1
|
Robson M, Im SA, Senkus E, Xu B, Domchek SM, Masuda N, Delaloge S, Li W, Tung N, Armstrong A, Wu W, Goessl C, Runswick S, Conte P. Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. N Engl J Med 2017; 377:523-533. [PMID: 28578601 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1706450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2203] [Impact Index Per Article: 275.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Olaparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that has promising antitumor activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. METHODS We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial in which olaparib monotherapy was compared with standard therapy in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or standard therapy with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, or vinorelbine in 21-day cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review and was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS Of the 302 patients who underwent randomization, 205 were assigned to receive olaparib and 97 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the standard-therapy group (7.0 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.43 to 0.80; P<0.001). The response rate was 59.9% in the olaparib group and 28.8% in the standard-therapy group. The rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 36.6% in the olaparib group and 50.5% in the standard-therapy group, and the rate of treatment discontinuation due to toxic effects was 4.9% and 7.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation, olaparib monotherapy provided a significant benefit over standard therapy; median progression-free survival was 2.8 months longer and the risk of disease progression or death was 42% lower with olaparib monotherapy than with standard therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; OlympiAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02000622 .).
Collapse
|
Clinical Trial, Phase III |
8 |
2203 |
2
|
Tutt A, Robson M, Garber JE, Domchek SM, Audeh MW, Weitzel JN, Friedlander M, Arun B, Loman N, Schmutzler RK, Wardley A, Mitchell G, Earl H, Wickens M, Carmichael J. Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet 2010; 376:235-44. [PMID: 20609467 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60892-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1355] [Impact Index Per Article: 90.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Olaparib, a novel, orally active poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, induced synthetic lethality in BRCA-deficient cells. A maximum tolerated dose and initial signal of efficacy in BRCA-deficient ovarian cancers have been reported. We therefore assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of olaparib alone in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer. METHODS Women (aged >or=18 years) with confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and recurrent, advanced breast cancer were assigned to two sequential cohorts in a phase 2 study undertaken in 16 centres in Australia, Germany, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA. The first cohort (n=27) was given continuous oral olaparib at the maximum tolerated dose (400 mg twice daily), and the second (n=27) was given a lower dose (100 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00494234. FINDINGS Patients had been given a median of three previous chemotherapy regimens (range 1-5 in cohort 1, and 2-4 in cohort 2). ORR was 11 (41%) of 27 patients (95% CI 25-59) in the cohort assigned to 400 mg twice daily, and six (22%) of 27 (11-41) in the cohort assigned to 100 mg twice daily. Toxicities were mainly at low grades. The most frequent causally related adverse events in the cohort given 400 mg twice daily were fatigue (grade 1 or 2, 11 [41%]; grade 3 or 4, four [15%]), nausea (grade 1 or 2, 11 [41%]; grade 3 or 4, four [15%]), vomiting (grade 1 or 2, three [11%]; grade 3 or 4, three [11%]), and anaemia (grade 1 or 2, one [4%]; grade 3 or 4, three [11%]). The most frequent causally related adverse events in the cohort given 100 mg twice daily were nausea (grade 1 or 2, 11 [41%]; none grade 3 or 4) and fatigue (grade 1 or 2, seven [26%]; grade 3 or 4, one [4%]). INTERPRETATION The results of this study provide positive proof of concept for PARP inhibition in BRCA-deficient breast cancers and shows a favourable therapeutic index for a novel targeted treatment strategy in patients with tumours that have genetic loss of function of BRCA1-associated or BRCA2-associated DNA repair. Toxicity in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations was similar to that reported previously in those without such mutations. FUNDING AstraZeneca.
Collapse
|
Clinical Trial, Phase II |
15 |
1355 |
3
|
Pritchard CC, Mateo J, Walsh MF, De Sarkar N, Abida W, Beltran H, Garofalo A, Gulati R, Carreira S, Eeles R, Elemento O, Rubin MA, Robinson D, Lonigro R, Hussain M, Chinnaiyan A, Vinson J, Filipenko J, Garraway L, Taplin ME, AlDubayan S, Han GC, Beightol M, Morrissey C, Nghiem B, Cheng HH, Montgomery B, Walsh T, Casadei S, Berger M, Zhang L, Zehir A, Vijai J, Scher HI, Sawyers C, Schultz N, Kantoff PW, Solit D, Robson M, Van Allen EM, Offit K, de Bono J, Nelson PS. Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations in Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375:443-53. [PMID: 27433846 PMCID: PMC4986616 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1603144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1205] [Impact Index Per Article: 133.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Inherited mutations in DNA-repair genes such as BRCA2 are associated with increased risks of lethal prostate cancer. Although the prevalence of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with localized prostate cancer who are unselected for family predisposition is insufficient to warrant routine testing, the frequency of such mutations in patients with metastatic prostate cancer has not been established. METHODS We recruited 692 men with documented metastatic prostate cancer who were unselected for family history of cancer or age at diagnosis. We isolated germline DNA and used multiplex sequencing assays to assess mutations in 20 DNA-repair genes associated with autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndromes. RESULTS A total of 84 germline DNA-repair gene mutations that were presumed to be deleterious were identified in 82 men (11.8%); mutations were found in 16 genes, including BRCA2 (37 men [5.3%]), ATM (11 [1.6%]), CHEK2 (10 [1.9% of 534 men with data]), BRCA1 (6 [0.9%]), RAD51D (3 [0.4%]), and PALB2 (3 [0.4%]). Mutation frequencies did not differ according to whether a family history of prostate cancer was present or according to age at diagnosis. Overall, the frequency of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic prostate cancer significantly exceeded the prevalence of 4.6% among 499 men with localized prostate cancer (P<0.001), including men with high-risk disease, and the prevalence of 2.7% in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, which includes 53,105 persons without a known cancer diagnosis (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In our multicenter study, the incidence of germline mutations in genes mediating DNA-repair processes among men with metastatic prostate cancer was 11.8%, which was significantly higher than the incidence among men with localized prostate cancer. The frequencies of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic disease did not differ significantly according to age at diagnosis or family history of prostate cancer. (Funded by Stand Up To Cancer and others.).
Collapse
|
Multicenter Study |
9 |
1205 |
4
|
Mosele F, Remon J, Mateo J, Westphalen CB, Barlesi F, Lolkema MP, Normanno N, Scarpa A, Robson M, Meric-Bernstam F, Wagle N, Stenzinger A, Bonastre J, Bayle A, Michiels S, Bièche I, Rouleau E, Jezdic S, Douillard JY, Reis-Filho JS, Dienstmann R, André F. Recommendations for the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for patients with metastatic cancers: a report from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group. Ann Oncol 2020; 31:1491-1505. [PMID: 32853681 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.07.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 736] [Impact Index Per Article: 147.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/20/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows sequencing of a high number of nucleotides in a short time frame at an affordable cost. While this technology has been widely implemented, there are no recommendations from scientific societies about its use in oncology practice. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) is proposing three levels of recommendations for the use of NGS. Based on the current evidence, ESMO recommends routine use of NGS on tumour samples in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), prostate cancers, ovarian cancers and cholangiocarcinoma. In these tumours, large multigene panels could be used if they add acceptable extra cost compared with small panels. In colon cancers, NGS could be an alternative to PCR. In addition, based on the KN158 trial and considering that patients with endometrial and small-cell lung cancers should have broad access to anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD1) antibodies, it is recommended to test tumour mutational burden (TMB) in cervical cancers, well- and moderately-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours, salivary cancers, thyroid cancers and vulvar cancers, as TMB-high predicted response to pembrolizumab in these cancers. Outside the indications of multigene panels, and considering that the use of large panels of genes could lead to few clinically meaningful responders, ESMO acknowledges that a patient and a doctor could decide together to order a large panel of genes, pending no extra cost for the public health care system and if the patient is informed about the low likelihood of benefit. ESMO recommends that the use of off-label drugs matched to genomics is done only if an access programme and a procedure of decision has been developed at the national or regional level. Finally, ESMO recommends that clinical research centres develop multigene sequencing as a tool to screen patients eligible for clinical trials and to accelerate drug development, and prospectively capture the data that could further inform how to optimise the use of this technology.
