Breast cancer risk for noncarriers of family-specific BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: findings from the Breast Cancer Family Registry

Prediction of Cancer Proneness under Influence of X-rays with Four DNA Mutability and/or Three Cellular Proliferation Assays

Context: Although carcinogenesis is a multi-factorial process, the mutability and the capacity of cells to proliferate are among the major features of the cells that contribute together to the initiation and promotion steps of cancer formation. Particularly, mutability can be quantified by hyper-recombination rate assessed with specific plasmid assay, hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT) mutations frequency rate, or MRE11 nuclease activities. Cell proliferation can be assessed by flow cytometry by quantifying G2/M, G1 arrests, or global cellular evasion.

METHODS

All these assays were applied to skin untransformed fibroblasts derived from eight major cancer syndromes characterized by their excess of relative cancer risk (ERR).

RESULTS

Significant correlations with ERR were found between hyper-recombination assessed by the plasmid assay and G2/M arrest and described a third-degree polynomial ERR function and a sigmoidal ERR function, respectively. The product of the hyper-recombination rate and capacity of proliferation described a linear ERR function that permits one to better discriminate each cancer syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyper-recombination and cell proliferation were found to obey differential equations that better highlight the intrinsic bases of cancer formation. Further investigations to verify their relevance for cancer proneness induced by exogenous agents are in progress.

Uncovering hidden genetic risk factors for breast and ovarian cancers in BRCA-negative women: a machine learning approach in the Saudi population

Breast and ovarian cancers are prevalent worldwide, with genetic factors such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations playing a significant role. However, not all patients carry these mutations, making it challenging to identify risk factors. Researchers have turned to whole exome sequencing (WES) as a tool to identify genetic risk factors in BRCA-negative women. WES allows the sequencing of all protein-coding regions of an individual's genome, providing a comprehensive analysis that surpasses traditional gene-by-gene sequencing methods. This technology offers efficiency, cost-effectiveness and the potential to identify new genetic variants contributing to the susceptibility to the diseases. Interpreting WES data for disease-causing variants is challenging due to its complex nature. Machine learning techniques can uncover hidden genetic-variant patterns associated with cancer susceptibility. In this study, we used the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and random forest (RF) algorithms to identify BRCA-related cancer high-risk genes specifically in the Saudi population. The experimental results exposed that the RF method scored superior performance with an accuracy of 88.16% and an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve of 0.95. Using bioinformatics analysis tools, we explored the top features of the high-accuracy machine learning model that we built to enhance our knowledge of genetic interactions and find complex genetic patterns connected to the development of BRCA-related cancers. We were able to identify the significance of HLA gene variations in these WES datasets for BRCA-related patients. We find that immune response mechanisms play a major role in the development of BRCA-related cancer. It specifically highlights genes associated with antigen processing and presentation, such as HLA-B, HLA-A and HLA-DRB1 and their possible effects on tumour progression and immune evasion. In summary, by utilizing machine learning approaches, we have the potential to aid in the development of precision medicine approaches for early detection and personalized treatment strategies.

Revisiting Screening in Women With a Family History of Breast Cancer

Women with a family history (FH) of breast cancer and without known genetic susceptibility represent a unique population whose lifetime probability of developing breast cancer varies widely depending on familial factors, breast density, and the risk assessment tool used. Recently updated guidelines from the American College of Radiology recommend supplemental annual screening with contrast-enhanced MRI or contrast-enhanced mammography for women with an FH who are high risk (≥20% lifetime risk) or have dense breasts. To date, most screening studies addressing outcomes in women with FH have largely included those also with confirmed or suspected gene mutations, in whom the lifetime risk is highest, with limited data for women at average to intermediate risk who are not known to be genetically susceptible and may not benefit as much from the same screening approaches. Further research focusing specifically on women with FH as the only breast cancer risk factor is warranted to refine risk assessment and optimize a multimodality personalized screening approach.

