Genetic testing for breast cancer predisposition has been available in the clinical practice for more than a decade. How the result of genetic testing affects the psychological well-being of the individuals is an under-researched area in many populations. Follow-up analysis of psychological well-being via HADS scale was performed in 364 individuals at 3 months and 1 year after the disclosure of BRCA1/2 genetic result. We analyzed potential predictors for pathological anxiety and variables associated to the variation of HADS scores over time. At pre-test only 16% and 4% of individuals presented symptoms of anxiety and depression, respectively. Having a prior diagnosis of cancer and presenting a pathological HADS-A score at the baseline were associated with clinically significant anxiety scores at one year, but the genetic test result was not. Thus, BRCA genetic testing does not influence short and long term anxiety and depression levels among those identified as mutation carriers. It is our task to demystify the allegedly negative impact of BRCA testing on psychological well being to increase the uptake of genetic testing and benefit those who are at high risk of developing breast, ovarian and prostate cancer.

Background: Germline mutation screening of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is performed in suspected familial breast cancer cases, but a causative mutation is found in only 30% of patients. The development of additional methods to identify good candidates for BRCA1 and BRCA2 analysis would therefore increase the efficacy of diagnostic mutation screening. With this in mind, we developed a study to determine molecular signatures of BRCA1—or BRCA2—mutated breast cancers. Materials and Methods: Array-cgh (comparative genomic hybridization) and transcriptomic analysis were performed on a series of 103 familial breast cancers. The series included 7 breast cancers with a BRCA1 mutation and 5 breast cancers with a BRCA2 mutation. The remaining 91 cases were obtained from 73 families selected on the basis of at least 3 affected first-degree relatives or at least 2 affected first-degree relatives with breast cancer at an average age of 45 years. Array-cgh analyses were performed on a 4407 BAC-array (CIT-V8) manufactured by IntegraGen. Transcriptomic analyses were performed using an Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 chip. Results: Using supervised clustering analyses we identified two transcriptomic signatures: one for BRCA1-mutated breast cancers consisting of 600 probe sets and another for BRCA2-mutated breast cancers also consisting of 600 probes sets. We also defined cgh-array signatures, based on the presence of specific genomic rearrangements, one for BRCA1-mutated breast cancers and one for BRCA2-mutated breast cancers. Conclusions: This study identified molecular signatures of breast cancers with BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutations. Genes present in these signatures could be exploited to find new markers for such breast cancers. We also identified specific genomic rearrangements in these breast cancers, which could be screened for in a diagnostic setting using fluorescence in situ hybridization, thus improving patient selection for BRCA1 and BRCA2 molecular genetic analysis.