Patients with an unclassified genetic variant in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes show different clinical features from those with a mutation

Assessing biases of information contained in pedigrees for the classification of BRCA-genetic variants: a study arising from the ENIGMA analytical working group

Purpose

One way of evaluating family history (FH) for classifying BRCA1/2 variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) is to assess the “BRCA-ness” of a pedigree by comparing it to reference populations. The aim of this study was to assess if prediction of BRCA pathogenic variant (mutation) status based on pedigree information differed due to changes in FH since intake, both in families with a pathogenic variant (BRCAm) and in families with wild-type (BRCAwt).

Patients and methods

We compared the BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant detection probabilities between intake and most recent pedigree for BRCAm families (n = 64) and BRCAwt (n = 118) using the BRCAPRO software program.

Results

Follow-up time between intake and most recent pedigree was significantly longer (p < 0.001) in the BRCAm compared to the BRCAwt families.

Among BRCAwt families, the probability to detect a pathogenic variant did not change over time. Conversely, among the BRCAm, this probability was significantly higher for most recent vs. intake pedigree (p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Clinical scores change significantly over time for BRCAm families. This may be due to differences in follow-up, but also to differences in cancer risks from carrying a pathogenic variant in a highly penetrant gene. To reduce bias, models for VUS classification should incorporate FH collected at intake.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing-pitfalls and recommendations for managing variants of uncertain clinical significance

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of BRCA1/2 testing for tailoring cancer treatment and extension of testing to tumour tissue for somatic mutation is moving BRCA1/2 mutation screening from a primarily prevention arena delivered by specialist genetic services into mainstream oncology practice. A considerable number of gene tests will identify rare variants where clinical significance cannot be inferred from sequence information alone. The proportion of variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) is likely to grow with lower thresholds for testing and laboratory providers with less experience of BRCA. Most VUS will not be associated with a high risk of cancer but a misinterpreted VUS has the potential to lead to mismanagement of both the patient and their relatives.

DESIGN

Members of the Clinical Working Group of ENIGMA (Evidence-based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles) global consortium (www.enigmaconsortium.org) observed wide variation in practices in reporting, disclosure and clinical management of patients with a VUS. Examples from current clinical practice are presented and discussed to illustrate potential pitfalls, explore factors contributing to misinterpretation, and propose approaches to improving clarity.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Clinicians, patients and their relatives would all benefit from an improved level of genetic literacy. Genetic laboratories working with clinical geneticists need to agree on a clinically clear and uniform format for reporting BRCA test results to non-geneticists. An international consortium of experts, collecting and integrating all available lines of evidence and classifying variants according to an internationally recognized system, will facilitate reclassification of variants for clinical use.

The BRCA1 variant p.Ser36Tyr abrogates BRCA1 protein function and potentially confers a moderate risk of breast cancer

The identification of variants of unknown clinical significance (VUS) in the BRCA1 gene complicates genetic counselling and causes additional anxiety to carriers. In silico approaches currently used for VUS pathogenicity assessment are predictive and often produce conflicting data. Furthermore, functional assays are either domain or function specific, thus they do not examine the entire spectrum of BRCA1 functions and interpretation of individual assay results can be misleading. PolyPhen algorithm predicted that the BRCA1 p.Ser36Tyr VUS identified in the Cypriot population was damaging, whereas Align-GVGD predicted that it was possibly of no significance. In addition the BRCA1 p.Ser36Tyr variant was found to be associated with increased risk (OR = 3.47, 95% CI 1.13-10.67, P = 0.02) in a single case-control series of 1174 cases and 1109 controls. We describe a cellular system for examining the function of exogenous full-length BRCA1 and for classifying VUS. We achieved strong protein expression of full-length BRCA1 in transiently transfected HEK293T cells. The p.Ser36Tyr VUS exhibited low protein expression similar to the known pathogenic variant p.Cys61Gly. Co-precipitation analysis further demonstrated that it has a reduced ability to interact with BARD1. Further, co-precipitation analysis of nuclear and cytosolic extracts as well as immunofluorescence studies showed that a high proportion of the p.Ser36Tyr variant is withheld in the cytoplasm contrary to wild type protein. In addition the ability of p.Ser36Tyr to co-localize with conjugated ubiquitin foci in the nuclei of S-phase synchronized cells following genotoxic stress with hydroxyurea is impaired at more pronounced levels than that of the p.Cys61Gly pathogenic variant. The p.Ser36Tyr variant demonstrates abrogated function, and based on epidemiological, genetic, and clinical data we conclude that the p.Ser36Tyr variant is probably associated with a moderate breast cancer risk.