Factors that influence the management recommendations breast surgeons provide to women with pathogenic variants in moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes

Pathogenic variants in moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, such as ATM and CHEK2, confer a two- to five-fold increased lifetime risk for breast cancer. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network has guidelines for breast surgeons to utilize when counseling women with pathogenic variants in these genes; however, previous studies indicate that other factors impact breast surgeons' recommendations to patients. This study investigated factors influencing management recommendations presented by breast surgeons to women with pathogenic variants in moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with breast surgeons practicing in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana. A total of 15 breast surgeons from eight different hospitals participated in five focus groups and three individual interviews. Participants discussed factors they consider when making management recommendations for risk reduction in women with pathogenic variants in moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Participants provided risk management recommendations for given scenarios. Patient motivation/opinion, family history, patient current health status, patient personal preference, and patient anxiety level were among the most common factors mentioned. It appeared that how these factors are valued and applied in practice varies. There was no consensus among breast surgeons on which risk-reducing management options they would recommend in each scenario. There are many factors breast surgeons take into consideration when making recommendations for this patient population. This information could inform future research on decision making around treatment for individuals with pathogenic variants in moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes.

Serous Tubal Intraepithelial Carcinoma in a Risk-reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy Specimen From a RAD51D Mutation Carrier: A Case Report

The RAD51D gene codes a protein-paralog of the RAD51 DNA recombinase, which catalyzes DNA strand exchange during homologous recombination. Similar to BRCA1 / BRCA2 , mutations in RAD51D both predispose to ovarian carcinoma and impart sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in preclinical studies. Based on cancer risk prediction models, RAD51D mutations pose a moderate-to-high risk for ovarian cancer warranting consideration for risk-reducing surgery. We report a case of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma in a patient undergoing risk-reducing total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for a RAD51D pathogenic variant. The histopathologic and p53-immunophenotypic features of this lesion are similar to those reported previously in BRCA1 / BRCA2 mutation carriers and those of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma associated with sporadic high-grade serous carcinomas. These features include marked increase in nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio, loss of cell polarity, absence of ciliation, prominent nucleoli, mitotic activity, epithelial stratification, surface exfoliative changes, and complete loss of p53 staining. Although familial ovarian cancers with mutations in RAD51D -or other genes in the Fanconi anemia pathway-are much less common those with BRCA1 / BRCA2 mutations, our findings support a common phenotype for early serous cancers in this pathway.

Heritable Susceptibility to Breast Cancer among African-American Women in the Detroit Research on Cancer Survivors Study

BACKGROUND

African-American women have high rates of breast cancer associated with hereditary features. However, no studies have reported the prevalence of inherited variation across all genes known to be breast cancer risk factors among African-American patients with breast cancer not selected for high-risk characteristics.

METHODS

We evaluated 182 African-American women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in metropolitan Detroit via targeted capture and multiplex sequencing of 13 well-established breast cancer risk genes and five suggested breast cancer risk genes.

RESULTS

We identified 24 pathogenic variants in 23 women [12.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8.2%-18.4%] and five genes (BRCA2, BRCA1, ATM, RAD50, CDH1). BRCA1 and BRCA2 accounted for 58.3% of all pathogenic variants. An additional six pathogenic variants were found in suggested breast cancer risk genes (MSH6, MUTYH, NF1, BRIP1).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants is relatively high among African-American patients with breast cancer unselected for high-risk characteristics across a broad spectrum of genes.

IMPACT

This study helps to define the genomic landscape of breast cancer susceptibility in African-American women who could benefit from enhanced surveillance and screening.

Is mammography screening beneficial: An individual-based stochastic model for breast cancer incidence and mortality

The benefits of mammography screening have been controversial, with conflicting findings from various studies. We hypothesize that unmeasured heterogeneity in tumor aggressiveness underlies these conflicting results. Based on published data from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS), we develop and parameterize an individual-based mechanistic model for breast cancer incidence and mortality that tracks five stages of breast cancer progression and incorporates the effects of age on breast cancer incidence and all-cause mortality. The model accurately reproduces the reported outcomes of the CNBSS. By varying parameters, we predict that the benefits of mammography depend on the effectiveness of cancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness. In particular, patients with the most rapidly growing or potentially largest tumors have the highest benefit and least harm from the screening, with only a relatively small effect of age. However, the model predicts that confining mammography to populations with a high risk of acquiring breast cancer increases the screening benefit only slightly compared with the full population.