Collapse
|
Review |
5 |
736 |
5
|
Gennari A, André F, Barrios CH, Cortés J, de Azambuja E, DeMichele A, Dent R, Fenlon D, Gligorov J, Hurvitz SA, Im SA, Krug D, Kunz WG, Loi S, Penault-Llorca F, Ricke J, Robson M, Rugo HS, Saura C, Schmid P, Singer CF, Spanic T, Tolaney SM, Turner NC, Curigliano G, Loibl S, Paluch-Shimon S, Harbeck N. ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for the diagnosis, staging and treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2021; 32:1475-1495. [PMID: 34678411 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 680] [Impact Index Per Article: 170.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2021] [Accepted: 09/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
|
Practice Guideline |
4 |
680 |
6
|
Easton DF, Pharoah PDP, Antoniou AC, Tischkowitz M, Tavtigian SV, Nathanson KL, Devilee P, Meindl A, Couch FJ, Southey M, Goldgar DE, Evans DGR, Chenevix-Trench G, Rahman N, Robson M, Domchek SM, Foulkes WD. Gene-panel sequencing and the prediction of breast-cancer risk. N Engl J Med 2015; 372:2243-57. [PMID: 26014596 PMCID: PMC4610139 DOI: 10.1056/nejmsr1501341] [Citation(s) in RCA: 668] [Impact Index Per Article: 66.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
10 |
668 |
7
|
Mavaddat N, Michailidou K, Dennis J, Lush M, Fachal L, Lee A, Tyrer JP, Chen TH, Wang Q, Bolla MK, Yang X, Adank MA, Ahearn T, Aittomäki K, Allen J, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antonenkova NN, Arndt V, Aronson KJ, Auer PL, Auvinen P, Barrdahl M, Beane Freeman LE, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bernstein L, Blomqvist C, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Bonanni B, Børresen-Dale AL, Brauch H, Bremer M, Brenner H, Brentnall A, Brock IW, Brooks-Wilson A, Brucker SY, Brüning T, Burwinkel B, Campa D, Carter BD, Castelao JE, Chanock SJ, Chlebowski R, Christiansen H, Clarke CL, Collée JM, Cordina-Duverger E, Cornelissen S, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dumont M, Durcan L, Dwek M, Eccles DM, Ekici AB, Eliassen AH, Ellberg C, Engel C, Eriksson M, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Figueroa J, Fletcher O, Flyger H, Försti A, Fritschi L, Gabrielson M, Gago-Dominguez M, Gapstur SM, García-Sáenz JA, Gaudet MM, Georgoulias V, Giles GG, Gilyazova IR, Glendon G, Goldberg MS, Goldgar DE, González-Neira A, Grenaker Alnæs GI, Grip M, Gronwald J, Grundy A, Guénel P, Haeberle L, Hahnen E, Haiman CA, Håkansson N, Hamann U, Hankinson SE, et alMavaddat N, Michailidou K, Dennis J, Lush M, Fachal L, Lee A, Tyrer JP, Chen TH, Wang Q, Bolla MK, Yang X, Adank MA, Ahearn T, Aittomäki K, Allen J, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antonenkova NN, Arndt V, Aronson KJ, Auer PL, Auvinen P, Barrdahl M, Beane Freeman LE, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bernstein L, Blomqvist C, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Bonanni B, Børresen-Dale AL, Brauch H, Bremer M, Brenner H, Brentnall A, Brock IW, Brooks-Wilson A, Brucker SY, Brüning T, Burwinkel B, Campa D, Carter BD, Castelao JE, Chanock SJ, Chlebowski R, Christiansen H, Clarke CL, Collée JM, Cordina-Duverger E, Cornelissen S, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dumont M, Durcan L, Dwek M, Eccles DM, Ekici AB, Eliassen AH, Ellberg C, Engel C, Eriksson M, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Figueroa J, Fletcher O, Flyger H, Försti A, Fritschi L, Gabrielson M, Gago-Dominguez M, Gapstur SM, García-Sáenz JA, Gaudet MM, Georgoulias V, Giles GG, Gilyazova IR, Glendon G, Goldberg MS, Goldgar DE, González-Neira A, Grenaker Alnæs GI, Grip M, Gronwald J, Grundy A, Guénel P, Haeberle L, Hahnen E, Haiman CA, Håkansson N, Hamann U, Hankinson SE, Harkness EF, Hart SN, He W, Hein A, Heyworth J, Hillemanns P, Hollestelle A, Hooning MJ, Hoover RN, Hopper JL, Howell A, Huang G, Humphreys K, Hunter DJ, Jakimovska M, Jakubowska A, Janni W, John EM, Johnson N, Jones ME, Jukkola-Vuorinen A, Jung A, Kaaks R, Kaczmarek K, Kataja V, Keeman R, Kerin MJ, Khusnutdinova E, Kiiski JI, Knight JA, Ko YD, Kosma VM, Koutros S, Kristensen VN, Krüger U, Kühl T, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lee E, Lejbkowicz F, Lilyquist J, Lindblom A, Lindström S, Lissowska J, Lo WY, Loibl S, Long J, Lubiński J, Lux MP, MacInnis RJ, Maishman T, Makalic E, Maleva Kostovska I, Mannermaa A, Manoukian S, Margolin S, Martens JWM, Martinez ME, Mavroudis D, McLean C, Meindl A, Menon U, Middha P, Miller N, Moreno F, Mulligan AM, Mulot C, Muñoz-Garzon VM, Neuhausen SL, Nevanlinna H, Neven P, Newman WG, Nielsen SF, Nordestgaard BG, Norman A, Offit K, Olson JE, Olsson H, Orr N, Pankratz VS, Park-Simon TW, Perez JIA, Pérez-Barrios C, Peterlongo P, Peto J, Pinchev M, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, Polley EC, Prentice R, Presneau N, Prokofyeva D, Purrington K, Pylkäs K, Rack B, Radice P, Rau-Murthy R, Rennert G, Rennert HS, Rhenius V, Robson M, Romero A, Ruddy KJ, Ruebner M, Saloustros E, Sandler DP, Sawyer EJ, Schmidt DF, Schmutzler RK, Schneeweiss A, Schoemaker MJ, Schumacher F, Schürmann P, Schwentner L, Scott C, Scott RJ, Seynaeve C, Shah M, Sherman ME, Shrubsole MJ, Shu XO, Slager S, Smeets A, Sohn C, Soucy P, Southey MC, Spinelli JJ, Stegmaier C, Stone J, Swerdlow AJ, Tamimi RM, Tapper WJ, Taylor JA, Terry MB, Thöne K, Tollenaar RAEM, Tomlinson I, Truong T, Tzardi M, Ulmer HU, Untch M, Vachon CM, van Veen EM, Vijai J, Weinberg CR, Wendt C, Whittemore AS, Wildiers H, Willett W, Winqvist R, Wolk A, Yang XR, Yannoukakos D, Zhang Y, Zheng W, Ziogas A, Dunning AM, Thompson DJ, Chenevix-Trench G, Chang-Claude J, Schmidt MK, Hall P, Milne RL, Pharoah PDP, Antoniou AC, Chatterjee N, Kraft P, García-Closas M, Simard J, Easton DF. Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes. Am J Hum Genet 2019; 104:21-34. [PMID: 30554720 PMCID: PMC6323553 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.002] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 637] [Impact Index Per Article: 106.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2018] [Accepted: 11/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Stratification of women according to their risk of breast cancer based on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could improve screening and prevention strategies. Our aim was to develop PRSs, optimized for prediction of estrogen receptor (ER)-specific disease, from the largest available genome-wide association dataset and to empirically validate the PRSs in prospective studies. The development dataset comprised 94,075 case subjects and 75,017 control subjects of European ancestry from 69 studies, divided into training and validation sets. Samples were genotyped using genome-wide arrays, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected by stepwise regression or lasso penalized regression. The best performing PRSs were validated in an independent test set comprising 11,428 case subjects and 18,323 control subjects from 10 prospective studies and 190,040 women from UK Biobank (3,215 incident breast cancers). For the best PRSs (313 SNPs), the odds ratio for overall disease per 1 standard deviation in ten prospective studies was 1.61 (95%CI: 1.57-1.65) with area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) = 0.630 (95%CI: 0.628-0.651). The lifetime risk of overall breast cancer in the top centile of the PRSs was 32.6%. Compared with women in the middle quintile, those in the highest 1% of risk had 4.37- and 2.78-fold risks, and those in the lowest 1% of risk had 0.16- and 0.27-fold risks, of developing ER-positive and ER-negative disease, respectively. Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that this PRS was well calibrated and predicts disease risk accurately in the tails of the distribution. This PRS is a powerful and reliable predictor of breast cancer risk that may improve breast cancer prevention programs.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
6 |
637 |
8
|
Satagopan JM, Ben-Porat L, Berwick M, Robson M, Kutler D, Auerbach AD. A note on competing risks in survival data analysis. Br J Cancer 2004; 91:1229-35. [PMID: 15305188 PMCID: PMC2410013 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602102] [Citation(s) in RCA: 559] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Survival analysis encompasses investigation of time to event data. In most clinical studies, estimating the cumulative incidence function (or the probability of experiencing an event by a given time) is of primary interest. When the data consist of patients who experience an event and censored individuals, a nonparametric estimate of the cumulative incidence can be obtained using the Kaplan-Meier method. Under this approach, the censoring mechanism is assumed to be noninformative. In other words, the survival time of an individual (or the time at which a subject experiences an event) is assumed to be independent of a mechanism that would cause the patient to be censored. Often times, a patient may experience an event other than the one of interest which alters the probability of experiencing the event of interest. Such events are known as competing risk events. In this setting, it would often be of interest to calculate the cumulative incidence of a specific event of interest. Any subject who does not experience the event of interest can be treated as censored. However, a patient experiencing a competing risk event is censored in an informative manner. Hence, the Kaplan-Meier estimation procedure may not be directly applicable. The cumulative incidence function for an event of interest must be calculated by appropriately accounting for the presence of competing risk events. In this paper, we illustrate nonparametric estimation of the cumulative incidence function for an event of interest in the presence of competing risk events using two published data sets. We compare the resulting estimates with those obtained using the Kaplan-Meier approach to demonstrate the importance of appropriately estimating the cumulative incidence of an event of interest in the presence of competing risk events.
