[how The Gynecologist Can Guide Women With A Family History Of Cancer?].

36

Absolute risk of breast cancer for Australian women with a family history

Background: The purpose of the present paper was to estimate the absolute risk of breast cancer over the remainder of a lifetime in Australian women with different categories of family history. Methods: Age-specific breast cancer incidence rates were adjusted for screening effects, and rates in those with no family history were estimated using the attributable fraction (AF). Relative risks from a published meta-analysis were applied to obtain incidence rates for different categories of family history, and age-specific incidence was converted to cumulative risk of breast cancer. The risk estimates were based upon Australian population statistics and published relative risks. Breast cancer incidence was from New South Wales women for 1996. The AF was calculated using prevalence of a family history of breast cancer from data on Queensland women. The cumulative absolute risk of breast cancer was calculated from decade and mid-decade ages to age 79 years, not adjusted for competing causes of death. Results: Lifetime risk is approximately 8.6% (1 in 12) for the general population and 7.8% (1 in 13) for those without a family history. Women with one relative affected have lifetime risks of 1 in 6-8 and those with two relatives affected have lifetime risks of 1 in 4-6. The cumulative residual lifetime risk decreases with advancing age; by age 60 years all groups with only one relative affected have well above a 90% probability of not developing breast cancer to age 79 years. Conclusions: These Australian risk statistics are useful for public information and in the clinical setting. Risks given here apply to women with average breast cancer risk from other risk factors.

Family history of cancer: Pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology consortium

Alcohol and tobacco consumption are well-recognized risk factors for head and neck cancer (HNC). Evidence suggests that genetic predisposition may also play a role. Only a few epidemiologic studies, however, have considered the relation between HNC risk and family history of HNC and other cancers. We pooled individual-level data across 12 case-control studies including 8,967 HNC cases and 13,627 controls. We obtained pooled odds ratios (OR) using fixed and random effect models and adjusting for potential confounding factors. All statistical tests were two-sided. A family history of HNC in first-degree relatives increased the risk of HNC (OR = 1.7, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.2-2.3). The risk was higher when the affected relative was a sibling (OR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.1) rather than a parent (OR = 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-1.8) and for more distal HNC anatomic sites (hypopharynx and larynx). The risk was also higher, or limited to, in subjects exposed to tobacco. The OR rose to 7.2 (95% CI 5.5-9.5) among subjects with family history, who were alcohol and tobacco users. A weak but significant association (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2) emerged for family history of other tobacco-related neoplasms, particularly with laryngeal cancer (OR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). No association was observed for family history of nontobacco-related neoplasms and the risk of HNC (OR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.9-1.1). Familial factors play a role in the etiology of HNC. In both subjects with and without family history of HNC, avoidance of tobacco and alcohol exposure may be the best way to avoid HNC. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc,

Sun exposure and interaction with family history in risk of melanoma, Queensland, Australia

Sun exposure is the main environmental risk factor for melanoma, but the timing of exposure during life that confers increased risk is controversial. Here we provide the first report of the association between lifetime and age-specific cumulative ultraviolet exposure and cutaneous melanoma in Queensland, Australia, an area of high solar radiation, and examine the association separately for families at high, intermediate and low familial melanoma risk. Subjects were a population-based sample of melanoma cases diagnosed and registered in Queensland between 1982 and 1990 and their relatives. The analysis included 1,263 cases and relatives with confirmed cutaneous melanoma and 3,111 first-degree relatives without melanoma as controls. Data an lifetime residence and sun exposure, family history and other melanoma risk factors were collected by a mailed questionnaire. Using conditional multiple logistic regression with stratification by family, cumulative sun exposure in childhood and in adulthood after age 20 was significantly associated with melanoma, with estimated relative risks of 1.15 per 5,000 minimal erythemal doses (MEDs) from age 5 to 12 years, and 1.52 per 5 MEDs/day from age 20. There was no association with sun exposure in families at high familial melanoma risk. History of nonmelanoma skin cancer (relative risk [RR] = 1.26) and multiple sunburns (RR = 1.31) were significant risk factors. These findings indicate that sun exposure in childhood and in adulthood are important determinants of melanoma but not in those rare families with high melanoma susceptibility, in which genetic factors are likely to be more important. (C) 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Inter-informant agreement and prevalence estimates for substance use disorders: direct interview versus family history method.