Somatic variants of potential clinical significance in the tumors of BRCA phenocopies

BACKGROUND

BRCA phenocopies are individuals with the same phenotype (i.e. cancer consistent with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer syndrome = HBOC) as their affected relatives, but not the same genotype as assessed by blood germline testing (i.e. they do not carry a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation). There is some evidence of increased risk for HBOC-related cancers in relatives of germline variant carriers even though they themselves test negative for the familial variant (BRCA non-carriers). At this time, BRCA phenocopies are recommended to undergo the same cancer surveillance as individuals in the general population. This raises the question of whether the increased cancer risk in BRCA non-carriers is due to alterations (germline, somatic or epigenetic) in other cancer-associated genes which were not analyzed during BRCA analysis.

METHODS

To assess the nature and potential clinical significance of somatic variants in BRCA phenocopy tumors, DNA from BRCA non-carrier tumor tissue was analyzed using next generation sequencing of 572 cancer genes. Tumor diagnoses of the 11 subjects included breast, ovarian, endometrial and primary peritoneal carcinoma. Variants were called using FreeBayes genetic variant detector. Variants were annotated for effect on protein sequence, predicted function, and frequency in different populations from the 1000 genomes project, and presence in variant databases COSMIC and ClinVar using Annovar.

RESULTS

None of the familial BRCA1/2 mutations were found in the tumor samples tested. The most frequently occurring somatic gene variants were ROS1(6/11 cases) and NUP98 (5/11 cases). BRCA2 somatic variants were found in 2/6 BRCA1 phenocopies, but 0/5 BRCA2 phenocopies. Variants of uncertain significance were found in other DNA repair genes (ERCC1, ERCC3, ERCC4, FANCD2, PALB2), one mismatch repair gene (PMS2), a DNA demethylation enzyme (TET2), and two histone modifiers (EZH2, SUZ12).

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited by a small sample size, these results support a role of selected somatic variants and epigenetic mechanisms in the development of tumors in BRCA phenocopies.

Transcriptome profiling revealed multiple genes and ECM-receptor interaction pathways that may be associated with breast cancer

Background

Exploration of the genes with abnormal expression during the development of breast cancer is essential to provide a deeper understanding of the mechanisms involved. Transcriptome sequencing and bioinformatics analysis of invasive ductal carcinoma and paracancerous tissues from the same patient were performed to identify the key genes and signaling pathways related to breast cancer development.

Methods

Samples of breast tumor tissue and paracancerous breast tissue were obtained from 6 patients. Sequencing used the Illumina HiSeq platform. All. Only perfectly matched clean reads were mapped to the reference genome database, further analyzed and annotated based on the reference genome information. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified using the DESeq R package (1.10.1) and DEGSeq R package (1.12.0). Using KOBAS software to execute the KEGG bioinformatics analyses, enriched signaling pathways of DEGs involved in the occurrence of breast cancer were determined. Subsequently, quantitative real time PCR was used to verify the accuracy of the expression profile of key DEGs from the RNA-seq result and to explore the expression patterns of novel cancer-related genes on 8 different clinical individuals.

Results

The transcriptomic sequencing results showed 937 DEGs, including 487 upregulated and 450 downregulated genes in the breast cancer specimens. Further quantitative gene expression analysis was performed and captured 252 DEGs (201 downregulated and 51 upregulated) that showed the same differential expression pattern in all libraries. Finally, 6 upregulated DEGs (CST2, DRP2, CLEC5A, SCD, KIAA1211, DTL) and 6 downregulated DEGs (STAC2, BTNL9, CA4, CD300LG, GPIHBP1 and PIGR), were confirmed in a quantitative real time PCR comparison of breast cancer and paracancerous breast tissues from 8 clinical specimens. KEGG analysis revealed various pathway changes, including 20 upregulated and 21 downregulated gene enrichment pathways. The extracellular matrix–receptor (ECM-receptor) interaction pathway was the most enriched pathway: all genes in this pathway were DEGs, including the THBS family, collagen and fibronectin. These DEGs and the ECM-receptor interaction pathway may perform important roles in breast cancer.