Collapse
|
Review |
21 |
559 |
9
|
Mavaddat N, Barrowdale D, Andrulis IL, Domchek SM, Eccles D, Nevanlinna H, Ramus SJ, Spurdle A, Robson M, Sherman M, Mulligan AM, Couch FJ, Engel C, McGuffog L, Healey S, Sinilnikova OM, Southey MC, Terry MB, Goldgar D, O'Malley F, John EM, Janavicius R, Tihomirova L, Hansen TVO, Nielsen FC, Osorio A, Stavropoulou A, Benítez J, Manoukian S, Peissel B, Barile M, Volorio S, Pasini B, Dolcetti R, Putignano AL, Ottini L, Radice P, Hamann U, Rashid MU, Hogervorst FB, Kriege M, van der Luijt RB, Peock S, Frost D, Evans DG, Brewer C, Walker L, Rogers MT, Side LE, Houghton C, Weaver J, Godwin AK, Schmutzler RK, Wappenschmidt B, Meindl A, Kast K, Arnold N, Niederacher D, Sutter C, Deissler H, Gadzicki D, Preisler-Adams S, Varon-Mateeva R, Schönbuchner I, Gevensleben H, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Belotti M, Barjhoux L, Isaacs C, Peshkin BN, Caldes T, de la Hoya M, Cañadas C, Heikkinen T, Heikkilä P, Aittomäki K, Blanco I, Lazaro C, Brunet J, Agnarsson BA, Arason A, Barkardottir RB, Dumont M, Simard J, Montagna M, Agata S, D'Andrea E, Yan M, Fox S, Rebbeck TR, Rubinstein W, Tung N, Garber JE, Wang X, Fredericksen Z, Pankratz VS, Lindor NM, Szabo C, Offit K, Sakr R, et alMavaddat N, Barrowdale D, Andrulis IL, Domchek SM, Eccles D, Nevanlinna H, Ramus SJ, Spurdle A, Robson M, Sherman M, Mulligan AM, Couch FJ, Engel C, McGuffog L, Healey S, Sinilnikova OM, Southey MC, Terry MB, Goldgar D, O'Malley F, John EM, Janavicius R, Tihomirova L, Hansen TVO, Nielsen FC, Osorio A, Stavropoulou A, Benítez J, Manoukian S, Peissel B, Barile M, Volorio S, Pasini B, Dolcetti R, Putignano AL, Ottini L, Radice P, Hamann U, Rashid MU, Hogervorst FB, Kriege M, van der Luijt RB, Peock S, Frost D, Evans DG, Brewer C, Walker L, Rogers MT, Side LE, Houghton C, Weaver J, Godwin AK, Schmutzler RK, Wappenschmidt B, Meindl A, Kast K, Arnold N, Niederacher D, Sutter C, Deissler H, Gadzicki D, Preisler-Adams S, Varon-Mateeva R, Schönbuchner I, Gevensleben H, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Belotti M, Barjhoux L, Isaacs C, Peshkin BN, Caldes T, de la Hoya M, Cañadas C, Heikkinen T, Heikkilä P, Aittomäki K, Blanco I, Lazaro C, Brunet J, Agnarsson BA, Arason A, Barkardottir RB, Dumont M, Simard J, Montagna M, Agata S, D'Andrea E, Yan M, Fox S, Rebbeck TR, Rubinstein W, Tung N, Garber JE, Wang X, Fredericksen Z, Pankratz VS, Lindor NM, Szabo C, Offit K, Sakr R, Gaudet MM, Singer CF, Tea MK, Rappaport C, Mai PL, Greene MH, Sokolenko A, Imyanitov E, Toland AE, Senter L, Sweet K, Thomassen M, Gerdes AM, Kruse T, Caligo M, Aretini P, Rantala J, von Wachenfeld A, Henriksson K, Steele L, Neuhausen SL, Nussbaum R, Beattie M, Odunsi K, Sucheston L, Gayther SA, Nathanson K, Gross J, Walsh C, Karlan B, Chenevix-Trench G, Easton DF, Antoniou AC. Pathology of breast and ovarian cancers among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012; 21:134-47. [PMID: 22144499 PMCID: PMC3272407 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-0775] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 480] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previously, small studies have found that BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast tumors differ in their pathology. Analysis of larger datasets of mutation carriers should allow further tumor characterization. METHODS We used data from 4,325 BRCA1 and 2,568 BRCA2 mutation carriers to analyze the pathology of invasive breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancers. RESULTS There was strong evidence that the proportion of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast tumors decreased with age at diagnosis among BRCA1 (P-trend = 1.2 × 10(-5)), but increased with age at diagnosis among BRCA2, carriers (P-trend = 6.8 × 10(-6)). The proportion of triple-negative tumors decreased with age at diagnosis in BRCA1 carriers but increased with age at diagnosis of BRCA2 carriers. In both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, ER-negative tumors were of higher histologic grade than ER-positive tumors (grade 3 vs. grade 1; P = 1.2 × 10(-13) for BRCA1 and P = 0.001 for BRCA2). ER and progesterone receptor (PR) expression were independently associated with mutation carrier status [ER-positive odds ratio (OR) for BRCA2 = 9.4, 95% CI: 7.0-12.6 and PR-positive OR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3-2.3, under joint analysis]. Lobular tumors were more likely to be BRCA2-related (OR for BRCA2 = 3.3, 95% CI: 2.4-4.4; P = 4.4 × 10(-14)), and medullary tumors BRCA1-related (OR for BRCA2 = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.18-0.35; P = 2.3 × 10(-15)). ER-status of the first breast cancer was predictive of ER-status of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (P = 0.0004 for BRCA1; P = 0.002 for BRCA2). There were no significant differences in ovarian cancer morphology between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (serous: 67%; mucinous: 1%; endometrioid: 12%; clear-cell: 2%). CONCLUSIONS/IMPACT: Pathologic characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumors may be useful for improving risk-prediction algorithms and informing clinical strategies for screening and prophylaxis.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
13 |
480 |
10
|
Bojesen SE, Pooley KA, Johnatty SE, Beesley J, Michailidou K, Tyrer JP, Edwards SL, Pickett HA, Shen HC, Smart CE, Hillman KM, Mai PL, Lawrenson K, Stutz MD, Lu Y, Karevan R, Woods N, Johnston RL, French JD, Chen X, Weischer M, Nielsen SF, Maranian MJ, Ghoussaini M, Ahmed S, Baynes C, Bolla MK, Wang Q, Dennis J, McGuffog L, Barrowdale D, Lee A, Healey S, Lush M, Tessier DC, Vincent D, Bacot F, Vergote I, Lambrechts S, Despierre E, Risch HA, González-Neira A, Rossing MA, Pita G, Doherty JA, Álvarez N, Larson MC, Fridley BL, Schoof N, Chang-Claude J, Cicek MS, Peto J, Kalli KR, Broeks A, Armasu SM, Schmidt MK, Braaf LM, Winterhoff B, Nevanlinna H, Konecny GE, Lambrechts D, Rogmann L, Guénel P, Teoman A, Milne RL, Garcia JJ, Cox A, Shridhar V, Burwinkel B, Marme F, Hein R, Sawyer EJ, Haiman CA, Wang-Gohrke S, Andrulis IL, Moysich KB, Hopper JL, Odunsi K, Lindblom A, Giles GG, Brenner H, Simard J, Lurie G, Fasching PA, Carney ME, Radice P, Wilkens LR, Swerdlow A, Goodman MT, Brauch H, García-Closas M, Hillemanns P, Winqvist R, Dürst M, Devilee P, Runnebaum I, Jakubowska A, Lubinski J, Mannermaa A, Butzow R, et alBojesen SE, Pooley KA, Johnatty SE, Beesley J, Michailidou K, Tyrer JP, Edwards SL, Pickett HA, Shen HC, Smart CE, Hillman KM, Mai PL, Lawrenson K, Stutz MD, Lu Y, Karevan R, Woods N, Johnston RL, French JD, Chen X, Weischer M, Nielsen SF, Maranian MJ, Ghoussaini M, Ahmed S, Baynes C, Bolla MK, Wang Q, Dennis J, McGuffog L, Barrowdale D, Lee A, Healey S, Lush M, Tessier DC, Vincent D, Bacot F, Vergote I, Lambrechts S, Despierre E, Risch HA, González-Neira A, Rossing MA, Pita G, Doherty JA, Álvarez N, Larson MC, Fridley BL, Schoof N, Chang-Claude J, Cicek MS, Peto J, Kalli KR, Broeks A, Armasu SM, Schmidt MK, Braaf LM, Winterhoff B, Nevanlinna H, Konecny GE, Lambrechts D, Rogmann L, Guénel P, Teoman A, Milne RL, Garcia JJ, Cox A, Shridhar V, Burwinkel B, Marme F, Hein R, Sawyer EJ, Haiman CA, Wang-Gohrke S, Andrulis IL, Moysich KB, Hopper JL, Odunsi K, Lindblom A, Giles GG, Brenner H, Simard J, Lurie G, Fasching PA, Carney ME, Radice P, Wilkens LR, Swerdlow A, Goodman MT, Brauch H, García-Closas M, Hillemanns P, Winqvist R, Dürst M, Devilee P, Runnebaum I, Jakubowska A, Lubinski J, Mannermaa A, Butzow R, Bogdanova NV, Dörk T, Pelttari LM, Zheng W, Leminen A, Anton-Culver H, Bunker CH, Kristensen V, Ness RB, Muir K, Edwards R, Meindl A, Heitz F, Matsuo K, du Bois A, Wu AH, Harter P, Teo SH, Schwaab I, Shu XO, Blot W, Hosono S, Kang D, Nakanishi T, Hartman M, Yatabe Y, Hamann U, Karlan BY, Sangrajrang S, Kjaer SK, Gaborieau V, Jensen A, Eccles D, Høgdall E, Shen CY, Brown J, Woo YL, Shah M, Azmi MAN, Luben R, Omar SZ, Czene K, Vierkant RA, Nordestgaard BG, Flyger H, Vachon C, Olson JE, Wang X, Levine DA, Rudolph A, Weber RP, Flesch-Janys D, Iversen E, Nickels S, Schildkraut JM, Silva IDS, Cramer DW, Gibson L, Terry KL, Fletcher O, Vitonis AF, van der Schoot CE, Poole EM, Hogervorst FBL, Tworoger SS, Liu J, Bandera EV, Li J, Olson SH, Humphreys