NCCN (2021) [157] |
Clinical breast exam, every 12 months, starting at age 35 years
Consider annual mammogram screening in men with gynecomastia starting at age 50 or 10 years before the earliest known MBC in the family (whichever comes first)
Starting at age 40 years: recommend prostate cancer screening for BRCA2 carriers, and consider prostate cancer screening for BRCA1 carriers
Melanoma risk management is appropriate, such as annual full body (examination and minimizing UV exposure)
Consider pancreatic cancer screening beginning at age 50 years (or 10 years younger than the earliest exocrine pancreatic cancer diagnosis in the family, whichever is earlier) for individuals with exocrine pancreatic cancer in ≥1 first- or second-degree relatives from the same side of the family as the identified germline PV
|
ASCO (2019) [4] |
|
SEOM (2019) [169] |
No evidence of clinical benefit of breast screening. Consider mammography in the case of gynecomastia
Annual screening with PSA for prostate cancer from the age of 40 years (recommended in BRCA2, and offer in BRCA1)
Consider pancreatic cancer surveillance with EUS and MRI in carriers with a first-degree relative with pancreatic cancer from the age of 50 or 10 years before the youngest diagnosis in the family
Consider skin and eye examination for melanoma screening according personal/familiar risk factors
|
ESMO (2016) [170] |
Annual clinical breast examination by a physician, starting from the age of 30. No evidence exists to justify or support routine annual breast imaging among male carriers
Annual screening for prostate cancer may be considered from the age of 40, particularly for BRCA2 carriers
BRCA2 carriers may consider annual skin and eye examination as screening for melanoma
BRCA2 carriers may consider annual screening for pancreatic cancer with EUS or MRI/MRCP while being informed that data supporting this approach is very limited. There is no consensus when screening should commence; however, age 50 or 10 years before the earliest diagnosed case in the family would be reasonable
|
ICR (2015) [171] |
|