Conclusion

Several potential breast cancer-related genes and pathways were captured, including 7 novel upregulated genes and 76 novel downregulated genes that were not found in other studies. These genes are related to cell proliferation, movement and adhesion. They may be important for research into breast cancer mechanisms, particularly CST2 and CA4. A key signaling pathway, the ECM-receptor interaction signal pathway, was also identified as possibly involved in the development of breast cancer.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s11658-019-0162-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Precision Medicine Versus Population Medicine in Colon Cancer: From Prospects of Prevention, Adjuvant Chemotherapy, and Surveillance

With the advances of technologic revolution that provides new insights into human biology, genetics and cancer, as well as advantages of big data which amasses large amounts of information for us to approach cancer treatment and prevention, we are facing challenges of organically combining data from studies based on general population and information from individual testing and setting out precisional recommendations in cancer diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. We are obligated to accelerate the adaptation of new scientific discoveries into effective treatments and prevention for cancer. In this review, we introduce our opinions on bringing knowledge of precision and population medicine together to guide our clinical practice from the prospects of colorectal cancer prevention, stage III colon cancer adjuvant therapy, and postsurgery surveillance.

Phenocopies in melanoma-prone families with germ-line CDKN2A mutations

PURPOSE

Carriers of CDKN2A mutations have high risks of melanoma and certain other cancers. In this study we examined the occurrence of tumors among CDKN2A wild type (wt) members of melanoma-prone families with CDKN2A mutations.

METHODS

Swedish and US melanoma-prone families with CDKN2A mutations were included. Data was collected on tumors diagnosed among family members. Among the CDKN2A mutated families, members with CDKN2A wt status who were diagnosed with melanoma were designated phenocopies.

RESULTS

Of patients with melanoma in the CDKN2A mutated families (n = 266), 7.1%, were seen among members with CDKN2A wt status (phenocopy rate). Among the CDKN2A wt family members of the CDKN2A mutated families (n = 256), 7.4% were diagnosed with melanoma. The prospective relative risk for melanomas was significantly higher among the CDKN2A wt subjects compared with population-based controls (7.4 (95% confidence interval 1.7-33.2)), while no elevated risks of nonmelanoma cancers were seen and their offspring did not have significantly elevated risks of melanoma or other cancers.

CONCLUSION

Members of CDKN2A mutation carrying families who test negative for their family's mutation have moderately increased risk for melanoma and should, in addition to being considered for continuing dermatologic surveillance, be encouraged to follow sun safety recommendations and practice skin self-exams.

Can chimerism explain breast/ovarian cancers in BRCA non-carriers from BRCA-positive families?

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is most frequently caused by mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (in short, BRCA) genes. The incidence of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in relatives of BRCA mutation carriers who test negative for the familial mutation (non-carriers) may be increased. However, the data is controversial, and at this time, these individuals are recommended the same cancer surveillance as general population. One possible explanation for BRCA phenocopies (close relatives of BRCA carriers who have developed cancer consistent with HBOC but tested negative for a familial mutation) is natural chimerism where lack of detectable mutation in blood may not rule out the presence of the mutation in the other tissues. To test this hypothesis, archival tumor tissue from eleven BRCA phenocopies was investigated. DNA from the tumor tissue was analyzed using sequence-specific PCR, capillary electrophoresis, and pyrosequencing. The familial mutations were originally detected in the patients’ first-degree relatives by commercial testing. The same testing detected no mutations in the blood of the patients under study. The test methods targeted only the known familial mutation in the tumor tissue. Tumor diagnoses included breast, ovarian, endometrial and primary peritoneal carcinoma. None of the familial mutations were found in the tumor samples tested. These results do not support, but do not completely exclude, the possibility of chimerism in these patients. Further studies with comprehensive sequence analysis in a larger patient group are warranted as a chimeric state would further refine the predictive value of genetic testing to include BRCA phenocopies.

No evidence of excessive cancer screening in female noncarriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families

BACKGROUND

In families with a proven BRCA1/2 mutation, women not carrying the familial mutation should follow the cancer screening recommendations applying to women in the general population. In the present study, we evaluated the cancer screening practices of unaffected noncarriers from families with a proven BRCA mutation, and we assessed the role of family history in their screening practices.

METHODS

Self-report data were provided retrospectively by 220 unaffected female noncarriers for periods of up to 10 years (mean: 4.3 years) since disclosure of their BRCA1/2 genetic test result. A ratio for the annual frequency of breast and ovarian cancer screening exams (mammography, breast ultrasonography, breast magnetic resonance imaging, transvaginal or pelvic ultrasound, cancer antigen 125 testing) was calculated as number of screening exams divided by the number of years in the individual observation period.

