Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is recommended for breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1) and 2 (BRCA2) mutation carriers. A major consequence of RRSO is surgical menopause associated with severe menopausal symptoms, mostly genitourinary complaints. Due to the inherent breast cancer risk, estrogen-based therapies are generally avoided in these patients. So far, the non-hormonal approaches available are not efficient to successfully treat the disabling vaginal atrophy-related symptoms. In regenerative medicine, mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are the most frequently used cell type due to their remarkable and regenerative characteristics. Therapies based on MSC have revealed positive outcomes regarding symptoms and signs associated with vaginal atrophy by promoting angiogenesis, vaginal restoration, and the proliferation of vaginal mucosa cells. Menstrual blood-derived stem cells (MenSC) are a novel source of MSC, with promising therapeutic potential directly linked to their high proliferative rates; low immunogenicity; non-invasive, easy, and periodic acquisition; and almost no associated ethical issues. In this review, we update the current knowledge and research regarding the potential value of previously preserved MenSC in the therapy of vaginal atrophy among BRCA mutation carriers subjected to RRSO.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature with reference to counselling and management of women with genetic predisposition to gynaecological cancers.
METHODS: Histochemical analysis, ultrasound, blood investigations, genetic testing, screening and risk-reducing surgery (RRS) are important tools for the management of gynaecological cancers and mortality reduction. Counselling can assist in timely management of gynaecological cancers. Systematic reviews, review articles, observational studies and clinical trials on PubMed, published in the English language, were included in this review.
RESULTS: The management of women with genetic predisposition to gynaecological cancers through screening tests and RRS has led to a significant decrease in the risk of malignancy through RRS in cases with BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations. RRS and screening have also been found to reduce the mortality rate and increase the survival rate in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations. The efficacy of endometrial cancer surveillance in women with Lynch syndrome is still unproven. RRS has not been reported to be effective in women with Cowden syndrome. The risk of ovarian malignancies in individuals with germline mutations remains minimal in the general population in comparison with genetic mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing and RRS should be implemented in addition to genetic counselling for proper management and mortality reduction of women predisposed to gynaecological cancers.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention of breast cancer in women at elevated risk includes several strategies such as endocrine prevention and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). The objective of this study was to evaluate awareness of different preventive strategies across high-risk subgroups.
METHODS: Women referred for high risk evaluation between 2020 and 2023 completed an initial risk-assessment questionnaire that included questions around perceived lifetime risk and consideration of preventive strategies. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-squared tests were used to compare differences across different high-risk subgroups.
RESULTS: 482 women with a median age of 43 years (20-79 years) met inclusion criteria; 183 (38.0%) germline pathogenic variant carriers (GPV), 90 (18.7%) with high-risk lesions (HRL) on breast biopsy, and 209 (43.4%) with strong family history (FH) without a known genetic predisposition. Most high-risk women reported that they had considered increased screening and surveillance (83.7%) and lifestyle strategies (80.6%), while fewer patients had considered RRM (39.8%) and endocrine prevention (27.0%). Prior to initial consultation, RRM was more commonly considered in GPV carriers (59.4%) relative to those with HRL (33.3%) or strong FH (26.3%, p < 0.001). Based on current guidelines, 206 (43%) patients were deemed eligible for endocrine prevention, including 80.5% with HRL and 39.0% with strong FH. Prior consideration of endocrine prevention was highest in patients with HRL and significantly lower in those with strong FH (47.2% HRL versus 31.1% GPV versus 18.7% FH, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Endocrine prevention is the least considered preventive option for high-risk women, despite eligibility in a significant proportion of those presenting with HRL or strong FH.