Consensus: a framework for evaluation of uncertain gene variants in laboratory test reporting

Accurate interpretation of gene testing is a key component in customizing patient therapy. Where confirming evidence for a gene variant is lacking, computational prediction may be employed. A standardized framework, however, does not yet exist for quantitative evaluation of disease association for uncertain or novel gene variants in an objective manner. Here, complementary predictors for missense gene variants were incorporated into a weighted Consensus framework that includes calculated reference intervals from known disease outcomes. Data visualization for clinical reporting is also discussed.

Characterisation of unclassified variants in the BRCA1/2 genes with a putative effect on splicing

A subset of the unclassified variants (UVs) identified during genetic screening of BRCA1/2 genes may affect splicing. We assessed at RNA level the effect of four BRCA1 and ten BRCA2 UVs with a putative splice effect, as predicted in silico. The variants selected for this study were beyond the positions -1, -2 or +1, +2 from the exon, and were not previously described (n = 8) or their effect on splicing was not assessed previously (n = 6). Lymphocytes from UV carriers and healthy controls were cultured and treated with puromycin to prevent nonsense-mediated mRNA decay. The relative contribution of each allele to the various transcripts was assessed using combinations of allele-specific and transcript-specific primers. BRCA2 c.425G>T, c.7976+3_7976+4del and c.8754+3G>C give rise to aberrant transcripts BRCA2Δ4, BRCA2Δ17 and retention of 46nt of intron 21, respectively, and were considered pathogenic. BRCA1 c.4987-3C>G gives rise to BRCA1Δ17 that is likely pathogenic; however, residual expression of the full-length transcript from the variant allele could not be excluded. BRCA1 c.692C>T, c.693G>A and BRCA2 c.6935A>T, besides expressing the full-length transcript, increased expression of BRCA1Δ11 and BRCA2Δ12, respectively. As these are naturally occurring isoforms, also observed in controls, the clinical relevance is unclear. The seven remaining UVs did not affect splicing and three intronic variants were therefore classified as neutral. In conclusion, the RNA analysis results clarified the clinical relevance of 6 of the 14 studied UVs and thereby greatly improve the genetic counselling of high-risk breast/ovarian cancer patients carrying these classified variants.

Efficiency of BRCAPRO and Myriad II mutation probability thresholds versus cancer history criteria alone for BRCA1/2 mutation detection

Considerable differences exist amongst countries in the mutation probability methods and thresholds used to select patients for BRCA1/2 genetic screening. In order to assess the added value of mutation probability methods, we have retrospectively calculated the BRCAPRO and Myriad II probabilities in 306 probands who had previously been selected for DNA-analysis according to criteria based on familial history of cancer. DNA-analysis identified 52 mutations (16.9%) and 11 unclassified variants (UVs, 3.6%). Compared to cancer history, a threshold ≥10% with BRCAPRO or with Myriad II excluded about 40% of the patients from analysis, including four with a mutation and probabilities <10% with both programs. All four probands had a BRCA2 mutation. BRCAPRO and Myriad II showed similar specificity at 10% threshold, overall BRCAPRO was more sensitive than Myriad II for the detection of mutations. Only two of the probands with an UV had probabilities >20% with BRCAPRO and Myriad II. In summary, BRCAPRO and Myriad II are more efficient than cancer history alone to exclude patients without a mutation. BRCAPRO performs better for the detection of BRCA1 mutations than of BRCA2 mutations. The Myriad II scores provided no additional information than the BRCAPRO scores alone for the detection of patients with a mutation. The use of thresholds excluded from analysis the majority of patients carrying an UV.

SGO White Paper on ovarian cancer: etiology, screening and surveillance

Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous, rapidly progressive, highly lethal disease of low prevalence. The etiology remains poorly understood. Numerous risk factors have been identified, the most prominent involving an inherited predisposition in 10% of cases. Women with germline mutations associated with Hereditary Breast/Ovarian Cancer and Lynch syndromes have dramatically elevated risks (up to 46% and 12%, respectively). Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is the best method to prevent ovarian cancer in these high-risk women. Significant risk reduction is also seen in the general population who use oral contraceptives. Since up to 89% patients with early-stage disease have symptoms prior to diagnosis, increased awareness of the medical community may facilitate further workup in patients who otherwise would have had a delay. Despite enormous effort, there is no proof that routine screening for ovarian cancer in either the high-risk or general populations with serum markers, sonograms, or pelvic examinations decreases mortality. Further evaluation is needed to determine whether any novel biomarkers, or panels of markers, have clinical utility in early detection. Prospective clinical trials have to be designed and completed prior to offering of any of these new diagnostic tests. CA125 is currently the only biomarker recommended for monitoring of therapy as well as detection of recurrence. This commentary provides an overview on the background, screening and surveillance of ovarian cancer.