RESULTS

The annual average for mammography exams was 0.15, 0.4, 0.56, and 0.71 in women 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 years of age respectively. The uptake of other breast and ovarian cancer screening exams was very low. Mammography and breast ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging were generally more frequent among participants with at least 1 first-degree relative affected by breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

In most noncarriers, screening practices are consistent with the guidelines concerning women in the general population. When noncarriers adopt screening behaviours that are different from those that would be expected for average-risk women, those behaviours are influenced by their familial cancer history.

IMPACT

Decision tools might help female noncarriers to be involved in their follow-up in accordance with their genetic status and their family history, while taking into account the benefits and disadvantages of cancer screening.

No evidence of increased breast cancer risk for proven noncarriers from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families

In families screened for mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes and found to have a segregating mutation the breast cancer risk for women shown not to carry the family-specific mutation might be at above "average" risk. We assessed the risk of breast cancer in a clinic based cohort of 725 female proven noncarriers in 239 BRCA1 and BRCA2 families compared with birth-matched controls from the Danish Civil Registration System. Prospective analysis showed no significantly increased risk for breast cancer in noncarriers with a hazard ratio of 0.67 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.32-1.42, p = 0.29] for all family members who tested negative and 0.87 (95 % CI 0.38-1.97, p = 0.73) for non-carries who were first-degree relatives of mutation carriers. Proven noncarriers from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families have no markedly increased risk for breast cancer compared to the general population, and our data do not suggest targeted breast cancer surveillance for noncarriers from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families.

Antimüllerian hormone levels are lower in BRCA2 mutation carriers

OBJECTIVE

To compare antimüllerian hormone (AMH) levels in women at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer compared with healthy low-risk control women.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Reproductive-age women with a uterus and both ovaries were analyzed in four groups: BRCA1 mutation carriers, BRCA2 carriers, BRCA-negative women, and low-risk controls.

INTERVENTION(S)

Self-collected dried blood spot.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

AMH levels.

RESULT(S)

One hundred ninety-five women were included: 55 BRCA1 carriers, 50 BRCA2 carriers, 26 BRCA negative women, and 64 low-risk controls. After adjusting for confounders, BRCA2 carriers had AMH levels that were 33% lower than control women and an increased odds of having AMH <1 ng/mL. BRCA1 carriers and BRCA-negative women had AMH levels similar to control women. When analysis was restricted to regularly menstruating women younger than 40 years of age, BRCA2 carriers continued to demonstrate significantly lower AMH levels and increased likelihood of low AMH. Also, in this restricted group, BRCA-negative women demonstrated AMH levels that were 42% lower than control women. No difference in AMH was observed for BRCA1 carriers.

CONCLUSION(S)

We observed significantly lower AMH levels among BRCA2 carriers compared with low-risk control women. These results were stable across all models. BRCA-negative women also had lower AMH values, but only in models restricted to young regularly menstruating women. In contrast to earlier analyses, BRCA1 carriers had AMH values that were similar to low-risk control women, but this may be due to differences in the population studied.

Revertant mosaicism for family mutations is not observed in BRCA1/2 phenocopies

In BRCA1/2 families, early-onset breast cancer (BrCa) cases may be also observed among non-carrier relatives. These women are considered phenocopies and raise difficult counselling issues concerning the selection of the index case and the residual risks estimate in negative family members. Few studies investigated the presence of potential genetic susceptibility factors in phenocopies, mainly focussing on BrCa-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms. We hypothesized that, as for other Mendelian diseases, a revertant somatic mosaicism, resulting from spontaneous correction of a pathogenic mutation, might occur also in BRCA pedigrees. A putative low-level mosaicism in phenocopies, which has never been investigated, might be the causal factor undetected by standard diagnostic testing. We selected 16 non-carriers BrCa-affected from 15 BRCA1/2 families, and investigated the presence of mosaicism through MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. The analyses were performed on available tumour samples (7 cases), blood leukocytes, buccal mucosa and urine samples (2 cases) or on blood only (7 cases). In one family (n.8), real-time PCR was also performed to analyse the phenocopy and her healthy parents. On the 16 phenocopies we did not detect the family mutations neither in the tumour, expected to display the highest mutation frequency, nor in the other analysed tissues. In family 8, all the genotyping assays did not detect mosaicism in the phenocopy or her healthy parents, supporting the hypothesis of a de novo occurrence of the BRCA2 mutation identified in the proband. These results suggest that somatic mosaicism is not likely to be a common phenomenon in BRCA1/2 families. As our families fulfilled high-risk selection criteria, other genetic factors might be responsible for most of these cases and have a significant impact on risk assessment in BRCA1/2 families. Finally, we found a de novo BRCA2 mutation, suggesting that, although rare, this event should be taken into account in the evaluation of high-risk families.