OBJECTIVES: Family studies typically use multiple sources of information on each individual including direct interviews and family history information. The aims of the present study were to: (1) assess agreement for diagnoses of specific substance use disorders between direct interviews and the family history method; (2) compare prevalence estimates according to the two methods; (3) test strategies to approximate prevalence estimates according to family history reports to those based on direct interviews; (4) determine covariates of inter-informant agreement; and (5) identify covariates that affect the likelihood of reporting disorders by informants. METHODS: Analyses were based on family study data which included 1621 distinct informant (first-degree relatives and spouses) - index subject pairs. RESULTS: Our main findings were: (1) inter-informant agreement was fair to good for all substance disorders, except for alcohol abuse; (2) the family history method underestimated the prevalence of drug but not alcohol use disorders; (3) lowering diagnostic thresholds for drug disorders and combining multiple family histories increased the accuracy of prevalence estimates for these disorders according to the family history method; (4) female sex of index subjects was associated with higher agreement for nearly all disorders; and (5) informants who themselves had a history of the same substance use disorder were more likely to report this disorder in their relatives, which entails the risk of overestimation of the size of familial aggregation. CONCLUSION: Our findings have important implications for the best-estimate procedure applied in family studies.

Parent-child agreement and prevalence estimates of diagnoses in childhood: direct interview versus family history method.

Diagnostic information on children is typically elicited from both children and their parents. The aims of the present paper were to: (1) compare prevalence estimates according to maternal reports, paternal reports and direct interviews of children [major depressive disorder (MDD), anxiety and attention-deficit and disruptive behavioural disorders]; (2) assess mother-child, father-child and inter-parental agreement for these disorders; (3) determine the association between several child, parent and familial characteristics and the degree of diagnostic agreement or the likelihood of parental reporting; (4) determine the predictive validity of diagnostic information provided by parents and children. Analyses were based on 235 mother-offspring, 189 father-offspring and 128 mother-father pairs. Diagnostic assessment included the Kiddie-schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS) (offspring) and the Diagnostic Interview for Genetic Studies (DIGS) (parents and offspring at follow-up) interviews. Parental reports were collected using the Family History - Research Diagnostic Criteria (FH-RDC). Analyses revealed: (1) prevalence estimates for internalizing disorders were generally lower according to parental information than according to the K-SADS; (2) mother-child and father-child agreement was poor and within similar ranges; (3) parents with a history of MDD or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) reported these disorders in their children more frequently; (4) in a sub-sample followed-up into adulthood, diagnoses of MDD, separation anxiety and conduct disorder at baseline concurred with the corresponding lifetime diagnosis at age 19 according to the child rather than according to the parents. In conclusion, our findings support large discrepancies of diagnostic information provided by parents and children with generally lower reporting of internalizing disorders by parents, and differential reporting of depression and ADHD by parental disease status. Follow-up data also supports the validity of information provided by adolescent offspring.

Strength of family history in predicting levels of blood pressure, plasma glucose and cholesterol.

Objective: Limited information is available on the quantitative relationship between family history and the corresponding underlying traits. We analyzed these associations for blood pressure, fasting blood glucose, and cholesterol levels. Methods: Data were obtained from 6,102 Caucasian participants (2,903 men and 3,199 women) aged 35-75 years using a population-based cross-sectional survey in Switzerland. Cardiovascular disease risk factors were measured, and the corresponding family history was self-reported using a structured questionnaire. Results: The prevalence of a positive family history (in first-degree relatives) was 39.6% for hypertension, 22.3% for diabetes, and 29.0% for hypercholesterolemia. Family history was not known for at least one family member in 41.8% of participants for hypertension, 14.4% for diabetes, and 50.2% for hypercholesterolemia. A positive family history was strongly associated with higher levels of the corresponding trait, but not with the other traits. Participants who reported not to know their family history of hypertension had a higher systolic blood pressure than participants with a negative history. Sibling histories had higher positive predictive values than parental histories. The ability to discriminate, calibrate, and reclassify was best for the family history of hypertension. Conclusions: Family history of hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolemia was strongly associated with the corresponding dichotomized and continuous phenotypes.

