Breast cancer is far from a single disease. Beneath the broad diagnosis lies a spectrum of subtypes, each with its own biology, prognosis, and response to treatment.¹ Among the most important of these are cases linked to inherited BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. These mutations have captured attention not just because of their scientific intrigue, but because of their profound real-world impact, affecting thousands of women, often at younger ages, with cancers that can be more aggressive and more difficult to manage.

For pharmaceutical professionals, BRCA-related breast cancer highlights both the challenges and opportunities of precision medicine. On one hand, these cancers carry heavy risks, higher lifetime incidence, more aggressive subtypes like triple-negative disease, and difficult treatment trade-offs.² On the other hand, the biology of BRCA mutations has opened the door to new therapeutic strategies, from PARP inhibitors to carefully designed combination regimens that directly exploit the tumour’s DNA repair weaknesses.^1,2,4

This article explores why BRCA-related breast cancer matters, the current treatment landscape and its limitations, and the findings of a recent Cambridge-led trial testing olaparib with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. Together, these insights shed light on where the field is heading and why timing, not just treatment, may hold the key to better outcomes.

Why BRCA Changes the Game in Breast Cancer

Women who carry a harmful mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene face a markedly higher risk of breast cancer, with more than 60% expected to develop the disease over their lifetime. In comparison, the lifetime risk for women in the general population is closer to 13%.²

The reason is written into the biology of a carrier. BRCA genes normally act as “tumour suppressors”, their job is to help repair damaged DNA. When one of these genes is faulty, that repair system falters. Instead of catching and fixing errors, the cell accumulates mutations, which can tip it down the path to cancer. It’s not that the BRCA mutation directly causes cancer on its own, but it removes a key safeguard, making breast tissue particularly vulnerable.²

The impact doesn’t stop at the breast. Women with BRCA mutations also face elevated risks of ovarian cancer (up to 58% with BRCA1) and a higher chance of developing cancer in the opposite breast over time. Add to that the fact that many of these women are diagnosed at an age when fertility, career, and long-term life planning are front of mind, and the psychosocial burden becomes clear. It’s not only women that this affects either, men who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations also face a higher risk of developing breast cancer compared with those who do not.²

Balancing Benefit and Burden in BRCA-Related Cancer Treatment

For BRCA-related breast cancer, treatment is still grounded in many of the same tools we use more broadly. Each option comes with clear benefits, but also trade-offs that can weigh heavily on patients and clinicians alike.

Surgery remains central

Surgery is often the first step. Depending on the case, this might mean a lumpectomy (breast-conserving surgery) or a mastectomy (removal of the whole breast), sometimes followed by reconstruction.⁵ For BRCA mutation carriers, bilateral mastectomy is sometimes recommended to reduce the risk of cancer developing in the other breast.² And because these mutations also raise ovarian cancer risk, a risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy may be discussed as well. The catch is that these procedures aren’t just physically demanding, they can be life-altering. Mastectomy can affect body image and identity, while oophorectomy induces early menopause, with all the knock-on effects for fertility, bone health, and long-term wellbeing.⁶

Chemotherapy

Standard chemotherapy regimens still have a role, but BRCA-mutated tumours often show particular sensitivity to platinum-based agents such as cisplatin and carboplatin. These drugs can be highly effective, especially when used in the neoadjuvant setting before surgery.² The limitation is toxicity: myelosuppression, neuropathy, and renal side effects often force dose adjustments or treatment breaks. Resistance can develop over time, and despite the initial sensitivity, long-term outcomes aren’t always significantly better than with conventional regimens.⁷

Targeted therapy with PARP inhibitors

This is where precision medicine has made the biggest leap forward. Drugs like olaparib and talazoparib take advantage of the DNA repair weaknesses in BRCA-mutated tumours, offering real benefit in both high-risk early disease and metastatic settings.⁴ The challenge is that they only work in patients with a confirmed BRCA mutation or, in some cases, other homologous recombination deficiencies. Resistance mechanisms inevitably creep in, blunting their effectiveness over time.^2,8,9 Concurrent use with chemotherapy often isn’t possible because of overlapping bone marrow toxicity.¹⁰ And while the results are promising, PARP inhibitors are expensive, not universally available, and carry risks of their own, from anaemia and fatigue to rare but serious haematological complications.⁹

