Is there a difference in testosterone levels and its regulators in men carrying BRCA mutations?

BRCA Mutations and Fertility Preservation

Hereditary cancers mostly affect the adolescent and young adult population (AYA) at reproductive age. Mutations in BReast CAncer (BRCA) genes are responsible for the majority of cases of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 act as tumor suppressor genes as they are key regulators of DNA repair through homologous recombination. Evidence of the accumulation of DNA double-strand break has been reported in aging oocytes, while BRCA expression decreases, leading to the hypothesis that BRCA mutation may impact fertility. Moreover, patients exposed to anticancer treatments are at higher risk of fertility-related issues, and BRCA mutations could exacerbate the treatment-induced depletion of the ovarian reserve. In this review, we summarized the functions of both genes and reported the current knowledge on the impact of BRCA mutations on ovarian ageing, premature ovarian insufficiency, female fertility preservation strategies and insights about male infertility. Altogether, this review provides relevant up-to-date information on the impact of BRCA1/2 mutations on fertility. Notably, BRCA-mutated patients should be adequately counselled for fertility preservation strategies, considering their higher sensitivity to chemotherapy gonadotoxic effects.

Oncogenic BRCA1,2 Mutations in the Human Lineage-A By-Product of Sexual Selection?

In this review, we discuss the long-known problem of tissue-specific carcinogenesis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: while the genes are expressed ubiquitously, increased cancer risk is observed mostly in the breast and ovaries, and to a much lesser extent, in some other tissues such as the prostate or pancreas. We reevaluate hypotheses on the evolutionary origin of these mutations in humans. Also, we align together the reports that at least some great apes have much lower risks of epithelial cancers in general and breast cancer in particular with the fact that humans have more voluminous breast tissue as compared to their closest extant relatives, particularly chimpanzees and bonobos. We conjecture that this disparity may be a consequence of sexual selection, augmented via selection for enhanced lactation. Further, we argue that there is an organ-specific enigma similar to the Peto paradox: breast cancer risk in humans is only minimally correlated with breast size. These considerations lead to the hypothesis that, along with the evolutionary development of larger breasts in humans, additional changes have played a balancing role in suppressing breast cancer. These yet-to-be-discovered mechanisms, while purely speculative, may be valuable to understanding human breast cancer, though they may not be exclusive to the mammary gland epithelial cells. Combining these themes, we review some anti-carcinogenesis preventive strategies and prospects of new interventions against breast cancer.

Serum testosterone and prostate cancer in men with germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants

Objectives

The relation of serum androgens and the development of prostate cancer (PCa) is subject of debate. Lower total testosterone (TT) levels have been associated with increased PCa detection and worse pathological features after treatment. However, data from the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) and Prostate Cancer Prevention (PCPT) trial groups indicate no association. The aim of this study is to investigate the association of serum androgen levels and PCa detection in a prospective screening study of men at higher genetic risk of aggressive PCa due to BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs), the IMPACT study.

Methods

Men enrolled in the IMPACT study provided serum samples during regular visits. Hormonal levels were calculated using immunoassays. Free testosterone (FT) was calculated from TT and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) using the Sodergard mass equation. Age, body mass index (BMI), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and hormonal concentrations were compared between genetic cohorts. We also explored associations between age and TT, SHBG, FT and PCa, in the whole subset and stratified by BRCA1/2 PVs status.

Results

A total of 777 participants in the IMPACT study had TT and SHBG measurements in serum samples at annual visits, giving 3940 prospective androgen levels, from 266 BRCA1 PVs carriers, 313 BRCA2 PVs carriers and 198 non-carriers. The median number of visits per patient was 5. There was no difference in TT, SHBG and FT between carriers and non-carriers. In a univariate analysis, androgen levels were not associated with PCa. In the analysis stratified by carrier status, no significant association was found between hormonal levels and PCa in non-carriers, BRCA1 or BRCA2 PVs carriers.

Conclusions

Male BRCA1/2 PVs carriers have a similar androgen profile to non-carriers. Hormonal levels were not associated with PCa in men with and without BRCA1/2 PVs. Mechanisms related to the particularly aggressive phenotype of PCa in BRCA2 PVs carriers may therefore not be linked with circulating hormonal levels.