Family history of cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

Alcohol and tobacco consumption are well-recognized risk factors for head and neck cancer (HNC). Evidence suggests that genetic predisposition may also play a role. Only a few epidemiologic studies, however, have considered the relation between HNC risk and family history of HNC and other cancers. We pooled individual-level data across 12 case-control studies including 8,967 HNC cases and 13,627 controls. We obtained pooled odds ratios (OR) using fixed and random effect models and adjusting for potential confounding factors. All statistical tests were two-sided. A family history of HNC in first-degree relatives increased the risk of HNC (OR=1.7, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.2-2.3). The risk was higher when the affected relative was a sibling (OR=2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.1) rather than a parent (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1-1.8) and for more distal HNC anatomic sites (hypopharynx and larynx). The risk was also higher, or limited to, in subjects exposed to tobacco. The OR rose to 7.2 (95% CI 5.5-9.5) among subjects with family history, who were alcohol and tobacco users. A weak but significant association (OR=1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2) emerged for family history of other tobacco-related neoplasms, particularly with laryngeal cancer (OR=1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). No association was observed for family history of nontobacco-related neoplasms and the risk of HNC (OR=1.0, 95% CI 0.9-1.1). Familial factors play a role in the etiology of HNC. In both subjects with and without family history of HNC, avoidance of tobacco and alcohol exposure may be the best way to avoid HNC.

Inter-informant agreement and prevalence estimates for mood syndromes: Direct interview vs. family history method.

BACKGROUND: The use of the family history method is recommended in family studies as a type of proxy interview of non-participating relatives. However, using different sources of information can result in bias as direct interviews may provide a higher likelihood of assigning diagnoses than family history reports. The aims of the present study were to: 1) compare diagnoses for threshold and subthreshold mood syndromes from interviews to those relying on information from relatives; 2) test the appropriateness of lowering the diagnostic threshold and combining multiple reports from the family history method to obtain comparable prevalence estimates to the interviews; 3) identify factors that influence the likelihood of agreement and reporting of disorders by informants. METHODS: Within a family study, 1621 informant-index subject pairs were identified. DSM-5 diagnoses from direct interviews of index subjects were compared to those derived from family history information provided by their first-degree relatives. RESULTS: 1) Inter-informant agreement was acceptable for Mania, but low for all other mood syndromes. 2) Except for Mania and subthreshold depression, the family history method provided significantly lower prevalence estimates. The gap improved for all other syndromes after lowering the threshold of the family history method. 3) Individuals who had a history of depression themselves were more likely to report depression in their relatives. LIMITATIONS: Low proportion of affected individuals for manic syndromes and lack of independence of data. CONCLUSIONS: The higher likelihood of reporting disorders by affected informants entails the risk of overestimation of the size of familial aggregation of depression.

Strength of family history in predicting levels of blood pressure, plasma glucose and cholesterol

Rapport de synthèse : L'histoire familiale reflète non seulement la susceptibilité génétique d'un individu à certaines maladies mais également ses comportements et habitudes, notamment partagées au sein d'une famille. L'hypertension artérielle, le diabète et l'hypercholestérolémie sont des facteurs de risque cardio-vasculaire modifiables hautement prévalent. L'association entre l'histoire familiale d'hypertension artérielle ou de diabète et le risque accru de développer de l'hypertension artérielle ou du diabète, respectivement, a été préalablement établie. Par contre, le lien entre l'histoire familiale de facteurs de risque cardio-vasculaire et les traits continus correspondants n'avaient jamais été mis clairement en évidence. De même, la signification d'une histoire familiale inconnue n'avait jusqu'alors pas été décrite. Ce travail, effectué dans le cadre de l'étude Colaus (Cohorte Lausannoise), une cohorte regroupant un échantillon composé de 6102 participants âgés de 35 à 75 ans sélectionnés au hasard dans la population lausannoise, a permis de décrire en détail la relation entre l'histoire familiale des facteurs de risque cardio-vasculaires et les trait correspondants dans la population étudiée. Les différentes analyses statistiques ont permis de mettre en évidence une relation forte entre l'histoire familiale d'hypertension artérielle, de diabète ainsi que de l'hypercholestérolémie et leurs traits dichotomique et continu correspondants. Les anamnèses des frères et soeurs avaient des valeurs prédictives positives plus élevées que les anamnèses parentales. Ceci signifie que les programmes de dépistage ne prenant en compte que l'histoire familiale des frères et soeurs seraient probablement plus efficaces que ceux qui comportent l'évaluation des anamnèses paternelle et maternelle. Plus de 40% des participants ignoraient l'histoire familiale d'hypertension d'au moins un des membres de leur famille. Ceux-ci avaient des valeurs de tension artérielle systolique plus élevées que ceux dont l'histoire familiale était négative, permettant de souligner la valeur prédictive du fait de ne pas connaître l'histoire familiale d'hypertension artérielle. Ces résultats montrent également que, lors d'analyses de la relation entre l'anamnèse familiale de facteurs de risque cardiovasculaires et leurs traits correspondants, les participants donnant des réponses négatives doivent être distingués de ceux qui ne connaissent pas leur anamnèse familiale. Les résultats de cette étude confirment la place centrale qu'occupe l'anamnèse familiale dans l'évaluation du risque cardio-vasculaire auprès de la population générale. L'importance de cet outil prédictif simple et bon marché ne va cesser d'augmenter avec la disponibilité croissante d'information génétique détaillée pour les maladies cardiovasculaires communes.