Analysis of chromosomal radiosensitivity of healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers in BRCA families with the G2 micronucleus assay

Breast cancer risk drastically increases in individuals with a heterozygous germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, while it is estimated to equal the population risk for relatives without the familial mutation (non-carriers). The aim of the present study was to use a G2 phase-specific micronucleus assay to investigate whether lymphocytes of healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers are characterized by increased radiosensitivity compared to controls without a family history of breast/ovarian cancer and how this relates to healthy non-carrier relatives. BRCA2 is active in homologous recombination, a DNA damage repair pathway, specifically active in the late S/G2 phase of the cell cycle. We found a significantly increased radiosensitivity in a cohort of healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers compared to individuals without a familial history of breast cancer (P=0.046; Mann-Whitney U test). At the individual level, 50% of healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers showed a radiosensitive phenotype (radiosensitivity score of 1 or 2), whereas 83% of the controls showed no radiosensitivity (P=0.038; one-tailed Fishers exact test). An odds ratio of 5 (95% CI, 1.07–23.47) indicated an association between the BRCA2 mutation and radiosensitivity in healthy mutation carriers. These results indicate the need for the gentle use of ionizing radiation for either diagnostic or therapeutic use in BRCA2 mutation carriers. We detected no increased radiosensitivity in the non-carrier relatives.

Incorporating truncating variants in PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM into the BOADICEA breast cancer risk model

PURPOSE

The proliferation of gene panel testing precipitates the need for a breast cancer (BC) risk model that incorporates the effects of mutations in several genes and family history (FH). We extended the BOADICEA model to incorporate the effects of truncating variants in PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM.

METHODS

The BC incidence was modeled via the explicit effects of truncating variants in BRCA1/2, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM and other unobserved genetic effects using segregation analysis methods.

RESULTS

The predicted average BC risk by age 80 for an ATM mutation carrier is 28%, 30% for CHEK2, 50% for PALB2, and 74% for BRCA1 and BRCA2. However, the BC risks are predicted to increase with FH burden. In families with mutations, predicted risks for mutation-negative members depend on both FH and the specific mutation. The reduction in BC risk after negative predictive testing is greatest when a BRCA1 mutation is identified in the family, but for women whose relatives carry a CHEK2 or ATM mutation, the risks decrease slightly.

CONCLUSIONS

The model may be a valuable tool for counseling women who have undergone gene panel testing for providing consistent risks and harmonizing their clinical management. A Web application can be used to obtain BC risks in clinical practice (http://ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/boadicea/).Genet Med 18 12, 1190-1198.

Refining Breast Cancer Risk Stratification: Additional Genes, Additional Information

Recent advances in genomic technology have enabled far more rapid, less expensive sequencing of multiple genes than was possible only a few years ago. Advances in bioinformatics also facilitate the interpretation of large amounts of genomic data. New strategies for cancer genetic risk assessment include multiplex sequencing panels of 5 to more than 100 genes (in which rare mutations are often associated with at least two times the average risk of developing breast cancer) and panels of common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), combinations of which are generally associated with more modest cancer risks (more than twofold). Although these new multiple-gene panel tests are used in oncology practice, questions remain about the clinical validity and the clinical utility of their results. To translate this increasingly complex genetic information for clinical use, cancer risk prediction tools are under development that consider the joint effects of all susceptibility genes, together with other established breast cancer risk factors. Risk-adapted screening and prevention protocols are underway, with ongoing refinement as genetic knowledge grows. Priority areas for future research include the clinical validity and clinical utility of emerging genetic tests; the accuracy of developing cancer risk prediction models; and the long-term outcomes of risk-adapted screening and prevention protocols, in terms of patients' experiences and survival.