K, Orlow I, Blomqvist C, Rodriguez-Rodriguez L, Aittomäki K, Salvesen HB, Muranen TA, Wik E, Brouwers B, Krakstad C, Wauters E, Halle MK, Wildiers H, Kiemeney LA, Mulot C, Aben KK, Laurent-Puig P, van Altena AM, Truong T, Massuger LFAG, Benitez J, Pejovic T, Perez JIA, Hoatlin M, Zamora MP, Cook LS, Balasubramanian SP, Kelemen LE, Schneeweiss A, Le ND, Sohn C, Brooks-Wilson A, Tomlinson I, Kerin MJ, Miller N, Cybulski C, Henderson BE, Menkiszak J, Schumacher F, Wentzensen N, Marchand LL, Yang HP, Mulligan AM, Glendon G, Engelholm SA, Knight JA, Høgdall CK, Apicella C, Gore M, Tsimiklis H, Song H, Southey MC, Jager A, van den Ouweland AMW, Brown R, Martens JWM, Flanagan JM, Kriege M, Paul J, Margolin S, Siddiqui N, Severi G, Whittemore AS, Baglietto L, McGuire V, Stegmaier C, Sieh W, Müller H, Arndt V, Labrèche F, Gao YT, Goldberg MS, Yang G, Dumont M, McLaughlin JR, Hartmann A, Ekici AB, Beckmann MW, Phelan CM, Lux MP, Permuth-Wey J, Peissel B, Sellers TA, Ficarazzi F, Barile M, Ziogas A, Ashworth A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Jones M, Ramus SJ, Orr N, Menon U, Pearce CL, Brüning T, Pike MC, Ko YD, Lissowska J, Figueroa J, Kupryjanczyk J, Chanock SJ, Dansonka-Mieszkowska A, Jukkola-Vuorinen A, Rzepecka IK, Pylkäs K, Bidzinski M, Kauppila S, Hollestelle A, Seynaeve C, Tollenaar RAEM, Durda K, Jaworska K, Hartikainen JM, Kosma VM, Kataja V, Antonenkova NN, Long J, Shrubsole M, Deming-Halverson S, Lophatananon A, Siriwanarangsan P, Stewart-Brown S, Ditsch N, Lichtner P, Schmutzler RK, Ito H, Iwata H, Tajima K, Tseng CC, Stram DO, van den Berg D, Yip CH, Ikram MK, Teh YC, Cai H, Lu W, Signorello LB, Cai Q, Noh DY, Yoo KY, Miao H, Iau PTC, Teo YY, McKay J, Shapiro C, Ademuyiwa F, Fountzilas G, Hsiung CN, Yu JC, Hou MF, Healey CS, Luccarini C, Peock S, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Peterlongo P, Rebbeck TR, Piedmonte M, Singer CF, Friedman E, Thomassen M, Offit K, Hansen TVO, Neuhausen SL, Szabo CI, Blanco I, Garber J, Narod SA, Weitzel JN, Montagna M, Olah E, Godwin AK, Yannoukakos D, Goldgar DE, Caldes T, Imyanitov EN, Tihomirova L, Arun BK, Campbell I, Mensenkamp AR, van Asperen CJ, van Roozendaal KEP, Meijers-Heijboer H, Collée JM, Oosterwijk JC, Hooning MJ, Rookus MA, van der Luijt RB, van Os TAM, Evans DG, Frost D, Fineberg E, Barwell J, Walker L, Kennedy MJ, Platte R, Davidson R, Ellis SD, Cole T, Paillerets BBD, Buecher B, Damiola F, Faivre L, Frenay M, Sinilnikova OM, Caron O, Giraud S, Mazoyer S, Bonadona V, Caux-Moncoutier V, Toloczko-Grabarek A, Gronwald J, Byrski T, Spurdle AB, Bonanni B, Zaffaroni D, Giannini G, Bernard L, Dolcetti R, Manoukian S, Arnold N, Engel C, Deissler H, Rhiem K, Niederacher D, Plendl H, Sutter C, Wappenschmidt B, Borg Å, Melin B, Rantala J, Soller M, Nathanson KL, Domchek SM, Rodriguez GC, Salani R, Kaulich DG, Tea MK, Paluch SS, Laitman Y, Skytte AB, Kruse TA, Jensen UB, Robson M, Gerdes AM, Ejlertsen B, Foretova L, Savage SA, Lester J, Soucy P, Kuchenbaecker KB, Olswold C, Cunningham JM, Slager S, Pankratz VS, Dicks E, Lakhani SR, Couch FJ, Hall P, Monteiro ANA, Gayther SA, Pharoah PDP, Reddel RR, Goode EL, Greene MH, Easton DF, Berchuck A, Antoniou AC, Chenevix-Trench G, Dunning AM. Multiple independent variants at the TERT locus are associated with telomere length and risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2013; 45:371-84, 384e1-2. [PMID: 23535731 PMCID: PMC3670748 DOI: 10.1038/ng.2566] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 446] [Impact Index Per Article: 37.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2012] [Accepted: 01/31/2013] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
TERT-locus SNPs and leukocyte telomere measures are reportedly associated with risks of multiple cancers. Using the Illumina custom genotyping array iCOGs, we analyzed ∼480 SNPs at the TERT locus in breast (n = 103,991), ovarian (n = 39,774) and BRCA1 mutation carrier (n = 11,705) cancer cases and controls. Leukocyte telomere measurements were also available for 53,724 participants. Most associations cluster into three independent peaks. The minor allele at the peak 1 SNP rs2736108 associates with longer telomeres (P = 5.8 × 10(-7)), lower risks for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative (P = 1.0 × 10(-8)) and BRCA1 mutation carrier (P = 1.1 × 10(-5)) breast cancers and altered promoter assay signal. The minor allele at the peak 2 SNP rs7705526 associates with longer telomeres (P = 2.3 × 10(-14)), higher risk of low-malignant-potential ovarian cancer (P = 1.3 × 10(-15)) and greater promoter activity. The minor alleles at the peak 3 SNPs rs10069690 and rs2242652 increase ER-negative (P = 1.2 × 10(-12)) and BRCA1 mutation carrier (P = 1.6 × 10(-14)) breast and invasive ovarian (P = 1.3 × 10(-11)) cancer risks but not via altered telomere length. The cancer risk alleles of rs2242652 and rs10069690, respectively, increase silencing and generate a truncated TERT splice variant.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
12 |
446 |
11
|
Mavaddat N, Pharoah PDP, Michailidou K, Tyrer J, Brook MN, Bolla MK, Wang Q, Dennis J, Dunning AM, Shah M, Luben R, Brown J, Bojesen SE, Nordestgaard BG, Nielsen SF, Flyger H, Czene K, Darabi H, Eriksson M, Peto J, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dudbridge F, Johnson N, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, Verhoef S, Rutgers EJ, Swerdlow A, Ashworth A, Orr N, Schoemaker MJ, Figueroa J, Chanock SJ, Brinton L, Lissowska J, Couch FJ, Olson JE, Vachon C, Pankratz VS, Lambrechts D, Wildiers H, Van Ongeval C, van Limbergen E, Kristensen V, Grenaker Alnæs G, Nord S, Borresen-Dale AL, Nevanlinna H, Muranen TA, Aittomäki K, Blomqvist C, Chang-Claude J, Rudolph A, Seibold P, Flesch-Janys D, Fasching PA, Haeberle L, Ekici AB, Beckmann MW, Burwinkel B, Marme F, Schneeweiss A, Sohn C, Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb P, Titus L, Egan KM, Hunter DJ, Lindstrom S, Tamimi RM, Kraft P, Rahman N, Turnbull C, Renwick A, Seal S, Li J, Liu J, Humphreys K, Benitez J, Pilar Zamora M, Arias Perez JI, Menéndez P, Jakubowska A, Lubinski J, Jaworska-Bieniek K, Durda K, Bogdanova NV, Antonenkova NN, Dörk T, Anton-Culver H, Neuhausen SL, Ziogas A, Bernstein L, Devilee P, Tollenaar RAEM, Seynaeve C, van Asperen CJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Reed MWR, et alMavaddat N, Pharoah PDP, Michailidou K, Tyrer J, Brook MN, Bolla MK, Wang Q, Dennis J, Dunning AM, Shah M, Luben R, Brown J, Bojesen SE, Nordestgaard BG, Nielsen SF, Flyger H, Czene K, Darabi H, Eriksson M, Peto J, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dudbridge F, Johnson N, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, Verhoef S, Rutgers EJ, Swerdlow A, Ashworth A, Orr N, Schoemaker MJ, Figueroa J, Chanock SJ, Brinton L, Lissowska J, Couch FJ, Olson JE, Vachon C, Pankratz VS, Lambrechts D, Wildiers H, Van Ongeval C, van Limbergen E, Kristensen V, Grenaker Alnæs G, Nord S, Borresen-Dale AL, Nevanlinna H, Muranen TA, Aittomäki K, Blomqvist C, Chang-Claude J, Rudolph A, Seibold P, Flesch-Janys D, Fasching PA, Haeberle L, Ekici AB, Beckmann MW, Burwinkel B, Marme F, Schneeweiss A, Sohn C, Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb P, Titus L, Egan KM, Hunter DJ, Lindstrom S, Tamimi RM, Kraft P, Rahman N, Turnbull C, Renwick A, Seal S, Li J, Liu J, Humphreys K, Benitez J, Pilar Zamora M, Arias Perez JI, Menéndez P, Jakubowska A, Lubinski J, Jaworska-Bieniek K, Durda K, Bogdanova NV, Antonenkova NN, Dörk T, Anton-Culver H, Neuhausen SL, Ziogas A, Bernstein L, Devilee P, Tollenaar RAEM, Seynaeve C, van Asperen CJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Reed MWR, Khusnutdinova E, Bermisheva M, Prokofyeva D, Takhirova Z, Meindl A, Schmutzler RK, Sutter C, Yang R, Schürmann P, Bremer M, Christiansen H, Park-Simon TW, Hillemanns P, Guénel P, Truong T, Menegaux F, Sanchez M, Radice P, Peterlongo P, Manoukian S, Pensotti V, Hopper JL, Tsimiklis H, Apicella C, Southey MC, Brauch H, Brüning T, Ko YD, Sigurdson AJ, Doody MM, Hamann U, Torres D, Ulmer HU, Försti A, Sawyer EJ, Tomlinson I, Kerin MJ, Miller N, Andrulis IL, Knight JA, Glendon G, Marie Mulligan A, Chenevix-Trench G, Balleine R, Giles GG, Milne RL, McLean C, Lindblom A, Margolin S, Haiman CA, Henderson BE, Schumacher F, Le Marchand L, Eilber U, Wang-Gohrke S, Hooning MJ, Hollestelle A, van den Ouweland AMW, Koppert LB, Carpenter J, Clarke C, Scott R, Mannermaa A, Kataja V, Kosma VM, Hartikainen JM, Brenner H, Arndt V, Stegmaier C, Karina Dieffenbach A, Winqvist R, Pylkäs K, Jukkola-Vuorinen A, Grip M, Offit K, Vijai J, Robson M, Rau-Murthy R, Dwek M, Swann R, Annie Perkins K, Goldberg MS, Labrèche F, Dumont M, Eccles DM, Tapper WJ, Rafiq S, John EM, Whittemore AS, Slager S, Yannoukakos D, Toland AE, Yao S, Zheng W, Halverson SL, González-Neira A, Pita G, Rosario Alonso M, Álvarez N, Herrero D, Tessier DC, Vincent D, Bacot F, Luccarini C, Baynes C, Ahmed S, Maranian M, Healey CS, Simard J, Hall P, Easton DF, Garcia-Closas M. Prediction of breast cancer risk based on profiling with common genetic variants. