BRCA1 founder mutations do not contribute to increased risk of gastric cancer in the Polish population

Untapped Potential of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors: Lessons Learned From the Real-World Clinical Homologous Recombination Repair Mutation Testing

Background

Testing for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) mutations is pivotal to assess individual risk, to proact preventive measures in healthy carriers and to tailor treatments for cancer patients. Increasing prominence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with remarkable impact on molecular-selected patient survival across diverse nosologies, ingrains testing for BRCA genes and beyond in clinical practice. Nevertheless, testing strategies remain a question of debate. While several pathogenic BRCA1/2 gene variants have been described as founder pathogenic mutations frequently found in patients from Russia, other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes have not been sufficiently explored. In this study, we present real-world data of routine HRR gene testing in Russia.

Methods

We evaluated clinical and sequencing data from cancer patients who had germline/somatic next-generation sequencing (NGS) HRR gene testing in Russia (BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2, or 15 HRR genes). The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the frequency of BRCA1/2 and non-BRCA gene mutations in real-world unselected patients from Russia, and to determine whether testing beyond BRCA1/2 is feasible.

Results

Data of 2,032 patients were collected from February 2021 to February 2023. Most had breast (n = 715, 35.2%), ovarian (n = 259, 12.7%), pancreatic (n = 85, 4.2%), or prostate cancer (n = 58, 2.9%). We observed 586 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and 372 deleterious variants (DVs) across 487 patients, with 17.6% HRR-mutation positivity. HRR testing identified 120 (11.8%) BRCA1/2-positive, and 172 (16.9%) HRR-positive patients. With 51 DVs identified in 242 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE), testing for variant origin clarification was required in one case (0.4%). Most BRCA1/2 germline variants were DV (121 DVs, 26 VUS); in non-BRCA1/2 genes, VUS were ubiquitous (53 DVs, 132 VUS). In silico prediction identified additional 4.9% HRR and 1.2% BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2 mutation patients.

Conclusions

Our study represents one of the first reports about the incidence of DV and VUS in HRR genes, including genes beyond BRCA1/2, identified in cancer patients from Russia, assessed by NGS. In silico predictions of the observed HRR gene variants suggest that non-BRCA gene testing is likely to result in higher frequency of patients who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy. Continuing sequencing efforts should clarify interpretation of frequently observed non-BRCA VUS.

Penetrance of Gastric Adenocarcinoma Susceptibility Genes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) is the fifth most common cancer in the world, and the presence of germline pathogenic variants has been linked with approximately 5% of gastric cancer diagnoses. Multiple GAC susceptibility genes have been identified, but information regarding the risk associated with pathogenic variants in these genes remains obscure. We conducted a systematic review of existing studies reporting the penetrance of GAC susceptibility genes.

METHODS

A structured search query was devised to identify GAC-related papers indexed in MEDLINE/PubMed. A semi-automated natural language processing algorithm was applied to identify penetrance papers for inclusion. Original studies reporting the penetrance of GAC were included and the full-text articles were independently reviewed. Summary statistics, effect estimates, and precision parameters from these studies were compiled into a table using a predetermined format to ensure consistency.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were identified reporting the penetrance of GAC among patients harboring mutations in 13 different genes: APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, MUTYH-Monoallelic, NBN, and STK11.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review highlights the importance of testing for germline pathogenic variants in patients before the development of GAC. Management of patients who harbor a pathogenic mutation is multifactorial, and clinicians should consider cancer risk for each applicable gene-cancer association throughout the screening and management process. The scarcity of studies we found investigating the risk of GAC among patients with pathogenic variants in GAC susceptibility genes highlights the need for more investigations that focus on producing robust risk estimates for gene-cancer associations.

Gastric Cancer Risk and Pathogenesis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Carriers

Carriers of a pathogenic germline variant (PV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at increased risk for a number of malignancies, including breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss emerging evidence that BRCA2 PV carriers, and likely also BRCA1 PV carriers, are also at increased risk for gastric cancer (GC), highlighting that GC may be part of the BRCA1/2 cancer risk spectrum. While the pathogenesis of GC among BRCA1/2 PV carriers remains unclear, increasing evidence reveals that GCs are often enriched with mutations in homologous recombination-associated genes such as BRCA1/2, and that GC prognosis and response to certain therapies can depend on BRCA1/2 expression. Given the strength of data published to date, a risk management strategy for GC among BRCA1/2 PV carriers is needed, and herein we also propose a potential strategy for GC risk management in this population. Moving forward, further study is clearly warranted to define the mechanistic relationship between BRCA1/2 PVs and development of GC as well as to determine how GC risk management should be factored into the clinical care of BRCA1/2 carriers.

BRCA mutations and gastrointestinal cancers: When to expect the unexpected?

BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants are widely known as major risk factors mainly for breast and ovarian cancer, while their role in gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies such as colorectal cancer (CRC), gastric cancer and oesophageal cancer (OeC) is still not well established. The main objective of this review is to summarise the available evidence on this matter. The studies included in the review were selected from PubMed/GoogleScholar/ScienceDirect databases to identify published articles where BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants were assessed either as a risk factor or a prognostic/predictive factor in these malignancies. Our review suggests that BRCA1/2 might have a role as a risk factor for colorectal, gastric and OeC, albeit with differences among these diseases: In particular BRCA1 seems to be much more frequently mutated in CRC whereas BRCA2 appears to be much more closely associated with gastric and OeC. Early-onset cancer seems to be also associated with BRCA1/2 mutations and a few studies suggest a positive prognostic role of these mutations. The assessment of a potentially predictive role of these mutations is hampered by the fact that most patients with these diseases have been treated with platinum compounds, where it is expected that a higher probability of response should be seen. A few clinical trials focused on poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors use in GI cancers are currently ongoing.

Inhibition of c-MET increases the antitumour activity of PARP inhibitors in gastric cancer models

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer‐related death worldwide. Activation of c‐MET increases tumour cell survival through the initiation of the DNA damage repair pathway. PARP is an essential key in the DNA damage repair pathway. The primary role of PARP is to detect and initiate an immediate cellular response to single‐strand DNA breaks. Tumours suppressor genes such as BRCA1/2 are closely associated with the DNA repair pathway. In BRCA1/2 mutations or deficiency status, cells are more likely to develop additional genetic alterations and chromosomal instability and can lead to cancer. In this study, we investigate the role of c‐MET and PARP inhibition in a gastric cancer model. We exploited functional in vitro and in vivo experiments to assess the antitumour potential of co‐inhibition of c‐MET (SU11274) and PARP (NU1025). This leads to a reduction of gastric cancer cells viability, especially after knockdown of BRCA1/2 through apoptosis and induction of γ‐Η2ΑΧ. Moreover, in AGS xenograft models, the combinatorial treatment of NU1025 plus SU11274 reduced tumour growth and triggers apoptosis. Collectively, our data may represent a new therapeutic approach for GC thought co‐inhibition of c‐MET and PARP, especially for patients with BRCA1/2 deficiency tumours.

Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Multimodal Approach

Despite its declining incidence, gastric cancer (GC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. A multimodal approach to GC is critical to ensure optimal patient outcomes. Pretherapy fine resolution contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging, endoscopic ultrasound and staging laparoscopy play an important role in patients with newly diagnosed ostensibly operable GC to avoid unnecessary non-therapeutic laparotomies. Currently, margin negative gastrectomy and adequate lymphadenectomy performed at high volume hospitals remain the backbone of GC treatment. Importantly, adequate GC surgery should be integrated in the setting of a multimodal treatment approach. Treatment for advanced GC continues to expand with the emergence of additional lines of systemic and targeted therapies.