Broek AJ, van’t Veer LJ, Hooning MJ, et al. Impact of age at primary breast cancer on contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:409–18.
Finch A, Beiner M, Lubinski J, et al. Salpingo-oophorectomy and the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. JAMA. 2006;296:185–92.
Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE, et al. Prevalence and penetrance of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population series of 649 women with ovarian cancer. Am J Hum Genet. 2001;68:700–10.
Rebbeck TR, Mitra N, Wan F, et al. Association of type and location of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with risk of breast and ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2015;313:1347–61.
Atchley DP, Albarracin CT, Lopez A, et al. Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4282–8.
Eerola H, Heikkila P, Tamminen A, et al. Relationship of patients’ age to histopathological features of breast tumours in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and mutation-negative breast cancer families. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7:R465–9.
Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L, et al. Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:5175–80.
Lakhani SR, Van De Vijver MJ, Jacquemier J, et al. The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:2310–8.
Lee E, McKean-Cowdin R, Ma H, et al. Characteristics of triplenegative breast cancer in patients with a BRCA1 mutation: results from a population-based study of young women. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4373–80.
Young SR, Pilarski RT, Donenberg T, et al. The prevalence of BRCA1 mutations among young women with triple-negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:86.
Berchuck A, Heron KA, Carney ME, et al. Frequency of germline and somatic BRCA1 mutations in ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4:2433–7.
Bjorge T, Lie AK, Hovig E, et al. BRCA1 mutations in ovarian cancer and borderline tumours in Norway: a nested case-control study. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:1829–34.
Lakhani SR, Manek S, Penault-Llorca F, et al. Pathology of ovarian cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:2473–81.
Press JZ, De Luca A, Boyd N, et al. Ovarian carcinomas with genetic and epigenetic BRCA1 loss have distinct molecular abnormalities. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:17.
Rechsteiner M, Zimmermann AK, Wild PJ, et al. TP53 mutations are common in all subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer and occur concomitantly with KRAS mutations in the mucinous type. Exp Mol Pathol. 2013;95:235–41.
Werness BA, Ramus SJ, DiCioccio RA, et al. Histopathology, FIGO stage, and BRCA mutation status of ovarian cancers from the Gilda Radner Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2004;23:29–34.
Ayadi-Kaddour A, Bouraoui S, Bellil K, et al. Colonic adenocarcinoma and bilateral malignant ovarian sex cord tumor with annular tubules in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Pathologica. 2004;96:117–20.
Clements A, Robison K, Granai C, et al. A case of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome with breast cancer, bilateral sex cord tumor with annular tubules, and adenoma malignum caused by STK11 gene mutation. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:1591–4.
Kondi-Pafiti A, Bakalianou K, Iavazzo C, et al. Endometrial carcinoma and ovarian sex cord tumor with annular tubules in a patient with history of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome and multiple malignancies. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2011;32:452–4.
Lele SM, Sawh RN, Zaharopoulos P, et al. Malignant ovarian sex cord tumor with annular tubules in a patient with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome: a case report. Mod Pathol. 2000;13:466–70.
Young RH. Sex cord-stromal tumors of the ovary and testis: their similarities and differences with consideration of selected problems. Mod Pathol. 2005;18(Suppl 2):S81–98.
Goulvent T, Ray-Coquard I, Borel S, et al. DICER1 and FOXL2 mutations in ovarian sex cord-stromal tumours: a GINECO Group study. Histopathology. 2016;68:279–85.
Alsop K, Fereday S, Meldrum C, et al. BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2654–63.
Bolton KL, Chenevix-Trench G, Goh C, et al. Association between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and survival in women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2012;307:382–90.
Cass I, Baldwin RL, Varkey T, et al. Improved survival in women with BRCA-associated ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2003;97:2187–95.
Chetrit A, Hirsh-Yechezkel G, Ben-David Y, et al. Effect of BRCA1/2 mutations on long-term survival of patients with invasive ovarian cancer: the national Israeli study of ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:20–5.
Tan DS, Rothermundt C, Thomas K, et al. “BRCAness” syndrome in ovarian cancer: a case-control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5530–6.
Yang D, Khan S, Sun Y, et al. Association of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with survival, chemotherapy sensitivity, and gene mutator phenotype in patients with ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2011;306:1557–65.
Tan DS, Kaye SB. Chemotherapy for patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2-mutated ovarian cancer: same or different? Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2015:114–21.
Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Kapoor R, et al. Improved survival in BRCA2 carriers with ovarian cancer. Familial Cancer. 2007;6:113–9.
Vencken PM, Kriege M, Hoogwerf D, et al. Chemosensitivity and outcome of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated ovarian cancer patients after fırst-line chemotherapy compared with sporadic ovarian cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1346–52.