A method to assess the clinical significance of unclassified variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes based on cancer family history

Introduction

Unclassified variants (UVs) in the BRCA1/BRCA2 genes are a frequent problem in counseling breast cancer and/or ovarian cancer families. Information about cancer family history is usually available, but has rarely been used to evaluate UVs. The aim of the present study was to identify which is the best combination of clinical parameters that can predict whether a UV is deleterious, to be used for the classification of UVs.

Methods

We developed logistic regression models with the best combination of clinical features that distinguished a positive control of BRCA pathogenic variants (115 families) from a negative control population of BRCA variants initially classified as UVs and later considered neutral (38 families).

Results

The models included a combination of BRCAPRO scores, Myriad scores, number of ovarian cancers in the family, the age at diagnosis, and the number of persons with ovarian tumors and/or breast tumors. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were respectively 0.935 and 0.836 for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 models. For each model, the minimum receiver operating characteristic distance (respectively 90% and 78% specificity for BRCA1 and BRCA2) was chosen as the cutoff value to predict which UVs are deleterious from a study population of 12 UVs, present in 59 Dutch families. The p.S1655F, p.R1699W, and p.R1699Q variants in BRCA1 and the p.Y2660D, p.R2784Q, and p.R3052W variants in BRCA2 are classified as deleterious according to our models. The predictions of the p.L246V variant in BRCA1 and of the p.Y42C, p.E462G, p.R2888C, and p.R3052Q variants in BRCA2 are in agreement with published information of them being neutral. The p.R2784W variant in BRCA2 remains uncertain.

Conclusions

The present study shows that these developed models are useful to classify UVs in clinical genetic practice.

Sequence variant classification and reporting: recommendations for improving the interpretation of cancer susceptibility genetic test results

Genetic testing of cancer susceptibility genes is now widely applied in clinical practice to predict risk of developing cancer. In general, sequence-based testing of germline DNA is used to determine whether an individual carries a change that is clearly likely to disrupt normal gene function. Genetic testing may detect changes that are clearly pathogenic, clearly neutral, or variants of unclear clinical significance. Such variants present a considerable challenge to the diagnostic laboratory and the receiving clinician in terms of interpretation and clear presentation of the implications of the result to the patient. There does not appear to be a consistent approach to interpreting and reporting the clinical significance of variants either among genes or among laboratories. The potential for confusion among clinicians and patients is considerable and misinterpretation may lead to inappropriate clinical consequences. In this article we review the current state of sequence-based genetic testing, describe other standardized reporting systems used in oncology, and propose a standardized classification system for application to sequence-based results for cancer predisposition genes. We suggest a system of five classes of variants based on the degree of likelihood of pathogenicity. Each class is associated with specific recommendations for clinical management of at-risk relatives that will depend on the syndrome. We propose that panels of experts on each cancer predisposition syndrome facilitate the classification scheme and designate appropriate surveillance and cancer management guidelines. The international adoption of a standardized reporting system should improve the clinical utility of sequence-based genetic tests to predict cancer risk.

Tumor characteristics as an analytic tool for classifying genetic variants of uncertain clinical significance

It is important to identify a germline mutation in a patient with an inherited cancer syndrome to allow mutation carriers to be included in cancer surveillance programs, which have been proven to save lives. Many of the mutations identified result in premature termination of translation, and thus in loss-of-function of the encoded mutated protein. However, the significance of a large proportion of the sequence changes reported is unknown. Some of these variants will be associated with a high risk of cancer and have direct clinical consequence. Many criteria can be used to classify variants with unknown significance; most criteria are based on the characteristics of the amino acid change, on segregation data and appearance of the variant, on the presence of the variant in controls, or on functional assays. In inherited cancers, tumor characteristics can also be used to classify variants. It is worthwhile to examine the clinical, morphological and molecular features of a patient, and his or her family, when assessing whether the role of a variant is likely to be neutral or pathogenic. Here we describe the advantages and disadvantages of using the tumor characteristics of patients carrying germline variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in BRCA1, BRCA2, or in one of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes, MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6, to infer pathogenicity.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 missense variants of high and low clinical significance influence lymphoblastoid cell line post-irradiation gene expression