Family history of cancer and the risk of laryngeal cancer: a case-control study from Italy and Switzerland.

Only limited data is available on the relationship between family history of laryngeal and other neoplasms and laryngeal cancer risk. We investigated the issue using data from a multicentre case-control study conducted in Italy and Switzerland between 1992 and 2009 including 852 cases with histologically confirmed laryngeal cancer and 1970 controls admitted to hospital for acute, non neoplastic conditions. Unconditional logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, study center, education, tobacco smoking, alcohol drinking and number of siblings were used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of laryngeal cancer. The multivariate OR was 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-5.3) in subjects reporting a first-degree relative with laryngeal cancer, as compared to subjects with no family history. The OR was higher when the relative was diagnosed before 60 years of age (OR = 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-8.8). As compared to subjects without family history, non-smokers, and moderate drinkers, the OR was 37.1 (95% CI 9.9-139.4) for current smokers, heavy drinkers, with family history of laryngeal cancer. Family history of colorectal (OR = 1.5, 95% CI 1.0-2.3) and kidney (OR = 3.8, 95% CI 1.2-12.1) cancer were also associated to an increased risk of laryngeal cancer, while no significant increase in risk was found for family history of cancer at all sites, excluding the larynx (OR = 1.1).

Family history of cancer and the risk of cancer: a network of case-control studies.

BACKGROUND: The risk of many cancers is higher in subjects with a family history (FH) of cancer at a concordant site. However, few studies investigated FH of cancer at discordant sites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study is based on a network of Italian and Swiss case-control studies on 13 cancer sites conducted between 1991 and 2009, and including more than 12 000 cases and 11 000 controls. We collected information on history of any cancer in first degree relatives, and age at diagnosis. Odds ratios (ORs) for FH were calculated by multiple logistic regression models, adjusted for major confounding factors. RESULTS: All sites showed an excess risk in relation to FH of cancer at the same site. Increased risks were also found for oral and pharyngeal cancer and FH of laryngeal cancer (OR = 3.3), esophageal cancer and FH of oral and pharyngeal cancer (OR = 4.1), breast cancer and FH of colorectal cancer (OR = 1.5) and of hemolymphopoietic cancers (OR = 1.7), ovarian cancer and FH of breast cancer (OR = 2.3), and prostate cancer and FH of bladder cancer (OR = 3.4). For most cancer sites, the association with FH was stronger when the proband was affected at age <60 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our results point to several potential cancer syndromes that appear among close relatives and may indicate the presence of genetic factors influencing multiple cancer sites.

Anamnèse familiale: utile ou futile. [Family history: useful or futile?]

Family history (FH) represents an important tool in clinical practice that allows assessing an increased risk to develop certain diseases as it captures genetic and environmental factors within a family. FH was shown to be important for several conditions such as type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases as it allows identifying subjects who can potentially benefit from specific diagnostic and therapeutic measures. We also show that FH remains an important tool even in this period of recent progress in molecular genetics and that it is probably underused in the clinical setting.