Sun C, Li N, Ding D, et al. The role of BRCA status on the prognosis of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review of the literature with a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e95285.
Pennington KP, Walsh T, Harrell MI, et al. Germline and somatic mutations in homologous recombination genes predict platinum response and survival in ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:764–75.
Evans DG, Gaarenstroom KN, Stirling D, et al. Screening for familial ovarian cancer: poor survival of BRCA1/2 related cancers. J Med Genet. 2009;46:593–7.
Woodward ER, Sleightholme HV, Considine AM, et al. Annual surveillance by CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound for ovarian cancer in both high-risk and population risk women is ineffective. BJOG. 2007;114:1500–9.
Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:945–56.
Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:327–40.
Sherman ME, Piedmonte M, Mai PL, et al. Pathologic findings at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: primary results from Gynecologic Oncology Group trial GOG-0199. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3275–83.
Finch AP, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1547–53.
Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, Evans DG, Lynch HT, Isaacs C, Garber JE, Neuhausen SL, Matloff E, Eeles R, Pichert G, Van t'veer L, Tung N, Weitzel JN, Couch FJ, Rubinstein WS, Ganz PA, Daly MB, Olopade OI, Tomlinson G, Schildkraut J, Blum JL, Rebbeck TR. Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA. 2010;304:967–75.
Rebbeck TR, Kauff ND, Domchek SM. Meta-analysis of risk reduction estimates associated with risk-reducing salpingooophorectomy in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:80–7.
Rebbeck TR, Lynch HT, Neuhausen SL, et al. Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1616–22.
Kauff ND, Satagopan JM, Robson ME, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1609–15.
Rebbeck TR, Levin AM, Eisen A, et al. Breast cancer risk after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:1475–9.
Finch A, Shaw P, Rosen B, et al. Clinical and pathologic findings of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomies in 159 BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;100:58–64.
Li X, You R, Wang X, et al. Effectiveness of prophylactic surgeries in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:3971–81.
Eisen A, Lubinski J, Klijn J, et al. Breast cancer risk following bilateral oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: an international case-control study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7491–6.
Kauff ND, Domchek SM, Friebel TM, et al. Risk-reducing salpingooophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1331–7.
Metcalfe K, Lynch HT, Foulkes WD, et al. Effect of oophorectomy on survival after breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:306–13.
Callahan MJ, Crum CP, Medeiros F, et al. Primary fallopian tube malignancies in BRCA-positive women undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer risk reduction. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3985–90.
Powell CB, Chen LM, McLennan J, et al. Risk-reducing salpingooophorectomy (RRSO) in BRCA mutation carriers: experience with a consecutive series of 111 patients using a standardized surgicalpathological protocol. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21:846–51.
Powell CB, Kenley E, Chen LM, et al. Risk-reducing salpingooophorectomy in BRCA mutation carriers: role of serial sectioning in the detection of occult malignancy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:127–32.
Shaw PA, Rouzbahman M, Pizer ES, et al. Candidate serous cancer precursors in fallopian tube epithelium of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Mod Pathol. 2009;22:1133–8.
Medeiros F, Muto MG, Lee Y, et al. The tubal fimbria is a preferred site for early adenocarcinoma in women with familial ovarian cancer syndrome. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:230–6.
Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Wagner T, et al. Effect of short-term hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk reduction after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7804–10.
Eisen A, Lubinski J, Gronwald J, et al. Hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1361–7.
Chlebowski RT, Prentice RL. Menopausal hormone therapy in BRCA1 mutation carriers: uncertainty and caution. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1341–3.
Garber JE, Hartman AR. Prophylactic oophorectomy and hormone replacement therapy: protection at what price? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:978–80.
McAlpine JN, Hanley GE, Woo MM, et al. Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:471. e471–411
Findley AD, Siedhoff MT, Hobbs KA, et al. Short-term effects of salpingectomy during laparoscopic hysterectomy on ovarian reserve: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1704–8.
Hartmann LC, Lindor NM. The role of risk-reducing surgery in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:454–68.
Daly MB, Dresher CW, Yates MS, et al. Salpingectomy as a means to reduce ovarian cancer risk. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015;8:342–8.
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) Ovarian Cancer Including Fallopian Tube Cancer and Primary Peritoneal Cancer Version 1.2016.
Mingels MJ, van Ham MA, de Kievit IM, et al. Müllerian precursor lesions in serous ovarian cancer patients: using the SEE-Fim and SEE-End protocol. Mod Pathol. 2014;27:1002–13.