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:djv036. [PMID: 25855707 PMCID: PMC4754625 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv036] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 400] [Impact Index Per Article: 40.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2014] [Revised: 12/01/2014] [Accepted: 01/26/2015] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data for multiple common susceptibility alleles for breast cancer may be combined to identify women at different levels of breast cancer risk. Such stratification could guide preventive and screening strategies. However, empirical evidence for genetic risk stratification is lacking. METHODS We investigated the value of using 77 breast cancer-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for risk stratification, in a study of 33 673 breast cancer cases and 33 381 control women of European origin. We tested all possible pair-wise multiplicative interactions and constructed a 77-SNP polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast cancer overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Absolute risks of breast cancer by PRS were derived from relative risk estimates and UK incidence and mortality rates. RESULTS There was no strong evidence for departure from a multiplicative model for any SNP pair. Women in the highest 1% of the PRS had a three-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer compared with women in the middle quintile (odds ratio [OR] = 3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.95 to 3.83). The ORs for ER-positive and ER-negative disease were 3.73 (95% CI = 3.24 to 4.30) and 2.80 (95% CI = 2.26 to 3.46), respectively. Lifetime risk of breast cancer for women in the lowest and highest quintiles of the PRS were 5.2% and 16.6% for a woman without family history, and 8.6% and 24.4% for a woman with a first-degree family history of breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS The PRS stratifies breast cancer risk in women both with and without a family history of breast cancer. The observed level of risk discrimination could inform targeted screening and prevention strategies. Further discrimination may be achievable through combining the PRS with lifestyle/environmental factors, although these were not considered in this report.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
10 |
400 |
12
|
Rebbeck TR, Mitra N, Wan F, Sinilnikova OM, Healey S, McGuffog L, Mazoyer S, Chenevix-Trench G, Easton DF, Antoniou AC, Nathanson KL, Laitman Y, Kushnir A, Paluch-Shimon S, Berger R, Zidan J, Friedman E, Ehrencrona H, Stenmark-Askmalm M, Einbeigi Z, Loman N, Harbst K, Rantala J, Melin B, Huo D, Olopade OI, Seldon J, Ganz PA, Nussbaum RL, Chan SB, Odunsi K, Gayther SA, Domchek SM, Arun BK, Lu KH, Mitchell G, Karlan BY, Walsh C, Lester J, Godwin AK, Pathak H, Ross E, Daly MB, Whittemore AS, John EM, Miron A, Terry MB, Chung WK, Goldgar DE, Buys SS, Janavicius R, Tihomirova L, Tung N, Dorfling CM, van Rensburg EJ, Steele L, Neuhausen SL, Ding YC, Ejlertsen B, Gerdes AM, Hansen TVO, Ramón y Cajal T, Osorio A, Benitez J, Godino J, Tejada MI, Duran M, Weitzel JN, Bobolis KA, Sand SR, Fontaine A, Savarese A, Pasini B, Peissel B, Bonanni B, Zaffaroni D, Vignolo-Lutati F, Scuvera G, Giannini G, Bernard L, Genuardi M, Radice P, Dolcetti R, Manoukian S, Pensotti V, Gismondi V, Yannoukakos D, Fostira F, Garber J, Torres D, Rashid MU, Hamann U, Peock S, Frost D, Platte R, Evans DG, Eeles R, Davidson R, Eccles D, Cole T, et alRebbeck TR, Mitra N, Wan F, Sinilnikova OM, Healey S, McGuffog L, Mazoyer S, Chenevix-Trench G, Easton DF, Antoniou AC, Nathanson KL, Laitman Y, Kushnir A, Paluch-Shimon S, Berger R, Zidan J, Friedman E, Ehrencrona H, Stenmark-Askmalm M, Einbeigi Z, Loman N, Harbst K, Rantala J, Melin B, Huo D, Olopade OI, Seldon J, Ganz PA, Nussbaum RL, Chan SB, Odunsi K, Gayther SA, Domchek SM, Arun BK, Lu KH, Mitchell G, Karlan BY, Walsh C, Lester J, Godwin AK, Pathak H, Ross E, Daly MB, Whittemore AS, John EM, Miron A, Terry MB, Chung WK, Goldgar DE, Buys SS, Janavicius R, Tihomirova L, Tung N, Dorfling CM, van Rensburg EJ, Steele L, Neuhausen SL, Ding YC, Ejlertsen B, Gerdes AM, Hansen TVO, Ramón y Cajal T, Osorio A, Benitez J, Godino J, Tejada MI, Duran M, Weitzel JN, Bobolis KA, Sand SR, Fontaine A, Savarese A, Pasini B, Peissel B, Bonanni B, Zaffaroni D, Vignolo-Lutati F, Scuvera G, Giannini G, Bernard L, Genuardi M, Radice P, Dolcetti R, Manoukian S, Pensotti V, Gismondi V, Yannoukakos D, Fostira F, Garber J, Torres D, Rashid MU, Hamann U, Peock S, Frost D, Platte R, Evans DG, Eeles R, Davidson R, Eccles D, Cole T, Cook J, Brewer C, Hodgson S, Morrison PJ, Walker L, Porteous ME, Kennedy MJ, Izatt L, Adlard J, Donaldson A, Ellis S, Sharma P, Schmutzler RK, Wappenschmidt B, Becker A, Rhiem K, Hahnen E, Engel C, Meindl A, Engert S, Ditsch N, Arnold N, Plendl HJ, Mundhenke C, Niederacher D, Fleisch M, Sutter C, Bartram CR, Dikow N, Wang-Gohrke S, Gadzicki D, Steinemann D, Kast K, Beer M, Varon-Mateeva R, Gehrig A, Weber BH, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Sinilnikova OM, Mazoyer S, Houdayer C, Belotti M, Gauthier-Villars M, Damiola F, Boutry-Kryza N, Lasset C, Sobol H, Peyrat JP, Muller D, Fricker JP, Collonge-Rame MA, Mortemousque I, Nogues C, Rouleau E, Isaacs C, De Paepe A, Poppe B, Claes K, De Leeneer K, Piedmonte M, Rodriguez G, Wakely K, Boggess J, Blank SV, Basil J, Azodi M, Phillips KA, Caldes T, de la Hoya M, Romero A, Nevanlinna H, Aittomäki K, van der Hout AH, Hogervorst FBL, Verhoef S, Collée JM, Seynaeve C, Oosterwijk JC, Gille JJP, Wijnen JT, Gómez Garcia EB, Kets CM, Ausems MGEM, Aalfs CM, Devilee P, Mensenkamp AR, Kwong A, Olah E, Papp J, Diez O, Lazaro C, Darder E, Blanco I, Salinas M, Jakubowska A, Lubinski J, Gronwald J, Jaworska-Bieniek K, Durda K, Sukiennicki G, Huzarski T, Byrski T, Cybulski C, Toloczko-Grabarek A, Złowocka-Perłowska E, Menkiszak J, Arason A, Barkardottir RB, Simard J, Laframboise R, Montagna M, Agata S, Alducci E, Peixoto A, Teixeira MR, Spurdle AB, Lee MH, Park SK, Kim SW, Friebel TM, Couch FJ, Lindor NM, Pankratz VS, Guidugli L, Wang X, Tischkowitz M, Foretova L, Vijai J, Offit K, Robson M, Rau-Murthy R, Kauff N, Fink-Retter A, Singer CF, Rappaport C, Gschwantler-Kaulich D, Pfeiler G, Tea MK, Berger A, Greene MH, Mai PL, Imyanitov EN, Toland AE, Senter L, Bojesen A, Pedersen IS, Skytte AB, Sunde L, Thomassen M, Moeller ST, Kruse TA, Jensen UB, Caligo MA, Aretini P, Teo SH, Selkirk CG, Hulick PJ, Andrulis I. Association of type and location of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with risk of breast and ovarian cancer. JAMA 2015; 313:1347-61. [PMID: 25849179 PMCID: PMC4537700 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.5985] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 378] [Impact Index Per Article: 37.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists. OBJECTIVE To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Observational study of women who were ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents. We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position. We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk. EXPOSURES Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Breast and ovarian cancer risks. RESULTS Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10(-9)). We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002). We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.