Hormone therapy

For patients whose tumours are hormone receptor-positive (HR+), endocrine therapy remains part of the standard toolkit. Tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors, and ovarian suppression in premenopausal women can be effective. But this only applies to a subset; many BRCA1-related cancers are triple-negative and don’t benefit.¹¹ Even in responsive patients, resistance often emerges, with mutations in ESR1 or activation of alternative growth pathways undermining long-term benefit.^1,11 Side effects such as menopausal symptoms, bone density loss, and cardiovascular issues can also make adherence challenging.¹¹

Radiation therapy

Radiotherapy still plays an important role in breast cancer, whether after lumpectomy or selectively after mastectomy depending on nodal status and tumour size.¹² But it’s not without its drawbacks. Radiation can cause tissue fibrosis, heart toxicity (particularly for left-sided disease), and, with long-term exposure, an increased risk of secondary malignancies.¹² 

Immunotherapy

Checkpoint inhibitors like pembrolizumab are making their way into treatment for BRCA-mutated triple-negative breast cancer, particularly in the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings. For some patients, they bring meaningful survival benefits. But the response rates are far from universal, and predicting who will benefit is still an imperfect science. Biomarker selection tools like PD-L1 expression and tumour mutational burden help, but they aren’t foolproof. On top of that, immune-related adverse events such as thyroiditis, colitis and pneumonitis can be severe and require long-term immunosuppression, which is a significant trade-off.¹³

Can Smarter Scheduling Improve Survival? 

A recent Phase II/III trial (the PARTNER trial), led by researchers at Cambridge University, set out to answer an important question: could weaving the targeted drug olaparib into standard chemotherapy before surgery improve outcomes for patients with early-stage BRCA1/2-related breast cancer?¹⁰

How the trial was set up

The study enrolled patients with early-stage BRCA1/2 mutations and randomised them to different treatment arms. In the research arm, patients received the chemotherapy drugs carboplatin plus paclitaxel on day 1, and olaparib tablets twice daily on days 3–14 post chemotherapy of each cycle (the so-called “gap schedule”), followed by anthracycline chemotherapy. There were 3 cycles of this treatment. The control arm received standard chemotherapy, carboplatin plus paclitaxel, then anthracyclines. A third arm, where olaparib was started before chemotherapy (the “non-gap” schedule), was dropped early after interim results suggested it wasn’t helping.¹⁰

What the trial measured

The main endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR): essentially, whether the tumour was wiped out at the time of surgery. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life.¹⁰

What they found

In total, 108 patients were enrolled, with 84 included in the main analysis. On the primary measure (pCR) there wasn’t much difference between groups (64% in the research arm vs 70% in the control arm; p=0.59).¹⁰ But things got more interesting when looking at survival outcomes at three years. Event-free survival was significantly better in the research arm (96% vs 80%), and both overall survival and breast cancer–specific survival reached 100% in the research group compared with 88% in controls (p=0.04 for each).¹⁰

Safety was a mixed picture. More patients in the research arm experienced grade 3 or higher adverse events (77% vs 60%), though discontinuation rates due to toxicity were similar between groups. Importantly, quality of life measures held steady, suggesting patients were able to tolerate the intensified approach.¹⁰

The dropped non-gap arm reinforced the importance of timing: starting olaparib before chemotherapy actually led to worse outcomes than either of the other approaches.¹⁰

The Bigger Picture

One of the most striking findings is that survival improved even though pathological complete response (pCR) did not.¹⁰ That flips a long-standing assumption on its head; pCR has often been treated as the gold standard for neoadjuvant prognosis,¹⁴ but in BRCA-mutated breast cancer, this study shows it may not tell the whole story.

It also demonstrates that PARP inhibitors can be combined with chemotherapy in a safe and tolerable way, so long as the timing is right. Using olaparib in a carefully timed “gap schedule” avoided the bone marrow toxicity seen with concurrent dosing, while still delivering survival benefit. The lesson is clear: scheduling matters. Get the order wrong, and survival actually worsens; get it right, and outcomes improve significantly.¹⁰

For high-risk patients with inherited BRCA1/2 mutations, often younger women facing aggressive cancers, this offers a new source of hope.² A more effective neoadjuvant strategy could mean better long-term survival without relying on prolonged adjuvant PARP therapy, potentially reducing cumulative toxicity and helping preserve quality of life, including fertility considerations.¹⁰

The study also supports a shift toward personalisation. If pCR isn’t a reliable predictor here, alternative markers like circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) may be better guides for treatment decisions.¹⁰ That could reshape how clinicians track and tailor therapy for BRCA-mutated disease.

