Clinical Management of Prostate Cancer in Men with BRCA Mutations

Analysis of BRCA Germline Mutations in Chinese Prostate Cancer Patients

Recent studies have indicated that prostate cancer (PCa) with BRCA2 mutations is more aggressive. However, these reports mostly focused on Caucasus populations, and large-scale studies on BRCA mutations in Chinese PCa populations remain limited. Herein, we screened, from multiple centers in China, a total of 172 patients with PCa carrying BRCA1/2 germline mutations. The variant distribution and type, associated somatic variant, and frequency of the BRCA germline variants in these patients were analyzed retrospectively. We found that Chinese patients with PCa carrying BRCA1/2 germline mutations were diagnosed at an earlier age, i.e., 67 years (range, 34–89 years), and most had metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC) (54.65%, 94/172). The top three BRCA variants were frameshift, missense, and splicing variants. The overall pathogenic rates of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants were 17.46% (11/63) and 56.55% (82/145), respectively. Among the somatic mutations associated with BRCA2 germline mutations, the highest frequency was for FOXA1 (circulating tumor DNA [ctDNA] sequencing, 7.4%; tissue samples, 52%) and NCOR2 mutations (ctDNA sequencing, 7.4%; tissue samples, 24%); TP53 was the dominant somatic mutation associated with BRCA1 germline mutations (ctDNA sequencing, 25%; tissue samples, 17%). Ultimately, in Chinese patients, PCa with BRCA1/2 germline mutations tends to be more aggressive. Compared with BRCA1, BRCA2 has a higher frequency of germline pathogenic mutations. FOXA1, NCOR2, and TP53 somatic mutations associated with higher BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic mutations. Our description of BRCA germline mutations in the Chinese PCa patients provides more reference data for the precise diagnosis and treatment of Chinese PCa patients.

Case Report: Co-Existence of BRCA2 and PALB2 Germline Mutations in Familial Prostate Cancer With Solitary Lung Metastasis

Background

Mutation-caused loss-of-function of factors involved in DNA damage response (DDR) is responsible for the development and progression of ~20% of prostate cancer (PCa). Some mutations can be used in cancer risk assessment and informed treatment decisions.

Methods

Target capture-based deep sequencing of 11 genes was conducted with total DNA purified from the proband’s peripheral blood. Sanger sequencing was conducted to screen potential germline mutations in the proband’s family members. Targeted sequencing of a panel of 1,021 genes was done with DNA purified from the tumor tissue.

Results

Two previously unreported germline mutations in the DDR pathway, BRCA2 (c.8474_8487delCATACCCTATACAG, p.A2825Vfs*15) and PALB2 (c.472delC, p.Q158Rfs*19) were identified in a patient with metastatic PCa. A specific therapeutic regimen including androgen deprivation therapy, locally radical radiotherapy, and systemic platinum chemotherapy worked well against his cancer. In addition, the metastatic ovarian cancer in the proband’s half-sister harboring the same BRCA2 germline mutation also responded well to platinum chemotherapy.

Conclusions

The newly identified germline mutations in DDR plays important role in PCa development. Since specific regimen worked well against this cancer, screening of DDR mutation could provide better management for patients with these mutation-mediated PCa.

Men's and Women's Approaches to Disclosure About BRCA-Related Cancer Risks and Family Planning Decision-Making

Little is known about how men and women who test positive for a BRCA gene mutation or have a strong family history of carrying a BRCA mutation manage disclosures about their BRCA-related cancer risks and family planning decision-making. By conducting interviews with 25 men and 20 women, this study investigated men's and women's approaches to disclosing their BRCA-related cancer risks and family planning decision-making. Guided by the Disclosure Decision-Making Model (DD-MM), this study demonstrates that men and women assess both information and the recipients of disclosures when making disclosure decisions. Theoretical implications for the DD-MM are discussed along with practical implications for hereditary cancer risk and family planning.

A novel BRCA2 mutation in prostate cancer sensitive to combined radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy

Genetic factors contribute to more than 40% of prostate cancer risk, and mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are well-established risk factors. By using target capture-based deep sequencing to identify potential pathogenic germline mutations, followed by Sanger sequencing to determine the loci of the mutations, we identified a novel pathogenic BRCA2 mutation caused by a cytosine-to-guanine base substitution at position 4211, resulting in protein truncation (p.Ser1404Ter), which was confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Analysis of peripheral blood also identified benign polymorphisms in BRCA2 (c.7397T>C, p.Val2466Ala) and SRD5A2 (c.87G>C, p.Lys29Asn). Analysis of tumor tissues revealed seven somatic mutations in prostate tumor tissue and nine somatic mutations in esophageal squamous carcinoma tissue (single nucleotide polymorphisms, insertions, and deletions). Five-year follow-up results indicate that ADT combined with radiotherapy successfully treated the prostate cancer. To our knowledge, we are the first to report the germline BRCA2 mutation c.4211C>G (p.Ser1404Ter) in prostate cancer. Combined ADT and radiotherapy may be effective in treating other patients with prostate cancer caused by this or similar mutations.