Breast cancer continues to be the most common cancer diagnosed among women worldwide. Family history of breast cancer is frequently encountered, and 5-15% of patients may carry inherited pathogenic germline variants, identification of which can be helpful for both; patients themselves and their unaffected close relatives. The availability and affordability of molecular diagnostics, like next generation sequencing (NGS), had resulted in wider adoption of such technologies to detect pathogenic variants of cancer-predisposing genes. International guidelines had recently broadened the indications for germline genetic testing to include much more patients, and also expanded the testing to include multi-gene panels, while some professional societies are calling for universal testing of all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer, regardless of their age, personal or family history. The risk of experiencing a contralateral breast cancer (CBC) or ipsilateral recurrence, is well known. Such risk is highest with variants like BRCA1 and BRCA2, but less well-studied with other less common variants. The optimal local therapy for women with BRCA-associated breast cancer remains controversial, but tends to be aggressive and may involve bilateral mastectomies, which may not have any survival advantage. Additionally, surgical management of unaffected women, known to carry a pathogenic cancer-predisposing gene, may vary from surveillance to bilateral mastectomies, too. The oncological safety, and the higher satisfaction of unaffected women and patients with new surgical techniques, like the skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies, eased up the process of counselling. In this review, we address the oncological safety of less aggressive surgical options for both; patients and unaffected carriers.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Female carriers of BRCA1/2 genes have an increased lifetime risk of breast cancer. Options for managing risk include imaging surveillance or risk-reducing surgery (RRS). This mixed methods study aimed to identify factors affecting risk-management decisions and the psychosocial outcomes of these decisions for high-risk women and their partners.
METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were performed with women at high breast cancer risk who had faced these choices. Partners were also interviewed. Analysis used a framework approach. A bespoke questionnaire was developed to quantify and explore associations.
RESULTS: A total of 32 women were interviewed. Of these, 27 had partners of whom 7 (26%) agreed to be interviewed. Four main themes arose: perception of risk and impact of increased risk; risk-management strategy decision-making; impact of risk-management strategy; support needs and partner relationship issues. The questionnaire response rate was 36/157 (23%). Decision satisfaction was high in both surveillance and RRS groups. Relationship changes were common but not universal. Common causes of distress following RRS included adverse body image changes. Both groups experienced generalised and cancer-specific anxiety. Drivers for surgery included having children, deaths of close family from breast cancer and higher levels of cancer anxiety.
CONCLUSIONS: Levels of psychosocial and decision satisfaction were high for women choosing both RRS and surveillance but, for a minority, risk-reducing measures result in long-term psychosocial morbidity. Efforts to recognise women at increased risk of psychological morbidity may allow targeted support.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complication rates and healthcare charges between patients who underwent coordinated versus staged breast surgery and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO).
METHODS: The MarketScan administrative database was used to identify adult female patients with invasive breast cancer or BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations who underwent BSO and breast surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction) between 2010 and 2015. Patients were assigned to the coordinated group if a breast operation and BSO were performed simultaneously or assigned to the staged group if BSO was performed separately. Primary outcomes were (1) incidence of 90-day postoperative complications and (2) 2-year aggregate perioperative healthcare charges. Fisher\'s exact tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and multivariable regression analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Of the 4228 patients who underwent breast surgery and BSO, 412 (9.7%) were in the coordinated group and 3816 (90.3%) were in the staged group. The coordinated group had a higher incidence of postoperative complications (24.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.01), higher risk-adjusted odds of postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.76, p = 0.02], and similar aggregate healthcare charges before (median charges: $106,500 vs. $101,555, p = 0.96) and after risk-adjustment [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.07; p = 0.95]. In a subgroup analysis, incidence of postoperative complications (12.9% for coordinated operations vs. 11.7% for staged operation, p = 0.73) was similar in patients whose breast operation was a lumpectomy.
CONCLUSIONS: While costs were similar, coordinating breast surgery with BSO was associated with more complications in patients who underwent mastectomy, but not in patients who underwent lumpectomy. These data should inform shared decision-making in high-risk patients.

This study aimed to assess the impact of risk-reducing surgery for breast cancer and ovarian cancer prevention on quality of life. We considered risk-reducing mastectomy, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, and risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy.
We followed a prospective protocol (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42022319782) and searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023.
We followed a PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design) framework. The population included women at increased risk of breast cancer or ovarian cancer. We focused on studies reporting quality of life outcomes (health-related quality of life, sexual function, menopause symptoms, body image, cancer-related distress or worry, anxiety, or depression) after risk-reducing surgery, including risk-reducing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer.
We used the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) for study appraisal. Qualitative synthesis and fixed-effects meta-analysis were performed.
