Results of multigene panel testing in familial cancer cases without genetic cause demonstrated by single gene testing

Oleuropein impact on colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered the third most common cancer in the world. In Mediterranean region, olives and olive oil play a substantial role in diet and medical traditional behaviors. They totally believe that high consumption of olive products can treat a wide range of diseases and decrease risk of illness. Oleuropein is the main active antioxidant molecule found in pre-mature olive fruit and leaves. Recently, it has been demonstrated that oleuropein is used in cancer therapy as an anti-proliferative and apoptotic agent for some cancer cells. In this review, we would like to explore the conclusive effects of oleuropein on CRC with respect to in vitro and in vivo studies.

Differences in Cancer Phenotypes Among Frequent CHEK2 Variants and Implications for Clinical Care-Checking CHEK2

Importance

Germline CHEK2 pathogenic variants (PVs) are frequently detected by multigene cancer panel testing (MGPT), but our understanding of PVs beyond c.1100del has been limited.

Objective

To compare cancer phenotypes of frequent CHEK2 PVs individually and collectively by variant type.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study was carried out in a single diagnostic testing laboratory from 2012 to 2019. Overall, 3783 participants with CHEK2 PVs identified via MGPT were included. Medical histories of cancer in participants with frequent PVs, negative MGPT (wild type), loss-of-function (LOF), and missense were compared.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants were stratified by CHEK2 PV type. Descriptive statistics were summarized including median (IQR) for continuous variables and proportions for categorical characteristics. Differences in age and proportions were assessed with Wilcoxon rank sum and Fisher exact tests, respectively. Frequencies, odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and P values were corrected for multiple comparisons where appropriate.

Results

Of the 3783 participants with CHEK2 PVs, 3473 (92%) were female and most reported White race. Breast cancer was less frequent in participants with p.I157T (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78; P<.001), p.S428F (OR, 0.59; 95% CI. 0.46-0.76; P<.001), and p.T476M (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98; P = .04) PVs compared with other PVs and an association with nonbreast cancers was not found. Following the exclusion of p.I157T, p.S428F, and p.T476M, participants with monoallelic CHEK2 PV had a younger age at first cancer diagnosis (P < .001) and were more likely to have breast (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.66-2.02; P < .001), thyroid (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.26-2.08; P < .001), and kidney cancer (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.75-3.68; P < .001) than the wild-type cohort. Participants with a CHEK2 PV were less likely to have a diagnosis of colorectal cancer (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.76; P < .001) compared with those in the wild-type cohort. There were no significant differences between frequent CHEK2 PVs and c.1100del and no differences between CHEK2 missense and LOF PVs.

Conclusions and Relevance

CHEK2 PVs, with few exceptions (p.I157T, p.S428F, and p.T476M), were associated with similar cancer phenotypes irrespective of variant type. CHEK2 PVs were not associated with colorectal cancer, but were associated with breast, kidney, and thyroid cancers. Compared with other CHEK2 PVs, the frequent p.I157T, p.S428F, and p.T476M alleles have an attenuated association with breast cancer and were not associated with nonbreast cancers. These data may inform the genetic counseling and care of individuals with CHEK2 PVs.

Germline Testing in a Cohort of Patients at High Risk of Hereditary Cancer Predisposition Syndromes: First Two-Year Results from South Italy

Germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in oncogenes and tumour suppressor genes are responsible for 5 to 10% of all diagnosed cancers, which are commonly known as hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes (HCPS). A total of 104 individuals at high risk of HCPS were selected by genetic counselling for genetic testing in the past 2 years. Most of them were subjects having a personal and family history of breast cancer (BC) selected according to current established criteria. Genes analysis involved in HCPS was assessed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) using a custom cancer panel with high- and moderate-risk susceptibility genes. Germline PVs were identified in 17 of 104 individuals (16.3%) analysed, while variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were identified in 21/104 (20.2%) cases. Concerning the germline PVs distribution among the 13 BC individuals with positive findings, 8/13 (61.5%) were in the BRCA1/2 genes, whereas 5/13 (38.4%) were in other high- or moderate-risk genes including PALB2, TP53, ATM and CHEK2. NGS genetic testing showed that 6/13 (46.1%) of the PVs observed in BC patients were detected in triple-negative BC. Interestingly, the likelihood of carrying the PVs in the moderate-to-high-risk genes calculated by the cancer risk model BOADICEA was significantly higher in pathogenic variant carriers than in negative subjects. Collectively, this study shows that multigene panel testing can offer an effective diagnostic approach for patients at high risk of hereditary cancers.

Combined screening analysis of aberrantly methylated-differentially expressed genes and pathways in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Methylation plays an important role in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by altering the expression of key genes. The aim of this study was to screen the aberrantly methylated-differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in HCC and elucidate their underlying molecular mechanism.