Komiyama S, Katabuchi H, Mikami M, et al. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2015 for the treatment of ovarian cancer including primary peritoneal cancer and fallopian tube cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2016;21:435–46.
Suzuki N, Katabuchi H. The requirement of RRSO for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Jpn Soc Obstet Gynecol. 2016;68:1332–4.
Iodice S, Barile M, Rotmensz N, et al. Oral contraceptive use and breast or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2 carriers: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2275–84.
Narod SA, Risch H, Moslehi R, et al. Oral contraceptives and the risk of hereditary ovarian cancer. Hereditary Ovarian Cancer Clinical Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:424–8.
Moorman PG, Havrilesky LJ, Gierisch JM, et al. Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:4188–98.
Lynch HT, Casey MJ, Snyder CL, et al. Hereditary ovarian carcinoma: heterogeneity, molecular genetics, pathology, and management. Mol Oncol. 2009;3:97–137.
Bonadona V, Bonaiti B, Olschwang S, et al. Cancer risks associated with germline mutations in MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 genes in Lynch syndrome. JAMA. 2011;305:2304–10.
Kohlmann W, Gruber S. Lynch syndrome. Gene reviews at gene tests: medical genetics information resource. 2014.
Lindor NM, Petersen GM, Hadley DW, et al. Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1507–17.
Watson P, Vasen HF, Mecklin JP, et al. The risk of extra-colonic, extra-endometrial cancer in the Lynch syndrome. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:444–9.
Guillotin D, Martin SA. Exploiting DNA mismatch repair deficiency as a therapeutic strategy. Exp Cell Res. 2014;329:110–5.
Souza RF, Appel R, Yin J, et al. Microsatellite instability in theinsulin-like growth factor II receptor gene in gastrointestinal tumours. Nat Genet. 1996;14:255–7.
Rampino N, Yamamoto H, Ionovetal Y. Somatic frameshift mutations in the BAX gene in colon cancers of the microsatellite mutator phenotype. Science. 1997;275:967–9.
Ketabi Z, Bartuma K, Bernsteinetal I. Ovarian cancer linked to lynch syndrome typically presents as early-onset, non-serous epithelialtumors. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:462–5.
Ferreira AM, Westers H, Sousaetal S. Mono nucleotide precedes dinucleotide repeat instability during colorectal tumour development in Lynch syndrome patients. J Pathol. 2009;219:96–102.
Chui MH, Gilks CB, Cooper K, Clarke BA. Identifying Lynch syndrome in patients with ovarian carcinoma: the significance of tumor subtype. Adv Anat Pathol. 2013;20:378–86.
Cai KQ, Albarracin C, Rosen D, et al. Microsatellite instability and alteration of the expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2 in ovarian clea rcell carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 2004;35:552–9.
Liu J, Albarracin CT, Chang K-H, et al. Microsatellite instability and expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2 proteins in ovarian endometrioid cancer. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:75–80.
Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Kumar A, Sellers TA. Systematic review and meta-analysis of ovarian cancers: estimation of microsatellite-high frequency and characterization no mismatch repair deficient tumor histology. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:6847–54.
Chui MH, Ryan P, Radigan J, et al. The histomorphology of Lynch syndrome-associated ovarian carcinomas: toward a subtype-specific screening strategy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:1173–81.
Watson P, utzow RB¨, Lynch HT, et al. The clinical features of ovarian cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82:223–8.
Vasen HFA, Stormorken A, Menko FH, et al. MSH2 mutation carriers are at higher risk of cancer than MLH1 mutation carriers: a study of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer families. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:4074–80.
Grindedal EM, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Vasen H, et al. Survival in women with MMR mutations and ovarian cancer: a multi center study in Lynch syndrome kindreds. J Med Genet. 2010;47:99–102.
Baldwin LA, Huang B, Milleretal RW. Ten-year relative survival for epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:612–8.
Chen LM, Yang KY, Little SE, et al. Gynecologic cancer prevention in Lynch syndrome/hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer families. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:18–25.
Schmeler KM, Lynch HT, Chen LM, et al. Prophylactic surgery to reduce the risk of gynecologic cancers in the Lynch syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:261–9.
Stuckless S, Green J, Dawson L, et al. Impact of gynecological screening in Lynch syndrome carriers with an MSH2 mutation. Clin Genet. 2013;83:359–64.
Syngal S, Brand RE, Church JM, et al. ACG clinical guideline: genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110:223–62. quiz 263
Stoffel EM, Mangu PB, Gruber SB, et al. Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline endorsement of the familial risk-colorectal cancer: European Society for Medical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:209–17.
Auranen A, Joutsiniemi T. A systematic review of gynecological cancer surveillance in women belonging to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) families. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011;90:437–44.