Collapse
|
Observational Study |
10 |
378 |
13
|
Narod SA, Brunet JS, Ghadirian P, Robson M, Heimdal K, Neuhausen SL, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Lerman C, Pasini B, de los Rios P, Weber B, Lynch H. Tamoxifen and risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a case-control study. Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. Lancet 2000; 356:1876-81. [PMID: 11130383 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03258-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 373] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Women with a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 have a high risk of developing breast cancer and of contralateral cancer after the initial diagnosis of breast cancer. Tamoxifen protects against contralateral breast cancer in the general population, but whether it protects against contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers is not known. METHODS We compared 209 women with bilateral breast cancer and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (bilateral-disease cases), with 384 women with unilateral disease and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (controls) in a matched case-control study. Age and age at diagnosis of breast cancer (range 24-74 years) were much the same in bilateral-disease cases and controls, and both groups had been followed up for the same time for a second primary breast cancer. History of tamoxifen use for first breast cancer was obtained by interview, or by self-administered questionnaire. FINDINGS The multivariate odds ratio for contralateral breast cancer associated with tamoxifen use was 0.50 (95% CI 0.28-0.89). Tamoxifen protected against contralateral breast cancer for carriers of BRCA1 mutations (odds ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.74) and for those with BRCA2 mutations (0.63, 0.20-1.50). In women who used tamoxifen for 2-4 years, the risk of contralateral breast cancer was reduced by 75%. A reduction in risk of contralateral cancer was also seen with oophorectomy (0.42, 0.22-0.83) and with chemotherapy (0-40, 0.26-0.60). INTERPRETATION Tamoxifen use reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer in women with pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene. The protective effect of tamoxifen seems independent of that of oophorectomy.
Collapse
|
Comparative Study |
25 |
373 |
14
|
Titus S, Li F, Stobezki R, Akula K, Unsal E, Jeong K, Dickler M, Robson M, Moy F, Goswami S, Oktay K. Impairment of BRCA1-related DNA double-strand break repair leads to ovarian aging in mice and humans. Sci Transl Med 2013; 5:172ra21. [PMID: 23408054 DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004925] [Citation(s) in RCA: 352] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
The underlying mechanism behind age-induced wastage of the human ovarian follicle reserve is unknown. We identify impaired ATM (ataxia-telangiectasia mutated)-mediated DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair as a cause of aging in mouse and human oocytes. We show that DSBs accumulate in primordial follicles with age. In parallel, expression of key DNA DSB repair genes BRCA1, MRE11, Rad51, and ATM, but not BRCA2, declines in single mouse and human oocytes. In Brca1-deficient mice, reproductive capacity was impaired, primordial follicle counts were lower, and DSBs were increased in remaining follicles with age relative to wild-type mice. Furthermore, oocyte-specific knockdown of Brca1, MRE11, Rad51, and ATM expression increased DSBs and reduced survival, whereas Brca1 overexpression enhanced both parameters. Likewise, ovarian reserve was impaired in young women with germline BRCA1 mutations compared to controls as determined by serum concentrations of anti-Müllerian hormone. These data implicate DNA DSB repair efficiency as an important determinant of oocyte aging in women.
Collapse
|
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
12 |
352 |
15
|
Phelan CM, Kuchenbaecker KB, Tyrer JP, Kar SP, Lawrenson K, Winham SJ, Dennis J, Pirie A, Riggan M, Chornokur G, Earp MA, Lyra PC, Lee JM, Coetzee S, Beesley J, McGuffog L, Soucy P, Dicks E, Lee A, Barrowdale D, Lecarpentier J, Leslie G, Aalfs CM, Aben KK, Adams M, Adlard J, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antonenkova N, Aravantinos G, Arnold N, Arun BK, Arver B, Azzollini J, Balmaña J, Banerjee SN, Barjhoux L, Barkardottir RB, Bean Y, Beckmann MW, Beeghly-Fadiel A, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bernardini MQ, Birrer MJ, Bjorge L, Black A, Blankstein K, Blok MJ, Bodelon C, Bogdanova N, Bojesen A, Bonanni B, Borg Å, Bradbury AR, Brenton JD, Brewer C, Brinton L, Broberg P, Brooks-Wilson A, Bruinsma F, Brunet J, Buecher B, Butzow R, Buys SS, Caldes T, Caligo MA, Campbell I, Cannioto R, Carney ME, Cescon T, Chan SB, Chang-Claude J, Chanock S, Chen XQ, Chiew YE, Chiquette J, Chung WK, Claes KB, Conner T, Cook LS, Cook J, Cramer DW, Cunningham JM, D’Aloisio AA, Daly MB, Damiola F, Damirovna SD, Dansonka-Mieszkowska A, Dao F, Davidson R, DeFazio A, Delnatte C, Doheny KF, Diez O, Ding YC, Doherty JA, Domchek SM, Dorfling CM, Dörk T, et alPhelan CM, Kuchenbaecker KB, Tyrer JP, Kar SP, Lawrenson K, Winham SJ, Dennis J, Pirie A, Riggan M, Chornokur G, Earp MA, Lyra PC, Lee JM, Coetzee S, Beesley J, McGuffog L, Soucy P, Dicks E, Lee A, Barrowdale D, Lecarpentier J, Leslie G, Aalfs CM, Aben KK, Adams M, Adlard J, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antonenkova N, Aravantinos G, Arnold N, Arun BK, Arver B, Azzollini J, Balmaña J, Banerjee SN, Barjhoux L, Barkardottir RB, Bean Y, Beckmann MW, Beeghly-Fadiel A, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bernardini MQ, Birrer MJ, Bjorge L, Black A, Blankstein K, Blok MJ, Bodelon C, Bogdanova N, Bojesen A, Bonanni B, Borg Å, Bradbury AR, Brenton JD, Brewer C, Brinton L, Broberg P, Brooks-Wilson A, Bruinsma F, Brunet J, Buecher B, Butzow R, Buys SS, Caldes T, Caligo MA, Campbell I, Cannioto R, Carney ME, Cescon T, Chan SB, Chang-Claude J, Chanock S, Chen XQ, Chiew YE, Chiquette J, Chung WK, Claes KB, Conner T, Cook LS, Cook J, Cramer DW, Cunningham JM, D’Aloisio AA, Daly MB, Damiola F, Damirovna SD, Dansonka-Mieszkowska A, Dao F, Davidson R, DeFazio A, Delnatte C, Doheny KF, Diez O, Ding YC, Doherty JA, Domchek SM, Dorfling CM, Dörk T, Dossus L, Duran M, Dürst M, Dworniczak B, Eccles D, Edwards T, Eeles R, Eilber U, Ejlertsen B, Ekici AB, Ellis S, Elvira M, Eng KH, Engel C, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Ferguson S, Ferrer SF, Flanagan JM, Fogarty ZC, Fortner RT, Fostira F, Foulkes WD, Fountzilas G, Fridley BL, Friebel TM, Friedman E, Frost D, Ganz PA, Garber J, García MJ, Garcia-Barberan V, Gehrig A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Gerdes AM, Giles GG, Glasspool R, Glendon G, Godwin AK, Goldgar DE, Goranova T, Gore M, Greene MH, Gronwald J, Gruber S, Hahnen E, Haiman CA, Håkansson N, Hamann U, Hansen TV, Harrington PA, Harris HR, Hauke J, Hein A, Henderson A, Hildebrandt MA, Hillemanns P, Hodgson S, Høgdall CK, Høgdall E, Hogervorst FB, Holland H, Hooning MJ, Hosking K, Huang RY, Hulick PJ, Hung J, Hunter DJ, Huntsman DG, Huzarski T, Imyanitov EN, Isaacs C, Iversen ES, Izatt L, Izquierdo A, Jakubowska A, James P, Janavicius R, Jernetz M, Jensen A, Jensen UB, John EM, Johnatty S, Jones ME, Kannisto P, Karlan BY, Karnezis A, Kast K, Kennedy CJ, Khusnutdinova E, Kiemeney LA, Kiiski JI, Kim SW, Kjaer SK, Köbel M, Kopperud RK, Kruse TA, Kupryjanczyk J, Kwong A, Laitman Y, Lambrechts D, Larrañaga N, Larson MC, Lazaro C, Le ND, Le Marchand L, Lee JW, Lele SB, Leminen A, Leroux D, Lester J, Lesueur F, Levine DA, Liang D, Liebrich C, Lilyquist J, Lipworth L, Lissowska J, Lu KH, Lubiński J, Luccarini C, Lundvall L, Mai PL, Mendoza-Fandiño G, Manoukian S, Massuger LF, May T, Mazoyer S, McAlpine JN, McGuire V, McLaughlin JR, McNeish I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Meindl A, Menon U, Mensenkamp AR, Merritt MA, Milne RL, Mitchell G, Modugno F, Moes-Sosnowska J, Moffitt M, Montagna M, Moysich KB, Mulligan AM, Musinsky J, Nathanson KL, Nedergaard L, Ness RB, Neuhausen SL, Nevanlinna H, Niederacher D, Nussbaum RL, Odunsi K, Olah E, Olopade OI, Olsson H, Olswold C, O’Malley DM, Ong KR, Onland-Moret NC, Orr N, Orsulic S, Osorio A, Palli D, Papi L, Park-Simon TW, Paul J, Pearce CL, Pedersen IS, Peeters PH, Peissel B, Peixoto A, Pejovic T, Pelttari LM, Permuth JB, Peterlongo P, Pezzani L, Pfeiler G, Phillips KA, Piedmonte M, Pike MC, Piskorz AM, Poblete SR, Pocza T, Poole EM, Poppe B, Porteous ME, Prieur F, Prokofyeva D, Pugh E, Pujana MA, Pujol P, Radice P, Rantala J, Rappaport-Fuerhauser C, Rennert G, Rhiem K, Rice P, Richardson A, Robson M, Rodriguez GC, Rodríguez-Antona C, Romm J, Rookus MA, Rossing MA, Rothstein JH, Rudolph A, Runnebaum IB, Salvesen HB, Sandler DP, Schoemaker MJ, Senter L, Setiawan VW, Severi G, Sharma P, Shelford T, Siddiqui N, Side LE, Sieh W, Singer CF, Sobol H, Song H, Southey MC, Spurdle AB, Stadler Z, Steinemann D, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Sucheston-Campbell LE, Sukiennicki G, Sutphen R, Sutter C, Swerdlow AJ, Szabo CI, Szafron L, Tan YY, Taylor JA, Tea MK, Teixeira MR, Teo SH, Terry KL, Thompson PJ, Thomsen LCV, Thull DL, Tihomirova L, Tinker AV, Tischkowitz M, Tognazzo S, Toland AE, Tone A, Trabert B, Travis RC, Trichopoulou A, Tung N, Tworoger SS, van Altena AM, Van Den Berg D, van der Hout AH, van der Luijt RB, Van Heetvelde M, Van Nieuwenhuysen E, van Rensburg EJ, Vanderstichele A, Varon-Mateeva R, Ana V, Edwards DV, Vergote I, Vierkant RA, Vijai J, Vratimos A, Walker L, Walsh C, Wand D, Wang-Gohrke S, Wappenschmidt B, Webb PM, Weinberg CR, Weitzel JN, Wentzensen N, Whittemore AS, Wijnen JT, Wilkens LR, Wolk A, Woo M, Wu X, Wu AH, Yang H, Yannoukakos D, Ziogas A, Zorn KK, Narod SA, Easton DF, Amos CI, Schildkraut JM, Ramus SJ, Ottini L, Goodman MT, Park SK, Kelemen LE, Risch HA, Thomassen M, Offit K, Simard J, Schmutzler RK, Hazelett D, Monteiro AN, Couch FJ, Berchuck A, Chenevix-Trench G, Goode EL, Sellers TA, Gayther SA, Antoniou AC, Pharoah PD. Identification of 12 new susceptibility loci for different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2017; 49:680-691. [PMID: 28346442 PMCID: PMC5612337 DOI: 10.1038/ng.3826] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 347] [Impact Index Per Article: 43.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2016] [Accepted: 03/03/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
To identify common alleles associated with different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), we pooled data from multiple genome-wide genotyping projects totaling 25,509 EOC cases and 40,941 controls. We identified nine new susceptibility loci for different EOC histotypes: six for serous EOC histotypes (3q28, 4q32.3, 8q21.11, 10q24.33, 18q11.2 and 22q12.1), two for mucinous EOC (3q22.3 and 9q31.1) and one for endometrioid EOC (5q12.3). We then performed meta-analysis on the results for high-grade serous ovarian cancer with the results from analysis of 31,448 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 3,887 mutation carriers with EOC. This identified three additional susceptibility loci at 2q13, 8q24.1 and 12q24.31. Integrated analyses of genes and regulatory biofeatures at each locus predicted candidate susceptibility genes, including OBFC1, a new candidate susceptibility gene for low-grade and borderline serous EOC.