A total of 34 studies were included (risk-reducing mastectomy: 16 studies; risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: 19 studies; risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy: 2 studies). Health-related quality of life was unchanged or improved in 13 of 15 studies after risk-reducing mastectomy (N=986) and 10 of 16 studies after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (N=1617), despite short-term deficits (N=96 after risk-reducing mastectomy and N=459 after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy). Sexual function (using the Sexual Activity Questionnaire) was affected in 13 of 16 studies (N=1400) after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in terms of decreased sexual pleasure (-1.21 [-1.53 to -0.89]; N=3070) and increased sexual discomfort (1.12 [0.93-1.31]; N=1400). Hormone replacement therapy after premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with an increase (1.16 [0.17-2.15]; N=291) in sexual pleasure and a decrease (-1.20 [-1.75 to -0.65]; N=157) in sexual discomfort. Sexual function was affected in 4 of 13 studies (N=147) after risk-reducing mastectomy, but stable in 9 of 13 studies (N=799). Body image was unaffected in 7 of 13 studies (N=605) after risk-reducing mastectomy, whereas 6 of 13 studies (N=391) reported worsening. Increased menopause symptoms were reported in 12 of 13 studies (N=1759) after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy with a reduction (-1.96 [-2.81 to -1.10]; N=1745) in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Symptoms. Cancer-related distress was unchanged or decreased in 5 of 5 studies after risk-reducing mastectomy (N=365) and 8 of 10 studies after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (N=1223). Risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (2 studies, N=413) led to better sexual function and menopause-specific quality of life.
Risk-reducing surgery may be associated with quality of life outcomes. Risk-reducing mastectomy and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy reduce cancer-related distress, and do not affect health-related quality of life. Women and clinicians should be aware of body image problems after risk-reducing mastectomy, and of sexual dysfunction and menopause symptoms after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. Risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy may be a promising alternative to mitigate quality of life-related risks of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.

Hereditary women\'s syndromes due to inherited mutations result in an elevated risk of developing gynecological cancers over the lifetime of affected carriers. The BRCA 1 and 2 mutations, Lynch syndrome (LS), and mutations in rare hereditary syndromes increase this risk and require more effective management of these patients based on surveillance and prophylactic surgery. Patients need counseling regarding risk-reducing surgery (RRS) and the time required to perform it, considering the adverse effects of premenopausal surgery and the hormonal effect on quality of life, bone density, sexual activity, and cardiological and vascular diseases. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is the gold standard for BRCA-mutated patients. An open question is that of endometrial cancer (EC) risk in patients with BRCA1/2 mutation to justify prophylactic hysterectomy during RRSO surgical procedures. RRS provides a 90-95% risk reduction for ovarian and breast cancer in women who are mutation carriers, but the role of prophylactic hysterectomy is underinvestigated in this setting of patients. In this review, we evaluate the management of the most common hereditary syndromes and the benefits of risk-reducing surgery, particularly exploring the role of prophylactic hysterectomy.

This narrative review aims to clarify the role of breast and gynecological risk-reduction surgery in BRCA mutation carriers. We examine the indications, contraindications, complications, technical aspects, timing, economic impact, ethical issues, and prognostic benefits of the most common prophylactic surgical options from the perspectives of a breast surgeon and a gynecologist. A comprehensive literature review was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. The databases were explored from their inceptions to August 2022. Three independent reviewers screened the items and selected those most relevant to this review\'s scope. BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are significantly more likely to develop breast, ovarian, and serous endometrial cancer. Because of the Angelina effect, there has been a significant increase in bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) since 2013. BRRM and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) significantly reduce the risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. RRSO has significant side effects, including an impact on fertility and early menopause (i.e., vasomotor symptoms, cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, cognitive impairment, and sexual dysfunction). Hormonal therapy can help with these symptoms. Because of the lower risk of developing breast cancer in the residual mammary gland tissue after BRRM, estrogen-only treatments have an advantage over an estrogen/progesterone combined treatment. Risk-reducing hysterectomy allows for estrogen-only treatments and lowers the risk of endometrial cancer. Although prophylactic surgery reduces the cancer risk, it has disadvantages associated with early menopause. A multidisciplinary team must carefully inform the woman who chooses this path of the broad spectrum of implications, from cancer risk reduction to hormonal therapies.