Clinical follow-up and breast and ovarian cancer screening of true BRCA1/2 noncarriers: a qualitative investigation

PURPOSE

Most women from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families who did not inherit the familial mutation have breast and ovarian cancer risks similar to those of women of the same age in the general population. However, recent studies suggest that some of these noncarriers may exhibit screening practices that may be considered as excessive compared to general population screening guidelines. Reasons for such tendencies remain largely unknown. This study aims to better understand how the implications of a noncarrier status are explained to these women and how their own realization of this status affects their screening behaviors.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted with five focus groups (n = 28) in Quebec City and Montreal, Canada.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of the discussions highlighted four major themes: (i) acquiring a noncarrier identity takes place progressively; (ii) noncarriers show a range of opinions about screening; (iii) noncarriers have mixed feelings about the follow-up by their physicians and gynecologists; and (iv) noncarriers need more information in a context where genetics progresses ever more rapidly.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide novel insights regarding the physician-patient interaction and the organizational aspects of the health-care system that may significantly impact the cancer screening practices of BRCA1/2 noncarriers.Genet Med 18 6, 627-634.

Next-generation sequencing for hereditary breast and gynecologic cancer risk assessment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize advances in next-generation sequencing and their application to breast and gynecologic cancer risk assessment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Next-generation sequencing panels of 6-112 cancer-associated genes are increasingly used in patient care. Studies report a 4-16% prevalence of mutations other than BRCA1/2 among patients who meet evidence-based practice guidelines for BRCA1/2 testing, with a high rate (15-88%) of uninterpretable variants of uncertain significance. Despite uncertainty about results interpretation and communication, there is early evidence of a benefit from multiple-gene sequencing panels for appropriately selected patients.

SUMMARY

Multiple-gene sequencing panels appear highly promising for the assessment of breast and gynecologic cancer risk, and they may usefully be administered in the context of cancer genetics expertise and/or clinical research protocols.

Detection of novel germline mutations for breast cancer in non-BRCA1/2 families

The identification of the breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 enhanced clinicians' ability to select high-risk individuals for aggressive surveillance and prevention, and led to the development of targeted therapies. However, BRCA1/2 mutations account for only 25% of familial breast cancer cases. To systematically identify rare, probably pathogenic variants in familial cases of breast cancer without BRCA1/2 mutations, we developed a list of 312 genes, and performed targeted DNA enrichment coupled to multiplex next-generation sequencing on 104 'BRCAx' patients and 101 geographically matched controls in Ireland. As expected, this strategy allowed us to identify mutations in several well-known high-susceptibility and moderate-susceptibility genes, including ATM (~ 5%), RAD50 (~ 3%), CHEK2 (~ 2%), TP53 (~ 1%), PALB2 (~ 1%), and MRE11A (~ 1%). However, we also identified novel pathogenic variants in 30 other genes, which, when taken together, potentially explain the etiology of the missing heritability in up to 35% of BRCAx patients. These included novel potential pathogenic mutations in MAP3K1, CASP8, RAD51B, ZNF217, CDKN2B-AS1, and ERBB2, including a splice site mutation, which we predict would generate a constitutively active HER2 protein. Taken together, this work extends our understanding of the genetics of familial breast cancer, and supports the need to implement hereditary multigene panel testing to more appropriately orientate clinical management.

Proven non-carriers in BRCA families have an earlier age of onset of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Risk estimates for proven non-carriers in BRCA mutation families are inconsistent for breast cancer and lacking for ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess the age-related risks for breast and ovarian cancer for proven non-carriers in these families.

METHODS

A consecutive cohort study ascertained 464 proven non-carriers who had a first-degree relative with a pathogenic BRCA mutation. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate the age-related cancer risks, and we calculated standardised incidence ratios.

RESULTS

In the 464 non-carriers, 17 breast cancers and two ovarian cancers were detected at a mean age of 47 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 32-61) and 49 years (95% CI 32-67), respectively. Overall, by the age of 50, the breast and ovarian cancer risks among non-carriers were 6.4% (95% CI 2.9-9.8%) and 0.4% (95% CI 0-1.3%), of which the breast cancer risk was statistically significantly higher than the risk in the general population. In particular, the number of breast cancers among non-carriers in BRCA1 families was higher than expected for the general population (standardised incidence ratio (SIR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.3). In the BRCA1 cohort, the mean number of breast cancer cases was higher in families in which non-carriers were diagnosed before the age of 50 (p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

The age at diagnosis of breast cancer in non-carriers in BRCA mutation families is younger than expected, yielding an increased risk in the fifth decade. This effect is most evident in BRCA1 families. If our results are confirmed by others, this could affect the advice given on breast cancer screening to proven non-carriers between the age of 40 and 50 in such families.