Collapse
|
research-article |
8 |
347 |
16
|
Frank TS, Manley SA, Olopade OI, Cummings S, Garber JE, Bernhardt B, Antman K, Russo D, Wood ME, Mullineau L, Isaacs C, Peshkin B, Buys S, Venne V, Rowley PT, Loader S, Offit K, Robson M, Hampel H, Brener D, Winer EP, Clark S, Weber B, Strong LC, Thomas A. Sequence analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2: correlation of mutations with family history and ovarian cancer risk. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16:2417-25. [PMID: 9667259 DOI: 10.1200/jco.1998.16.7.2417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 344] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Previous studies of mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 have used detection methods that may underestimate the actual frequency of mutations and have analyzed women using heterogeneous criteria for risk of hereditary cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 238 women with breast cancer before age 50 or ovarian cancer at any age and at least one first- or second-degree relative with either diagnosis underwent sequence analysis of BRCA1 followed by analysis of BRCA2 (except for 27 women who declined analysis of BRCA2 after a deleterious mutation was discovered in BRCA1). Results were correlated with personal and family history of malignancy. RESULTS Deleterious mutations were identified in 94 (39%) women, including 59 of 117 (50%) from families with ovarian cancer and 35 of 121 (29%) from families without ovarian cancer. Mutations were identified in 14 of 70 (20%) women with just one other relative who developed breast cancer before age 50. In women with breast cancer, mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were associated with a 10-fold increased risk of subsequent ovarian carcinoma (P = .005). CONCLUSION Because mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in women with breast cancer are associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer, analysis of these genes should be considered for women diagnosed with breast cancer who have a high probability of carrying a mutation according to the statistical model developed with these data.
Collapse
|
Multicenter Study |
27 |
344 |
17
|
Yang X, Leslie G, Doroszuk A, Schneider S, Allen J, Decker B, Dunning AM, Redman J, Scarth J, Plaskocinska I, Luccarini C, Shah M, Pooley K, Dorling L, Lee A, Adank MA, Adlard J, Aittomäki K, Andrulis IL, Ang P, Barwell J, Bernstein JL, Bobolis K, Borg Å, Blomqvist C, Claes KB, Concannon P, Cuggia A, Culver JO, Damiola F, de Pauw A, Diez O, Dolinsky JS, Domchek SM, Engel C, Evans DG, Fostira F, Garber J, Golmard L, Goode EL, Gruber SB, Hahnen E, Hake C, Heikkinen T, Hurley JE, Janavicius R, Kleibl Z, Kleiblova P, Konstantopoulou I, Kvist A, Laduca H, Lee AS, Lesueur F, Maher ER, Mannermaa A, Manoukian S, McFarland R, McKinnon W, Meindl A, Metcalfe K, Mohd Taib NA, Moilanen J, Nathanson KL, Neuhausen S, Ng PS, Nguyen-Dumont T, Nielsen SM, Obermair F, Offit K, Olopade OI, Ottini L, Penkert J, Pylkäs K, Radice P, Ramus SJ, Rudaitis V, Side L, Silva-Smith R, Silvestri V, Skytte AB, Slavin T, Soukupova J, Tondini C, Trainer AH, Unzeitig G, Usha L, van Overeem Hansen T, Whitworth J, Wood M, Yip CH, Yoon SY, Yussuf A, Zogopoulos G, Goldgar D, Hopper JL, Chenevix-Trench G, Pharoah P, George SH, Balmaña J, Houdayer C, et alYang X, Leslie G, Doroszuk A, Schneider S, Allen J, Decker B, Dunning AM, Redman J, Scarth J, Plaskocinska I, Luccarini C, Shah M, Pooley K, Dorling L, Lee A, Adank MA, Adlard J, Aittomäki K, Andrulis IL, Ang P, Barwell J, Bernstein JL, Bobolis K, Borg Å, Blomqvist C, Claes KB, Concannon P, Cuggia A, Culver JO, Damiola F, de Pauw A, Diez O, Dolinsky JS, Domchek SM, Engel C, Evans DG, Fostira F, Garber J, Golmard L, Goode EL, Gruber SB, Hahnen E, Hake C, Heikkinen T, Hurley JE, Janavicius R, Kleibl Z, Kleiblova P, Konstantopoulou I, Kvist A, Laduca H, Lee AS, Lesueur F, Maher ER, Mannermaa A, Manoukian S, McFarland R, McKinnon W, Meindl A, Metcalfe K, Mohd Taib NA, Moilanen J, Nathanson KL, Neuhausen S, Ng PS, Nguyen-Dumont T, Nielsen SM, Obermair F, Offit K, Olopade OI, Ottini L, Penkert J, Pylkäs K, Radice P, Ramus SJ, Rudaitis V, Side L, Silva-Smith R, Silvestri V, Skytte AB, Slavin T, Soukupova J, Tondini C, Trainer AH, Unzeitig G, Usha L, van Overeem Hansen T, Whitworth J, Wood M, Yip CH, Yoon SY, Yussuf A, Zogopoulos G, Goldgar D, Hopper JL, Chenevix-Trench G, Pharoah P, George SH, Balmaña J, Houdayer C, James P, El-Haffaf Z, Ehrencrona H, Janatova M, Peterlongo P, Nevanlinna H, Schmutzler R, Teo SH, Robson M, Pal T, Couch F, Weitzel JN, Elliott A, Southey M, Winqvist R, Easton DF, Foulkes WD, Antoniou AC, Tischkowitz M. Cancer Risks Associated With Germline PALB2 Pathogenic Variants: An International Study of 524 Families. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:674-685. [PMID: 31841383 PMCID: PMC7049229 DOI: 10.1200/jco.19.01907] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 277] [Impact Index Per Article: 55.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To estimate age-specific relative and absolute cancer risks of breast cancer and to estimate risks of ovarian, pancreatic, male breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants (PVs) because these risks have not been extensively characterized. METHODS We analyzed data from 524 families with PALB2 PVs from 21 countries. Complex segregation analysis was used to estimate relative risks (RRs; relative to country-specific population incidences) and absolute risks of cancers. The models allowed for residual familial aggregation of breast and ovarian cancer and were adjusted for the family-specific ascertainment schemes. RESULTS We found associations between PALB2 PVs and risk of female breast cancer (RR, 7.18; 95% CI, 5.82 to 8.85; P = 6.5 × 10-76), ovarian cancer (RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.40 to 6.04; P = 4.1 × 10-3), pancreatic cancer (RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.50; P = 8.7 × 10-3), and male breast cancer (RR, 7.34; 95% CI, 1.28 to 42.18; P = 2.6 × 10-2). There was no evidence for increased risks of prostate or colorectal cancer. The breast cancer RRs declined with age (P for trend = 2.0 × 10-3). After adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case families were similar to the estimates from families ascertained through population-based studies (P for difference = .41). On the basis of the combined data, the estimated risks to age 80 years were 53% (95% CI, 44% to 63%) for female breast cancer, 5% (95% CI, 2% to 10%) for ovarian cancer, 2%-3% (95% CI females, 1% to 4%; 95% CI males, 2% to 5%) for pancreatic cancer, and 1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 5%) for male breast cancer. CONCLUSION These results confirm PALB2 as a major breast cancer susceptibility gene and establish substantial associations between germline PALB2 PVs and ovarian, pancreatic, and male breast cancers. These findings will facilitate incorporation of PALB2 into risk prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.
