There is no international consensus up to which age women with a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and no family history of breast or ovarian cancer should be offered genetic testing for germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (gBRCA) mutations. Here, we explored the association of age at TNBC diagnosis with the prevalence of pathogenic gBRCA mutations in this patient group. The study comprised 802 women (median age 40 years, range 19–76) with oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 negative breast cancers, who had no relatives with breast or ovarian cancer. All women were tested for pathogenic gBRCA mutations. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the association between age at TNBC diagnosis and the presence of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation. A total of 127 women with TNBC (15.8%) were gBRCA mutation carriers (BRCA1: n = 118, 14.7%; BRCA2: n = 9, 1.1%). The mutation prevalence was 32.9% in the age group 20–29 years compared to 6.9% in the age group 60–69 years. Logistic regression analysis revealed a significant increase of mutation frequency with decreasing age at diagnosis (odds ratio 1.87 per 10 year decrease, 95%CI 1.50–2.32, p < 0.001). gBRCA mutation risk was predicted to be > 10% for women diagnosed below approximately 50 years. Based on the general understanding that a heterozygous mutation probability of 10% or greater justifies gBRCA mutation screening, women with TNBC diagnosed before the age of 50 years and no familial history of breast and ovarian cancer should be tested for gBRCA mutations. In Germany, this would concern approximately 880 women with newly diagnosed TNBC per year, of whom approximately 150 are expected to be identified as carriers of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation.

Introduction: While it has been reported that the risk of contralateral breast cancer in patients from BRCA1 or BRCA2 positive families is elevated, little is known about contralateral breast cancer risk in patients from high risk families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study was performed from 1996 to 2011 and comprised 6,235 women with unilateral breast cancer from 6,230 high risk families that had tested positive for BRCA1 (n = 1,154) or BRCA2 (n = 575) mutations or tested negative (n = 4,501). Cumulative contralateral breast cancer risks were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and were compared between groups using the log-rank test. Cox regression analysis was applied to assess the impact of the age at first breast cancer and the familial history stratified by mutation status. Results: The cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer 25 years after first breast cancer was 44.1% (95%CI, 37.6% to 50.6%) for patients from BRCA1 positive families, 33.5% (95%CI, 22.4% to 44.7%) for patients from BRCA2 positive families and 17.2% (95%CI, 14.5% to 19.9%) for patients from families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations. Younger age at first breast cancer was associated with a higher risk of contralateral breast cancer. For women who had their first breast cancer before the age of 40 years, the cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer after 25 years was 55.1% for BRCA1, 38.4% for BRCA2, and 28.4% for patients from BRCA1/2 negative families. If the first breast cancer was diagnosed at the age of 50 or later, 25-year cumulative risks were 21.6% for BRCA1, 15.5% for BRCA2, and 12.9% for BRCA1/2 negative families. Conclusions: Contralateral breast cancer risk in patients from high risk families that tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations is similar to the risk in patients with sporadic breast cancer. Thus, the mutation status should guide decision making for contralateral mastectomy.

Cancer progression is caused by genetic changes and associated with various alterations in cell properties, which also affect a tumor's mechanical state. While an increasedstiffnesshas been well known for long for solid tumors, it has limited prognostic power. It is hypothesized that cancer progression is accompanied by tissuefluidization, where portions of the tissue can change position across different length scales. Supported by tabletop magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) on stroma mimicking collagen gels and microscopic analysis of live cells inside patient derived tumor explants, an overview is provided of how cancer associated mechanisms, including cellular unjamming, proliferation, microenvironment composition, and remodeling can alter a tissue'sfluidityandstiffness. In vivo, state‐of‐the‐art multifrequency MRE can distinguish tumors from their surrounding host tissue by their rheological fingerprints. Most importantly, a meta‐analysis on the currently available clinical studies is conducted and universal trends are identified. The results and conclusions are condensed into a gedankenexperiment about how a tumor can grow and eventually metastasize into its environment from a physics perspective to deduce corresponding mechanical properties. Based onstiffness, fluidity,spatial heterogeneity, andtextureof thetumor fronta roadmap for a prognosis of a tumor's aggressiveness and metastatic potential is presented.

Purpose: Agents that target the epigenome show activity in breast cancer models. In preclinical studies, the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat induces cell-cycle arrest, apoptosis, and differentiation. We evaluated biomarker modulation in breast cancer tissues obtained from women with newly diagnosed invasive disease who received vorinostat and those who did not. Experimental Design: Tumor specimens were collected from 25 women who received up to 6 doses of oral vorinostat 300 mg twice daily and from 25 untreated controls in a nonrandomized study. Candidate gene expression was analyzed by reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) using the Oncotype DX 21-gene assay, and by immunohistochemistry for Ki-67 and cleaved caspase-3. Matched samples from treated women were analyzed for gene methylation by quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR (QM-MSP). Wilcoxon nonparametric tests were used to compare changes in quantitative gene expression levels pre- and post-vorinostat with changes in expression in untreated controls, and changes in gene methylation between pre- and post-vorinostat samples. Results: Vorinostat was well tolerated and there were no study-related delays in treatment. Compared with untreated controls, there were statistically significant decreases in the expression of proliferation-associated genes Ki-67 (P = 0.003), STK15 (P = 0.005), and Cyclin B1 (P = 0.03) following vorinostat, but not in other genes by the Oncotype DX assay, or in expression of Ki-67 or cleaved caspase-3 by immunohistochemistry. Changes in methylation were not observed. Conclusions: Short-term vorinostat administration is associated with a significant decrease in expression of proliferation-associated genes in untreated breast cancers. This demonstration of biologic activity supports investigation of vorinostat in combination with other agents for the management of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 19(14); 4008–16. ©2013 AACR.

High levels of emotional distress in cancer patients often goes unnoticed in daily clinical routine, resulting in severe undertreatment of mental health problems in this patient group. Screening tools can be used to increase case identification, however, screening alone does not necessarily translate into better mental health for the patient. Doctors play a key role in providing basic emotional support and transferring the patients in need of such specific support to mental health professionals. This study investigates whether a stepped care model, combining screening, doctor consultation and professional psycho-oncological service in a structured way, improves the emotional wellbeing of cancer patients.