MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126121970 · doi:10.71000/69n38822

IMPACT OF BRCA1 AND BRCA2 GENE MUTATIONS ON BREAST AND OVARIAN CANCER PREVENTION STRATEGIES

2025· article· W7126121970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Kashif, Aasma Sajawal, Nishwa Ali, Mah Rukh Fayyaz, Farhat Rehana Malik, Muhammad Adnan, Syeddah Saiqa Gillani, Akif Saeed

Bibliographic record

VenueInsights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian cancerBreast cancerSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryCancer preventionProphylactic MastectomyPsychological interventionMammography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes significantly elevate lifetime risks for breast and ovarian cancers, necessitating specialized prevention strategies. Despite established guidelines, the rapid evolution of evidence on the efficacy and impact of various risk-management options—including surgery, enhanced surveillance, and chemoprevention—requires continual synthesis to inform clinical practice. Objective: This systematic review aimed to synthesize contemporary evidence on how BRCA1/2 gene mutations influence and justify specific prevention, screening, and management strategies for breast and ovarian cancers. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies published between 2019-2024. Inclusion criteria focused on comparative studies of BRCA1/2 carriers evaluating prevention interventions (risk-reducing surgery, intensive surveillance, chemoprevention) against relevant comparators, with outcomes including cancer incidence, mortality, and quality of life. Study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane RoB 2 tool were performed independently by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis was undertaken due to clinical heterogeneity. Results: Eight studies (n=12,548 carriers) were included. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with an 80-88% reduction in ovarian cancer risk and improved all-cause mortality. Risk-reducing mastectomy reduced breast cancer risk by >90%. Annual breast MRI with mammography significantly outperformed mammography alone, with higher sensitivity (93% vs. 42%) and lower interval cancer rates. Evidence for chemoprevention was less robust. Studies highlighted the importance of incorporating quality-of-life and psychosocial outcomes into decision-making. Conclusion: For BRCA1/2 carriers, risk-reducing surgeries and MRI-enhanced surveillance are highly effective strategies for cancer risk reduction and early detection. Optimal care requires a personalized, shared decision-making approach that balances oncologic efficacy with personal values and psychosocial well-being. Further research is needed on long-term quality of life and novel preventive agents.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.007
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsights-Journal of Health and RehabilitationSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207