Jarvinen HJ, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Aktan-Collan K, et al. Ten years after mutation testing for Lynch syndrome: cancer incidence and outcome in mutation-positive and mutation-negative family members. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4793–7.
Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Butzow R, Leminen A, et al. Surveillance for endometrial cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Int J Cancer. 2007;120:821–4.
Rijcken FE, Mourits MJ, Kleibeuker JH, et al. Gynecologic screening in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;91:74–80.
Dove-Edwin I, Boks D, Goff S, et al. The outcome of endometrial carcinoma surveillance by ultrasound scan in women at risk of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma and familial colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;94:1708–12.
Veronica R, Hirshfield KM, Ganesan S, Rodriguez-Rodriguez L. Molecular characterization of epithelial ovarian cancer: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:2113.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474:609–15.
Konstantinopoulos PA, Ceccaldi R, Shapiro GI, D'Andrea AD. Homologous recombination deficiency: exploiting the fundamental vulnerability of ovarian cancer. Cancer Discov. 2015;5:1137–54.
Meindl A, Hellebrand H, Wiek C, et al. Germline mutations in breast and ovarian cancer pedigrees establish RAD51C as a human cancer susceptibility gene. Nat Genet. 2010;42:410–4.
Loveday C, Turnbull C, Ramsay E, et al. Germline mutations in RAD51D confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet. 2011;43:879–82.
Loveday C, Turnbull C, Ruark E, et al. Germline RAD51C mutations confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet. 2012;44:475–6. author reply 476
Song H, Dicks E, Ramus SJ, et al. Contribution of germline mutations in the RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D genes to ovarian cancer in the population. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2901–7.
Rafnar T, Gudbjartsson DF, Sulem P, et al. Mutations in BRIP1 confer high risk of ovarian cancer. Nat Genet. 2011;43:1104–7.
Ramus SJ, Song H, Dicks E, et al. Germline mutations in the BRIP1, BARD1, PALB2, and NBN genes in women with ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107.
Sy SM, Huen MS, Chen J. PALB2 is an integral component of the BRCA complex required for homologous recombination repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:7155–60.
Poumpouridou N, Kroupis C. Hereditary breast cancer: beyond BRCA genetic analysis; PALB2 emerges. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012;50:423–34.
Butler T, Maravent S, Boisselle J, et al. A review of 2014 cancer drug approvals, with a look at 2015 and beyond. P T. 2015;40:191–205.
Deeks ED. Olaparib: first global approval. Drugs. 2015;75:231–40.
Elit L, Hirte H. Palliative systemic therapy for women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: current options. Onco Targets Ther. 2013;6:107–18.
Suh DH, Lee KH, Kim K, et al. Major clinical research advances in gynecologic cancer in 2014. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015;26:156–67.
Gelmon KA, Tischkowitz M, Mackay H, et al. Olaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade serous or poorly differentiated ovarian carcinoma or triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:852–61.
Audeh MW, Carmichael J, Penson RT, et al. Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and recurrent ovarian cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2010;376:245–51.
Fong PC, Yap TA, Boss DS, et al. Poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibition: frequent durable responses in BRCA carrier ovarian cancer correlating with platinum-free interval. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2512–9.
Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1382–92.
Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, Friedlander M, Vergote I, Rustin G, Scott CL, Meier W, Shapira-Frommer R, Safra T, Matei D, Fielding A, Spencer S, Dougherty B, Orr M, Hodgson D, Barrett JC, Matulonis U. Olaparib maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer: a preplanned retrospective analysis of outcomes by BRCA status in a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:852–61.
Kaufman B, Shapira-Frommer R, Schmutzler RK, et al. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:244–50.
Oza AM, Cibula D, Benzaquen AO, Poole C, Mathijssen RH, Sonke GS, Colombo N, Špaček J, Vuylsteke P, Hirte H, Mahner S, Plante M, Schmalfeldt B, Mackay H, Rowbottom J, Lowe ES, Dougherty B, Barrett JC, Friedlander M. Olaparib combined with chemotherapy for recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:87–97.
Walsh CS. Two decades beyond BRCA1/2: homologous recombination, hereditary cancer risk and a target for ovarian cancer therapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;137:343–50.
Lee JM, Ledermann JA, Kohn EC. PARP inhibitors for BRCA1/2 mutation-associated and BRCA-like malignancies. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:32–40.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sekine, M., Enomoto, T. (2017). Hereditary Ovarian Cancer. In: Katabuchi, H. (eds) Frontiers in Ovarian Cancer Science. Comprehensive Gynecology and Obstetrics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4160-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4160-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4159-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4160-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)