And the implications go beyond breast cancer. If drug scheduling is this crucial in BRCA-driven breast tumours, the same principle may well apply in other cancers with BRCA mutations or DNA repair deficiencies, such as ovarian cancer.¹⁰ It’s a reminder that sometimes precision medicine isn’t just about the drug, it’s about the clock.

Conclusion

BRCA-related breast cancer represents one of the clearest examples of how genetics reshapes both risk and treatment. These mutations don’t just raise the odds of cancer. they change the biology of the disease itself, creating tumours that are often more aggressive, harder to treat, and more disruptive to patients’ lives. Traditional tools like surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation remain essential, but their limitations are felt sharply in this setting.

What we’re now seeing, though, is the power of precision medicine to make a real difference. The PARTNER trial shows that it’s not just about what drugs we use, but how and when we use them. A well-timed schedule with olaparib and chemotherapy translated into survival gains without adding unmanageable toxicity, something that could genuinely shift the treatment landscape for high-risk patients.

For pharmaceutical professionals, the message is clear: the future of BRCA-related breast cancer care lies in refining strategies that are both biologically targeted and practically tolerable. That means continuing to push on drug development, but also on smarter trial design, better biomarkers like ctDNA, and treatment approaches that prioritise survivorship and quality of life alongside tumour control.

References 

1. Xiong X, Zheng LW, Ding Y, et al. Breast cancer: pathogenesis and treatments. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2025;10(1):49. Published 2025 Feb 19. doi:10.1038/s41392-024-02108-4
2. National Cancer Institute. BRCA Gene Changes: Cancer Risk and Genetic Testing. Available at: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics/brca-fact-sheet Accessed 2 September 2025.
3. Petrucelli N, Daly MB, Pal T. BRCA1- and BRCA2-Associated Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. 1998 Sep 4 [Updated 2025 Mar 20]. In: Adam MP, Feldman J, Mirzaa GM, et al., editors. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2025. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1247/
4. Cancer Research UK. PARP inhibitors. Available at: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/treatment/targeted-cancer-drugs-immunotherapy/parp-inhibitors Accessed 2 September 2025.
5. Cancer Research UK. Types of breast cancer surgery. Available at: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/breast-cancer/treatment/surgery/types-surgery Accessed 2 September 2025. 
6. American Cancer Society. Surgery for Ovarian Cancer. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/ovarian-cancer/treating/surgery.html Accessed 2 September 2025. 
7. American Cancer Society. Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/treatment/chemotherapy-for-breast-cancer.html Accessed 2 September 2025. 
8. Kinnel B, Singh SK, Oprea-Ilies G, Singh R. Targeted Therapy and Mechanisms of Drug Resistance in Breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(4):1320. Published 2023 Feb 19. doi:10.3390/cancers15041320
9. American Cancer Society. Targeted Drug Therapy for Breast Cancer. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/treatment/targeted-therapy-for-breast-cancer.html Accessed 2 September 2025. 
10. Abraham JE, O'Connor LO, Grybowicz L, et al. Neoadjuvant PARP inhibitor scheduling in BRCA1 and BRCA2 related breast cancer: PARTNER, a randomized phase II/III trial. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):4269. Published 2025 May 13. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-59151-0
11. American Cancer Society. Hormone Therapy for Breast Cancer. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/treatment/hormone-therapy-for-breast-cancer.html Accessed 2 September 2025. 
12. Cancer Research UK. Having radiotherapy for breast cancer. Available at: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/breast-cancer/treatment/radiotherapy/radiotherapy-treatment Accessed 2 September 2025. 
13. American Cancer Society. Immunotherapy for Breast Cancer. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/treatment/immunotherapy.html Accessed 2 September 2025. 

Ivanovic N, Bjelica D, Loboda B, et al. Changing the role of pCR in breast cancer treatment - an unjustifiable interpretation of a good prognostic factor as a "factor for a good prognosis". Front Oncol. 2023;13:1207948. Published 2023 Jul 18. doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1207948