Should the risk for uterine cancer influence decision making for prophylactic hysterectomy in BRCA1/2 mutated patients- a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chen Nahshon; Yakir Segev; Ofer Gemer; Tomer Bar Noy; Meirav Schmidt; Ludmila Ostrovsky; Ofer Lavie

doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.11.034

Should the risk for uterine cancer influence decision making for prophylactic hysterectomy in BRCA1/2 mutated patients- a systematic review and meta-analysis

Gynecol Oncol. 2021 Mar;160(3):755-762. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.11.034. Epub 2020 Dec 10.

Authors

Chen Nahshon¹, Yakir Segev², Ofer Gemer³, Tomer Bar Noy², Meirav Schmidt², Ludmila Ostrovsky², Ofer Lavie²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Gynecological Oncology Carmel Medical Center, Haifa affiliated to Technion, Haifa., Israel. Electronic address: csarshalom@gmail.com.
² Department of Gynecological Oncology Carmel Medical Center, Haifa affiliated to Technion, Haifa., Israel.
³ Department of Gynecological Oncology, Barzilai Medical Center, Ashkelon, affiliated to Ben Gurion University, Beer-Sheva., Israel.

PMID: 33309051
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.11.034

Abstract

Objective: To study the possible association between uterine cancer and the BRCA1/2 associated cancer syndrome and discuss the implications of such an association on the clinical managment of patients with BRCA1/2 mutations.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Study protocol was prospectively registered at PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42020193496). Considered for inclusion were studies providing the diagnosis rate of uterine cancer in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations by comparing observed and expected rate according to a known disease incidence. The results were measured by standardized incidence ratio (SIR). The primary outcome was defined as any uterine cancer diagnosis and subgroup analyses were conducted for uterine serous papillary cancer (USPC) specifically and for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations separately.

Results: 4591 records were identified through database search; eight studies were finally included, comprising 13,098 patients with BRCA1/2 mutations. BRCA1/2 mutated patients were found to have a significantly higher risk for uterine cancer compared to the general population (SIR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.76-2.8, p < 0.001). A higher incidence of USPC was also found in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations (SIR = 17.97, 95% CI 9.89-32.66, p < 0.001), as well as in a separate analysis for BRCA1 (SIR = 2.81, 95% CI 2.09-3.79, p < 0.001) and BRCA2 (SIR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.09-2.80, p < 0.001) mutations.

Conclusion: Patients who carry a BRCA1/2 mutation are at a significantly higher risk of developing uterine cancer, specifically USPC, supporting that USPC may be a component of the BRCA1/2 syndrome. The decision to perform concurrent hysterectomy at the time of the risk reduction bilateral salpingo -oophorectomy surgery should be considered individually.

Keywords: BRCA mutation; Endometrial cancer; Hereditary cancer; Prophylactic hysterectomy; Uterine cancer.

Publication types

Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Decision Making
Female
Genes, BRCA1 / physiology*
Genes, BRCA2 / physiology*
Humans
Hysterectomy / methods*
Uterine Neoplasms / pathology
Uterine Neoplasms / surgery*