Elsevier

Gynecologic Oncology

Volume 153, Issue 1, April 2019, Pages 192-200
Gynecologic Oncology

Review Article
Hormone replacement therapy after risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations; a systematic review of risks and benefits

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.12.014Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Hormone replacement therapy use improves endocrine symptoms and sexual function after premature surgical menopause.

  • In BRCA mutation carriers, breast cancer risk is not altered by estrogen replacement therapy after oophorectomy.

  • Progestin containing hormonal regimens may have a less favorable breast cancer risk profile for BRCA mutation carriers.

Abstract

Women with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations, are recommended risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) prior to menopause. Surgical menopause has significant impact on patients' health and well–being. Subsequently, concerns about surgical menopause influence uptake of RRSO in high risk women. The role of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in BRCA mutation carriers undergoing RRSO has been controversial. In the general population, premature surgical menopause is associated with worse quality of life and cognitive function, and increased risk of bone and cardiovascular disease; HRT continued until the natural age of menopause is shown to alleviate a number of these effects. Conflicting information has been published on HRT and breast cancer risk. For BRCA mutation carriers, potential augmentation of already elevated breast cancer risk is of great concern. In this article, we provide a review of the literature on HRT in this high-risk population, including effects on quality of life, cardiovascular, bone, and brain health. We also review impact of HRT on breast cancer risk, with a discussion of HRT formulation and surgical approach. Though evidence is limited, HRT after RRSO has a number of reported benefits and does not appear to impact breast cancer risk reduction in BRCA mutation carriers. This information is critical when discussing RRSO with patients, as providers should review risks of early menopause and treatment options. This review provides information to assist with counseling this specific population.

Introduction

In women with inherited breast cancer susceptibility gene mutations, BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA), the lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancers is markedly increased. In patients with BRCA1 mutations, cumulative risk of breast and ovarian cancer by age 80 is about 72% and 44% respectively; for BRCA2 mutations, that risk is about 69% and 17% respectively [1,2]. Risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is the current standard of care for prevention of ovarian and fallopian tube carcinoma in patients with BRCA mutations. Per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, women with BRCA1 mutations are recommended RRSO between age 35 to 40, and upon completion of child bearing [3]. Onset of ovarian cancer in patients with BRCA2 mutations occurs on average 8 to 10 years later than in BRCA1 mutation carriers; therefore it is reasonable to delay RRSO until age 40 to 45 in patients with BRCA2 mutations [3].

For women with BRCA mutations, overall mortality is significantly decreased if they undergo RRSO at the recommended age [[4], [5], [6], [7], [8]]. Among women with BRCA mutations, those who underwent RRSO have lower risk of ovarian cancer compared with women who did not undergo RRSO, including women with a history of breast cancer (hazard ratio (HR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04–0.59) and those without a history of breast cancer (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12–0.69) [4]. Women who underwent RRSO also had a lower risk of first diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.12–0.69), and in BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41–0.96). All-cause mortality was lower for BRCA carriers who underwent RRSO (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26–0.61), as well as breast cancer specific (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26–0.76), and ovarian cancer specific mortality (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06–0.80) [4]. The largest reduction in mortality after RRSO was due to a decrease in ovarian cancer specific mortality, which was the predominant reason for improved all-cause mortality in these women. Other studies quote the relative risk of ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal cancer after RRSO as 0.04 (95% CI 0.01–0.16) [6] and 0.25 (95% CI 0.08–0.74) [7].

In contrast, women without pathogenic mutations who undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) before age 45 and do not use hormone replacement therapy (HRT) have an increased overall mortality [9,10]. In an analysis of long term outcomes in the Nurses' Health Study, over 24 years of follow-up for women with hysterectomy and BSO compared with ovarian conservation, the multivariate HRs were 1.12 (95% CI 1.03–1.21) for total mortality, 1.17 (95% CI 1.02–1.35) for fatal plus nonfatal coronary heart disease, and 1.14 (95% CI 0.98–1.33) for stroke [9]. These results differed with and without HRT, all cause mortality was increased in those under age 50 who had never used HRT (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.04–1.92), but was not increased in women who were past or current HRT users (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94–1.17), this difference was significantly different (p for interaction = 0.03). Rocca et al. found that mortality is significantly higher in women who had undergone bilateral oophorectomy before age 45 than in referent women without oophorectomy (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.16–2.40, p = 0.006) [10]. These results differed by use of HRT, women who had premature oophorectomy and who did not take estrogen had almost twice the risk of death compared with referent women, HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.25–2.96, p = 0.003); in contrast to those who did take estrogen up to age 45 with HR 1.27 (95% CI 0.67–2.39, p = 0.46) [10].

In addition to increased mortality, surgical menopause can have significant effects on quality of life (QOL). Women who have early menopause may have bothersome symptoms including hot flashes, sleep disturbances, mood changes, and vaginal dryness; these symptoms may be alleviated with HRT. Adverse effects on cognition, mood, cardiovascular, bone and sexual health are also reported with premature or early menopause. HRT may lessen some of these risks, therefore many medical societies recommend providing HRT at least until natural age of menopause [[11], [12], [13], [14], [15]].