METHODS

Gene expression microarrays (GSE101685) and gene methylation microarrays (GSE44909) were selected. DEGs and differentially methylated genes (DMGs) were screened. Gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses were performed using the Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated discovery (DAVID). The Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes (STRING) database was used to analyze the functional protein-protein interaction (PPI) network. Molecular Complex Detection (MCODE) analysis was performed using the Cytoscape software. Hub genes were verified in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database.

RESULTS

A total of 80 hypomethylation-high expression genes (Hypo-HGs) were identified. Pathway enrichment analysis showed DNA replication, cell cycle, viral carcinogenesis, and the spliceosome. The top 5 hub genes were minichromosome maintenance complex component 3 (MCM3), checkpoint kinase 1 (CHEK1), kinesin family member 11 (KIF11), PDZ binding kinase (PBK), and Rac GTPase activating protein 1 (RACGAP1). In addition, 189 hypermethylation-low expression genes (Hyper-LGs) were identified. Pathway enrichment analysis indicated enrichment in metabolic pathways, drug metabolism-other enzymes, and chemical carcinogenesis. The top 5 hub genes were leukocyte immunoglobulin like receptor B2 (LILRB2), formyl peptide receptor 1 (FPR1), S100 calcium binding protein A9 (S100A9), S100 calcium binding protein A8 (S100A8), and myeloid cell nuclear differentiation antigen (MNDA). The methylation status and mRNA expression of MCM3, CHEK1, KIF11, PBK, and S100A9 were consistent in the TCGA database and significantly correlated with the prognosis of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined screening of aberrantly methylated-DEGs based on bioinformatic analysis may provide new clues for elucidating the epigenetic mechanism in HCC. Hub genes, including MCM3, CHEK1, KIF11, PBK, and S100A9, may serve as biomarkers for the precise diagnosis of HCC.

Outcomes of retesting in patients with previously uninformative cancer genetics evaluations

Advances in cancer genetics have increased germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PV/LPV) detection rates. More data is needed to inform which patients with previously uninformative results could benefit most from retesting, especially beyond breast/ovarian cancer populations. Here, we describe retesting outcomes and predictors of PV/LPVs in a cohort of patients unselected by cancer diagnosis. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted for patients at a cancer genetics clinic between 1998 and 2019 who underwent genetic testing (GT) on ≥ 2 dates with ≥ 1 year between tests, with no PV/LPVs on first-line GT. Demographics, retesting indications, and GT details were reviewed to evaluate predictive factors of PV/LPV identification. 139 patients underwent retesting, of whom 24 (17.3%) had a PV/LPV, encompassing 15 genes. 14 PV/LPV carriers (58.3%) only returned for retesting after personal or familial history changes (typically new cancer diagnoses), while 10 (41.7%) retested due to updated GT availability. No specific GT method was most likely to identify PV/LPVs and no specific clinical factors were predictive of a PV/LPV. The identified PV/LPVs were consistent with patients' personal or family histories, but were discordant with the initial referral indication for GT. For 16 (66.7%) PV/LPV carriers, the genetic diagnosis changed clinical management. This study adds to the limited body of literature on retesting outcomes beyond first-line BRCA analysis alone and confirms the utility of multigene panel testing. Retesting certain affected individuals when updated GT is available could result in earlier PV/LPV identification, significantly impacting screening recommendations and potentially reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality.

Genetic Variation and the Role of Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer: A Single-Institution Experience

Background

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in women. There are multiple pathogenic mutations in addition to BRCA1/2 that are implicated in causing hereditary breast cancer.

Methods and results

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1568 patients with breast cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018. The age range is 23-87. Among the study population, 26% had genetic testing and 8% of those were found to carry a pathogenic variant, as designated in NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) Guidelines. Of that 8%, 3.4% were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, and the rest were other prevalent pathogenic variants.

Discussion

Expanded panel testing has the potential to increase the detection rate of pathogenic variants compared to testing for BRCA1/2 alone. Diagnostic accuracy of genetic causes of breast cancer has a significant clinical impact on patients and their families in terms of targeted treatment and prevention strategies. There is a strong need for further understanding of genetic patterns and variations in hereditary breast cancer. Awareness of the possibility of moderate to low penetrance genes and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) is important to assist with appropriate genetic counseling. We believe that physicians should consider re-testing with an expanded panel if patients previously had BRCA1 and BRCA2 testings only with a negative result as it may identify additional mutations.