Clinical and pathologic factors predicting reclassification in active surveillance cohorts

The incidence of small, lower risk well-differentiated prostate cancer is increasing and almost half of the patients with this diagnosis are candidates for initial conservative management in an attempt to avoid overtreatment and morbidity associated with surgery or radiation. A proportion of patients labeled as low risk, candidates for Active Surveillance (AS), harbor aggressive disease and would benefit from definitive treatment. The focus of this review is to identify clinicopathologic features that may help identify these less optimal AS candidates. A systematic Medline/PubMed Review was performed in January 2017 according to PRISMA guidelines; 83 articles were selected for full text review according to their relevance and after applying limits described. For patients meeting AS criteria including Gleason Score 6, several factors can assist in predicting those patients that are at higher risk for reclassification including higher PSA density, bilateral cancer, African American race, small prostate volume and low testosterone. Nomograms combining these features improve risk stratification. Clinical and pathologic features provide a significant amount of information for risk stratification (>70%) for patients considering active surveillance. Higher risk patient subgroups can benefit from further evaluation or consideration of treatment. Recommendations will continue to evolve as data from longer term AS cohorts matures.

Prostate-specific antigen velocity in a prospective prostate cancer screening study of men with genetic predisposition

BACKGROUND

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA-velocity (PSAV) have been used to identify men at risk of prostate cancer (PrCa). The IMPACT study is evaluating PSA screening in men with a known genetic predisposition to PrCa due to BRCA1/2 mutations. This analysis evaluates the utility of PSA and PSAV for identifying PrCa and high-grade disease in this cohort.

METHODS

PSAV was calculated using logistic regression to determine if PSA or PSAV predicted the result of prostate biopsy (PB) in men with elevated PSA values. Cox regression was used to determine whether PSA or PSAV predicted PSA elevation in men with low PSAs. Interaction terms were included in the models to determine whether BRCA status influenced the predictiveness of PSA or PSAV.

RESULTS

1634 participants had ⩾3 PSA readings of whom 174 underwent PB and 45 PrCas diagnosed. In men with PSA >3.0 ng ml-l, PSAV was not significantly associated with presence of cancer or high-grade disease. PSAV did not add to PSA for predicting time to an elevated PSA. When comparing BRCA1/2 carriers to non-carriers, we found a significant interaction between BRCA status and last PSA before biopsy (P=0.031) and BRCA2 status and PSAV (P=0.024). However, PSAV was not predictive of biopsy outcome in BRCA2 carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

PSA is more strongly predictive of PrCa in BRCA carriers than non-carriers. We did not find evidence that PSAV aids decision-making for BRCA carriers over absolute PSA value alone.

Screening Men at Increased Risk for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Model Estimates of Benefits and Harms

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for PSA screening in subgroups with increased risk of prostate cancer diagnosis due to race or genotype are underdeveloped. Our goal was to investigate types of increased prostate cancer risk and implications for targeted screening.

METHODS

We investigated computer simulation of subgroups with average and hypothetical increased risk(s) of onset of latent disease, progression, and/or cancer-specific death. For each subgroup, we predicted lifetime probabilities of overdiagnosis and life saved under more and less intensive PSA screening strategies. An application estimated risks of onset among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in the Identification of Men with a genetic predisposition to ProstAte Cancer: Targeted screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and controls (IMPACT) study using maximum likelihood.

RESULTS

Our simulations implied PSA screening can save more lives among subgroups with increased risk than with average risk, but more intensive screening did not always improve harm-benefit trade-offs. IMPACT data were consistent with increased risks of onset among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers [HR = 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-1.59 and HR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.14-2.78, respectively]. Our analysis suggests screening BRCA2 mutation carriers earlier and more frequently than the average-risk population, but a lower PSA threshold for biopsy is unlikely to improve outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective screening in men with increased prostate cancer risk depends on the manner in which the risk is increased. More intensive screening is not always optimal.

IMPACT

Guidelines for screening men at increased prostate cancer risk should consider the mechanism inducing the increased risk. Although the benefit of screening may be greater in men with increased risks, more intensive screening is not always appropriate. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(2); 222-7. ©2016 AACR.

Familial prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men in the United States as well as most Western countries. A significant proportion of men report having a positive family history of prostate cancer in a first-degree relative (father, brother, son), which is important in that family history is one of the only established risk factors for the disease and plays a role in decision-making for prostate cancer screening. Familial aggregation of prostate cancer is considered a surrogate marker of genetic susceptibility to developing the disease, but shared environment cannot be excluded as an explanation for clustering of cases among family members. Prostate cancer is both a clinically and genetically heterogeneous disease with inherited factors predicted to account for 40%-50% of cases, comprised of both rare highly to moderately penetrant gene variants, as well as common genetic variants of low penetrance. Most notably, HOXB13 and BRCA2 mutations have been consistently shown to increase prostate cancer risk, and are more commonly observed among patients diagnosed with early-onset disease. A recurrent mutation in HOXB13 has been shown to predispose to hereditary prostate cancer (HPC), and BRCA2 mutations to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have also identified approximately 100 loci that associate with modest (odds ratios <2.0) increases in prostate cancer risk, only some of which have been replicated in subsequent studies. Despite these efforts, genetic testing in prostate cancer lags behind other common tumors like breast and colorectal cancer. To date, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines have highly selective criteria for BRCA1/2 testing for men with prostate cancer based on personal history and/or specific family cancer history. Tumor sequencing is also leading to the identification of germline mutations in prostate cancer patients, informing the scope of inheritance. Advances in genetic testing for inherited and familial prostate cancer (FPC) are needed to inform personalized cancer risk screening and treatment approaches.