The role of HRT in BRCA mutation carriers after RRSO is controversial with the main concern being potential augmentation of an already high risk of breast cancer. Much of the data related to risks and benefits of HRT in the general population come from studies of older women undergoing natural menopause, and these data are not necessarily relevant to the question of HRT following premature menopause. For example, the average age of entry into the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) was 63 [16], while RRSO is recommended between age 35 to 45 for BRCA mutation carriers. For the purpose of this review, we will mostly restrict our survey to studies of women undergoing premature surgical menopause.

Studies evaluating HRT and surgical menopause are limited by variations in type, compliance and duration of HRT. Johansen et al. published a cross sectional study comparing women at increased risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer after RRSO to average-risk control women who had undergone bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) [17]. Among women less than age 52 without history of breast cancer, only 52% of RRSO and 49% of BSO controls reported current use of HRT (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 0.72–1.76).

For BRCA mutation carriers, the decision to use HRT is complex and should be discussed in detail before surgery. Some BRCA mutation carriers undergoing RRSO are not candidates for HRT due to a personal history of hormone sensitive breast cancer. For the remainder, the risks of HRT must be balanced against the impact of early menopause on long-term health and quality of life. The goal of this review is to systematically review and present the available data regarding HRT after RRSO in patients with pathogenic BRCA mutations, including the impact on QOL, sexual function, breast cancer risk, cardiovascular, brain and bone health. We also discuss the formulation of HRT and consideration of surgical approaches to risk reduction.

Section snippets

Methods

A review using The National Library of Medicine (PubMed) Database was performed. Over 15 search terms were used, with three main concepts: “hormone replacement”, “BRCA”, and “risk reduction”. The initial search returned over 1000 studies. Articles were included if they examined hormone replacement in women who had undergone RRSO. Only articles published in English were reviewed. Abstracts were reviewed for relevance and all potentially relevant articles were reviewed for inclusion. These

Quality of life (QOL) and sexual function

HRT improves menopause symptoms (e.g. vasomotor symptoms, sexual function, vulvo-vaginal atrophy) and QOL after premature surgical menopause in the general population [13,[18], [19], [20]]. As expected, similar improvements in QOL have been noted in high-risk women and BRCA mutation carriers taking HRT after RRSO. In a retrospective cohort study, Madalinska et al. described the impact of HRT use on endocrine symptoms and sexual functioning in high-risk premenopausal women (total N = 164, 78%

Conclusions

The available literature suggests that HRT may provide benefit to BRCA mutation carriers after RRSO. RRSO is recommended before the average age of menopause. Early surgical menopause has effects on QOL, sexual function, bone health, cardiovascular health and cognitive function. Studies on QOL show benefit of HRT for BRCA mutation carriers after RRSO; HRT users report fewer endocrine symptoms, and better sexual functioning [[21], [22], [23], [24], [25]]. Women who take HRT after RRSO are less

Funding

EMS and BN are supported by a Stand Up To Cancer-Ovarian Cancer Research Fund Alliance-National Ovarian Cancer Coalition Dream Team Translational Cancer Research Grant (SU2C-AACR-DT16-15). Stand Up To Cancer is a division of the Entertainment Industry Foundation. Research grants are administered by the American Association for Cancer Research, the Scientific Partner of SU2C.

Author contribution

SG and ES conceived of the idea, acquired data and wrote the manuscript in consultation with KP, BN, ML, and RY. All authors reviewed the final manuscript.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

References (56)

  • E. Suvanto-Luukkonen et al.

    The levonorgestrel intrauterine system in menopausal hormone replacement therapy: five-year experience

    Fertil. Steril.

    (1999)
  • D.A. Levine et al.

    Risk of endometrial carcinoma associated with BRCA mutation

    Gynecol. Oncol.

    (2001)
  • Y.C. Lee et al.

    Kathleen cuningham foundation consortium for research into familial breast cancer (kConFab), risk of uterine cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

    Eur. J. Cancer

    (2017)
  • O. Lavie et al.

    BRCA germline mutations in Jewish women with uterine serous papillary carcinoma

    Gynecol. Oncol.

    (2004)
  • Y. Segev et al.

    Hereditary breast cancer study group, the incidence of endometrial cancer in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: an international prospective cohort study

    Gynecol. Oncol.

    (2013)
  • K.B. Kuchenbaecker et al.

    Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

    JAMA

    (2017)
  • M.B. Daly et al.

    NCCN guidelines insights: genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian, version 2.2017

    J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw.

    (2017)
  • S.M. Domchek et al.

    Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality

    JAMA

    (2010)
  • A.P.M. Finch et al.

    Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

    J. Clin. Oncol.

    (2014)
  • T.R. Rebbeck et al.

    Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (2002)
  • N.D. Kauff et al.

    Risk-reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (2002)
  • W.H. Parker et al.

    Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy and long-term health outcomes in the nurses' health study

    Obstet. Gynecol.

    (2009)
  • S.S. Faubion et al.

    Long-term health consequences of premature or early menopause and considerations for management HHS public access

    Climacteric

    (2015)
  • Committee Opinion No. 698

    Obstet. Gynecol.

    (2017)
  • The 2017 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society

    Menopause

    (2017)
  • P. Kodaman

    Early menopause: primary ovarian insufficiency and surgical menopause

    Semin. Reprod. Med.

    (2010)
  • W.G. for the W.H.I

    Writing group for the women's health initiative investigators, risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the women's health initiative randomized controlled trial

    JAMA, J. Am. Med. Assoc.

    (2002)
  • N. Johansen et al.

    Use of hormone replacement therapy after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy

    Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand.

    (2017)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text