How Have Multigene Panels Changed the Clinical Practice of Genetic Counseling and Testing

Historically, genetic testing (and billing) for hereditary cancer risk was essentially performed gene by gene, with clinicians ordering testing only for the genes most likely to explain a patient's or family's cancer presentation, with laboratories typically charging $1,000 to $1,500 for each gene that was sequenced. Given the expense, only patients at high risk of having a hereditary syndrome were offered testing. With the introduction of next-generation sequencing technologies, however, laboratories are able to test for multiple genes at the same time with greater efficiency, significantly decreased costs, and relatively little increased expense when adding additional genes. This has drastically altered clinical practice so that clinicians now typically order testing for a panel of multiple genes for most patients. Although this approach has streamlined the diagnostic odyssey, it has introduced several problems, as well, including difficulties in choosing the appropriate panel test for a given patient, assessing the significance of identified genetic variants (including variants of uncertain significance [VUS]), and understanding the disease risks and management associated with pathogenic variants in a given gene. Many laboratories offer testing for genes that have limited data supporting their associated cancer risks, which then leads to an inability to set management guidelines based on that gene. In addition, testing larger numbers of genes increases the likelihood of finding one or more VUS, which introduce their own management issues. Thus, although panel testing has certainly moved clinical practice forward in many ways, it has also raised its own set of problems that increase the complexity of genetic counseling and highlight the need for education of community practitioners on the complexities and nuances of this testing. Whenever possible, testing should be performed by, or in consultation with, cancer genetics professionals.

Splicing analysis of SLC40A1 missense variations and contribution to hemochromatosis type 4 phenotypes

Hemochromatosis type 4, or ferroportin disease, is considered as the second leading cause of primary iron overload after HFE-related hemochromatosis. The disease, which is predominantly associated with missense variations in the SLC40A1 gene, is characterized by wide clinical heterogeneity. We tested the possibility that some of the reported missense mutations, despite their positions within exons, cause splicing defects. Fifty-eight genetic variants were selected from the literature based on two criteria: a precise description of the nucleotide change and individual evidence of iron overload. The selected variants were investigated by different in silico prediction tools and prioritized for midigene splicing assays. Of the 15 variations tested in vitro, only two were associated with splicing changes. We confirm that the c.1402G>A transition (p.Gly468Ser) disrupts the exon 7 donor site, leading to the use of an exonic cryptic splicing site and the generation of a truncated reading frame. We observed, for the first time, that the p.Gly468Ser substitution has no effect on the ferroportin iron export function. We demonstrate alternative splicing of exon 5 in different cell lines and show that the c.430A>G (p.Asn144Asp) variant promotes exon 5 inclusion. This could be part of a gain-of-function mechanism. We conclude that splicing mutations rarely contribute to hemochromatosis type 4 phenotypes. An in-depth investigation of exon 5 auxiliary splicing sequences may help to elucidate the mechanism by which splicing regulatory proteins regulate the production of the full length SLC40A1 transcript and to clarify its physiological importance.

Prevalence of germline variants in consensus moderate-to-high-risk predisposition genes to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2-negative Brazilian patients

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify and classify genetic variants in consensus moderate-to-high-risk predisposition genes associated with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC), in BRCA1/2-negative patients from Brazil.

METHODS

The study comprised 126 index patients who met NCCN clinical criteria and tested negative for all coding exons and intronic flanking regions of BRCA1/2 genes. Multiplex PCR-based assays were designed to cover the complete coding regions and flanking splicing sites of six genes implicated in HBOC. Sequencing was performed on HiSeq2500 Genome Analyzer.

RESULTS

Overall, we identified 488 unique variants. We identified five patients (3.97%) that harbored pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in four genes: ATM (1), CHEK2 (2), PALB2 (1), and TP53 (1). One hundred and thirty variants were classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), 10 of which were predicted to disrupt mRNA splicing (seven non-coding variants and three coding variants), while other six missense VUS were classified as probably damaging by prediction algorithms.

CONCLUSION

A detailed mutational profile of non-BRCA genes is still being described in Brazil. In this study, we contributed to filling this gap, by providing important data on the diversity of genetic variants in a Brazilian high-risk patient cohort. ATM, CHEK2, PALB2 and TP53 are well established as HBOC predisposition genes, and the identification of deleterious variants in such actionable genes contributes to clinical management of probands and relatives.

Summary of BARD1 Mutations and Precise Estimation of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risks Associated with the Mutations

Over the last two decades, numerous BARD1 mutations/pathogenic variants (PVs) have been found in patients with breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). However, their role in BC and OC susceptibility remains controversial, and strong evidence-based guidelines for carriers are not yet available. Herein, we present a comprehensive catalog of BARD1 PVs identified in large cumulative cohorts of ~48,700 BC and ~20,800 OC cases (retrieved from 123 studies examining the whole coding sequence of BARD1). Using these resources, we compared the frequency of BARD1 PVs in the cases and ~134,100 controls from the gnomAD database and estimated the effect of the BARD1 PVs on BC and OC risks. The analysis revealed that BARD1 is a BC moderate-risk gene (odds ratio (OR) = 2.90, 95% CIs:2.25–3.75, p < 0.0001) but not an OC risk gene (OR = 1.36, 95% CIs:0.87–2.11, p = 0.1733). In addition, the BARD1 mutational spectrum outlined in this study allowed us to determine recurrent PVs and evaluate the variant-specific risk for the most frequent PVs. In conclusion, these precise estimates improve the understanding of the role of BARD1 PVs in BC and OC predisposition and support the need for BARD1 diagnostic testing in BC patients.