The functional consequences of missense variants in disease genes are difficult to predict. We assessed if gene expression profiles could distinguish between BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic truncating and missense mutation carriers and familial breast cancer cases whose disease was not attributable to BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations (BRCAX cases). 72 cell lines from affected women in high-risk breast ovarian families were assayed after exposure to ionising irradiation, including 23 BRCA1 carriers, 22 BRCA2 carriers, and 27 BRCAX individuals. A subset of 10 BRCAX individuals carried rare BRCA1/2 sequence variants considered to be of low clinical significance (LCS). BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers had similar expression profiles, with some subclustering of missense mutation carriers. The majority of BRCAX individuals formed a distinct cluster, but BRCAX individuals with LCS variants had expression profiles similar to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Gaussian Process Classifier predicted BRCA1, BRCA2 and BRCAX status, with a maximum of 62% accuracy, and prediction accuracy decreased with inclusion of BRCAX samples carrying an LCS variant, and inclusion of pathogenic missense carriers. Similarly, prediction of mutation status with gene lists derived using Support Vector Machines was good for BRCAX samples without an LCS variant (82–94%), poor for BRCAX with an LCS (40–50%), and improved for pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation carriers when the gene list used for prediction was appropriate to mutation effect being tested (71–100%). This study indicates that mutation effect, and presence of rare variants possibly associated with a low risk of cancer, must be considered in the development of array-based assays of variant pathogenicity.

Inherited mutations in the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase risk of breast cancer and contribute to a proportion of breast cancer families. However, more than half of the reported sequence alterations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are currently of unknown clinical significance. We analysed gene expression in lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from blood of patients with sequence alterations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and compared these to lymphoblastoid cells from familial breast cancer patients without such alterations. We then classified these lymphoblastoid cells based on their gene profiles. We found that BRCA1 and BRCA2 samples were more similar to each other than to familial breast cancer patients without BRCA1/2 mutations, and that the type of sequence change in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (missense or truncating) influenced gene expression. We included in the study ten familial breast cancer samples, which carried sequence changes in BRCA1 or BRCA2, that are believed to be of little clinical significance. Interestingly these samples were distinct from other familial breast cancer cases without any sequence alteration in BRCA1 or BRCA2, indicating that further work needs to be performed to determine the possible association of these “low clinical significance” sequence changes with a low to moderate risk of cancer.

Cancer risk assessment and the genetic counseling process: using hereditary breast and ovarian cancer as an example

While only a small proportion of cancers can be attributed to a hereditary susceptibility, identifying high-risk individuals plays an essential role in medical management and has a significant impact on the patient as well as their immediate and extended family members. This paper aims at increasing the medical professionals' knowledge of the components of a genetic counseling session, with particular attention toward identifying at-risk individuals and understanding the complexities of the testing process. In addition, tools are provided to assist in identifying these individuals in clinical practice and streamlining the referral process to a cancer genetics center.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 status in a Central Sudanese series of breast cancer patients: interactions with genetic, ethnic and reproductive factors

The etiology of breast cancer in Africa is scarcely investigated. Breast cancer was responsible for 456/2,233 cancer patients (20.4%) ascertained between 1999 and 2004 at Gezira University, Central Sudan. Male breast cancer accounted for 16/456 patients (3.5%), 275/440 female patients (62.5%) were premenopausal and 150/440 cases (34%) occurred in women with > or =5 childbirths. We characterized for germline BRCA1/2 mutations a one-year series of patients (34 females, 1 male) selected by diagnosis within age 40 years or male gender. Overall 33/35 patients were found to carry 60 BRCA1/2 variants, of which 17 (28%) were novel, 22 (37%) reported in populations from various geographic areas and 21 (35%) reported worldwide. Detected variants included 5 truncating mutations, one of which (in BRCA2) was in the male patient. The 55 non-truncating variants included 3 unclassified variants predicted to affect protein product and not co-occurring with a truncating mutation in the same gene. Patients were from different tribes but AMOVA showed that most BRCA1/2 variation was within individuals (86.41%) and patients clustered independently of tribe in a phylogenetic tree. Cluster analysis based on age at cancer diagnosis and reproductive variables split female patients in two clusters that, by factor analysis, were explained by low versus high scores of the total period occupied by pregnancies and lactation. The cluster with low scores comprised all 4 patients with truncating mutations and 3 of the 4 carriers of unclassified variants predicted to affect protein product. Our findings suggest that in Central Sudan BRCA1/2 represent an important etiological factor of breast cancer in males and young women less exposed to pregnancy and lactation. Factors other than BRCA1/2 may contribute to breast cancer in young highly multiparous women who breast-fed for prolonged periods.