Evidence that BRCA1- or BRCA2-associated cancers are not inevitable

Inheriting a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation can cause a deficiency in repairing complex DNA damage. This step leads to genomic instability and probably contributes to an inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer. Complex DNA damage has been viewed as an integral part of DNA replication before cell division. It causes temporary replication blocks, replication fork collapse, chromosome breaks and sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs). Chemical modification of DNA may also occur spontaneously as a byproduct of normal processes. Pathways containing BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene products are essential to repair spontaneous complex DNA damage or to carry out SCEs if repair is not possible. This scenario creates a theoretical limit that effectively means there are spontaneous BRCA1/2-associated cancers that cannot be prevented or delayed. However, much evidence for high rates of spontaneous DNA mutation is based on measuring SCEs by using bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU). Here we find that the routine use of BrdU has probably led to overestimating spontaneous DNA damage and SCEs because BrdU is itself a mutagen. Evidence based on spontaneous chromosome abnormalities and epidemiologic data indicates strong effects from exogenous mutagens and does not support the inevitability of cancer in all BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We therefore remove a theoretical argument that has limited efforts to develop chemoprevention strategies to delay or prevent cancers in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Improving mutation notification when new genetic information is identified in research: a trial of two strategies in familial breast cancer

PURPOSE

The Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Aspects of Breast Cancer (kConFab) is a large-scale research study that notifies participants when new, personally relevant, information is discovered. In 2009, the (kConFab) instituted an intensive notification process to ensure at-risk individuals were effectively notified. This study (i) evaluated the impact of intensive notification on genetic testing uptake; (ii) identified those most likely to undergo testing postnotification; and (iii) identified those most likely to acknowledge that they had been notified.

METHODS

Clinical/demographic data were retrieved from the (kConFab) database. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify potential predictors of testing uptake and notification acknowledgment using IBM SPSS.

RESULTS

A total of 155 of 1,812 individuals underwent testing after standard notification (8.6%). In comparison, 23/291 individuals (7.9%) notified using the "intensive" approach underwent testing (χ(2) = 0.14; P = 0.71). After controlling for notification process, females and participants with a previous cancer were most likely to have undergone testing (P < 0.006). Older individuals (50+ years) were most likely to acknowledge they had been notified (P = 0.038).

CONCLUSION

Increasing the intensity of participant follow-up did not increase genetic testing uptake. The challenge to effectively notify participants, and increase the proportion whose risk is managed clinically, remains, particularly for males and individuals unaffected by cancer.Genet Med 2013:15(3):187-194.

Higher cytoplasmic and nuclear poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase expression in familial than in sporadic breast cancer

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP) is a key element of the single-base excision pathway for repair of DNA single-strand breaks. To compare the cytoplasmic and nuclear poly(ADP-ribose) expression between familial (BRCA1, BRCA2, or non BRCA1/2) and sporadic breast cancer, we investigated 39 sporadic and 39 familial breast cancer cases. The two groups were matched for hormone receptor status and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Additionally, they were matched by grading with a maximum difference of ±1 degree (e.g., G2 instead of G3). Cytoplasmic PARP (cPARP) expression was significantly higher in familial compared to sporadic breast cancer (P = 0.008, chi-squared test for trends) and a high nuclear PARP expression (nPARP) was significantly more frequently observed in familial breast cancer (64 %) compared with sporadic breast cancer (36 %) (P = 0.005, chi-squared test). The overall PARP expression was significantly higher in familial breast cancer (P = 0.042, chi-squared test). In familial breast cancer, a combination of high cPARP and high nPARP expression is the most common (33 %), whereas in sporadic breast cancer, a combination of low cPARP and intermediate nPARP expression is the most common (39 %). Our results show that the overall PARP expression in familial breast cancer is higher than in sporadic breast cancer which might suggest they might respond better to treatment with PARP inhibitors.