Collapse
|
research-article |
5 |
277 |
18
|
Schrader KA, Cheng DT, Joseph V, Prasad M, Walsh M, Zehir A, Ni A, Thomas T, Benayed R, Ashraf A, Lincoln A, Arcila M, Stadler Z, Solit D, Hyman DM, Hyman D, Zhang L, Klimstra D, Ladanyi M, Offit K, Berger M, Robson M. Germline Variants in Targeted Tumor Sequencing Using Matched Normal DNA. JAMA Oncol 2016; 2:104-11. [PMID: 26556299 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 261] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Tumor genetic sequencing identifies potentially targetable genetic alterations with therapeutic implications. Analysis has concentrated on detecting tumor-specific variants, but recognition of germline variants may prove valuable as well. OBJECTIVE To estimate the burden of germline variants identified through routine clinical tumor sequencing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patients with advanced cancer diagnoses eligible for studies of targeted agents at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center are offered tumor-normal sequencing with MSK-IMPACT, a 341-gene panel. We surveyed the germline variants seen in 187 overlapping genes with Mendelian disease associations in 1566 patients who had undergone tumor profiling between March and October 2014. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The number of presumed pathogenic germline variants (PPGVs) and variants of uncertain significance per person in 187 genes associated with single-gene disorders and the proportions of individuals with PPGVs in clinically relevant gene subsets, in genes consistent with known tumor phenotypes, and in genes with evidence of second somatic hits in their tumors. RESULTS The mean age of the 1566 patients was 58 years, and 54% were women. Presumed pathogenic germline variants in known Mendelian disease-associated genes were identified in 246 of 1566 patients (15.7%; 95% CI, 14.0%-17.6%), including 198 individuals with mutations in genes associated with cancer susceptibility. Germline findings in cancer susceptibility genes were concordant with the individual's cancer type in only 81 of 198 cases (40.9%; 95% CI, 34.3%-47.9%). In individuals with PPGVs retained in the tumor, somatic alteration of the other allele was seen in 39 of 182 cases (21.4%; 95% CI, 16.1%-28.0%), of which 13 cases did not show a known correlation of the germline mutation and a known syndrome. Mutations in non-cancer-related Mendelian disease genes were seen in 55 of 1566 cases (3.5%; 95% CI, 27.1%-45.4%). Almost every individual had more than 1 variant of uncertain significance (1565 of 1566 patients; 99.9%; 95% CI, 99.6%-99.9%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Germline variants are common in individuals undergoing tumor-normal sequencing and may reveal otherwise unsuspected syndromic associations.
Collapse
|
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
9 |
261 |
19
|
Robson M, Gilewski T, Haas B, Levin D, Borgen P, Rajan P, Hirschaut Y, Pressman P, Rosen PP, Lesser ML, Norton L, Offit K. BRCA-associated breast cancer in young women. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16:1642-9. [PMID: 9586873 DOI: 10.1200/jco.1998.16.5.1642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 254] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To delineate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of breast cancer that arises in the setting of a germline BRCA mutation and to compare BRCA-associated breast cancers (BABC) with those that arise in women without mutations. PATIENTS AND METHODS We reviewed the clinical records of 91 Ashkenazi Jewish women ascertained during studies of the genetics of early-onset breast cancer. All women underwent testing for the BRCA1 mutations 185delAG and 5382insC. After the discovery of BRCA2, 79 women were also tested for the BRCA2 mutation 6174delT. RESULTS Mutations were identified in 30 women (33%). BABC were less likely to present with stage I disease than cases in women without mutations (27% v 46%), more likely to have axillary nodal involvement (54% v46%), and more likely to have extensive axillary involvement (25% v 17%). These differences were not statistically significant. BABC were significantly more likely to be histologic grade III (100% v 59%, P=.04) and to be estrogen receptor-negative (70% v 34%, P=.04). In the entire cohort, there were no significant differences between BABC and non-BRCA-associated cancers in 5-year relapse-free survival (65% v 69%, P=not significant [NS]), 5-year event-free survival (57% v 68%, P=NS), or 5-year overall survival. However, among cases diagnosed within 2 years of study entry, there was a trend toward shorter event-free survival in BRCA heterozygotes, but not relapse-free survival. Women with germline BRCA mutations were significantly more likely to develop contralateral breast cancer at 5 years (31% v 4%, P=.0007). CONCLUSION BABC present with adverse clinical and histopathologic features when compared with cases not associated with BRCA mutations. However, the prognosis of BABC appears to be similar to that of nonassociated cancer. Further studies of incident cases are necessary to define the independent prognostic significance of germline BRCA mutations.
Collapse
|
|
27 |
254 |
20
|
Narod SA, Dubé MP, Klijn J, Lubinski J, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, Provencher D, Heimdal K, Moller P, Robson M, Offit K, Isaacs C, Weber B, Friedman E, Gershoni-Baruch R, Rennert G, Pasini B, Wagner T, Daly M, Garber JE, Neuhausen SL, Ainsworth P, Olsson H, Evans G, Osborne M, Couch F, Foulkes WD, Warner E, Kim-Sing C, Olopade O, Tung N, Saal HM, Weitzel J, Merajver S, Gauthier-Villars M, Jernstrom H, Sun P, Brunet JS. Oral contraceptives and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1773-9. [PMID: 12464649 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/94.23.1773] [Citation(s) in RCA: 237] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oral contraceptive use has been associated with an increase in the risk of breast cancer in young women. We examined whether this association is seen in women at high risk of breast cancer because they carry a mutation in one of two breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2. METHODS We performed a matched case-control study on 1311 pairs of women with known deleterious BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations recruited from 52 centers in 11 countries. Women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer were matched to control subjects by year of birth, country of residence, mutation (BRCA1 or BRCA2), and history of ovarian cancer. All study subjects completed a questionnaire about oral contraceptive use. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived by conditional logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, ever use of oral contraceptives was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72 to 1.24). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, ever use of oral contraceptives was associated with a modestly increased risk of breast cancer (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.40). However, compared with BRCA1 mutation carriers who never used oral contraceptives, those who used oral contraceptives for at least 5 years had an increased risk of breast cancer (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.60), as did those who used oral contraceptives before age 30 (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.52), those who were diagnosed with breast cancer before age 40 (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.72), and those who first used oral contraceptives before 1975 (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.75). CONCLUSIONS Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, women who first used oral contraceptives before 1975, who used them before age 30, or who used them for 5 or more years may have an increased risk of early-onset breast cancer. Oral contraceptives do not appear to be associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA2 carriers, but data for BRCA2 carriers are limited.
Collapse
|
|
23 |
237 |
21
|
Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ, Robson M, Abramson AF, Heerdt A, Dershaw DD. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:619-26. [PMID: 12933450 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.181.3.1810619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 236] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of cancer and the positive predictive value of biopsy in the first screening round of breast MRI in women at high risk of developing breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective review was performed of the records of 367 consecutive women at high risk of developing breast cancer who had normal findings on mammography and their first breast MRI screening examination during a 2-year period. The frequency of recommending biopsy at the first screening MRI study and the biopsy results were reviewed. RESULTS Biopsy was recommended in 64 women (17%). Biopsy revealed cancer that was occult on mammography and physical examination in 14 (24%) of 59 women who had biopsy and in 14 (4%) of 367 women who underwent breast MRI screening. Histologic findings in 14 women with cancer were ductal carcinoma in situ in eight (57%) and infiltrating carcinoma in six (43%). The median size of infiltrating carcinoma was 0.4 cm (range, 0.1-1.2 cm). Two patients had nodes that were positive for cancer. Biopsy revealed high-risk lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, or radial scar) in 13 (4%) of 367 women and other benign findings in 32 (9%) of 367 women who had MRI screening. CONCLUSION Among women at high risk of developing breast cancer, breast MRI led to a recommendation of biopsy in 17%. Cancer was found in 24% of women who underwent biopsy and in 4% of women who had breast MRI screening. More than half the MRI-detected cancers were ductal carcinoma in situ.
Collapse
|
Evaluation Study |
22 |
236 |
22
|
Rebbeck TR, Friebel TM, Friedman E, Hamann U, Huo D, Kwong A, Olah E, Olopade OI, Solano AR, Teo SH, Thomassen M, Weitzel JN, Chan TL, Couch FJ, Goldgar DE, Kruse TA, Palmero EI, Park SK, Torres D, van Rensburg EJ, McGuffog L, Parsons MT, Leslie G, Aalfs CM, Abugattas J, Adlard J, Agata S, Aittomäki K, Andrews L, Andrulis IL, Arason A, Arnold N, Arun BK, Asseryanis E, Auerbach L, Azzollini J, Balmaña J, Barile M, Barkardottir RB, Barrowdale D, Benitez J, Berger A, Berger R, Blanco AM, Blazer KR, Blok MJ, Bonadona V, Bonanni B, Bradbury AR, Brewer C, Buecher B, Buys SS, Caldes T, Caliebe A, Caligo MA, Campbell I, Caputo S, Chiquette J, Chung WK, Claes KB, Collée JM, Cook J, Davidson R, de la Hoya M, De Leeneer K, de Pauw A, Delnatte C, Diez O, Ding YC, Ditsch N, Domchek SM, Dorfling CM, Velazquez C, Dworniczak B, Eason J, Easton DF, Eeles R, Ehrencrona H, Ejlertsen B, Engel C, Engert S, Evans DG, Faivre L, Feliubadaló L, Ferrer SF, Foretova L, Fowler J, Frost D, Galvão HCR, Ganz PA, Garber J, Gauthier-Villars M, Gehrig A, Gerdes AM, Gesta P, Giannini G, Giraud S, Glendon G, Godwin AK, Greene MH, et alRebbeck TR, Friebel TM, Friedman E, Hamann U, Huo D, Kwong A, Olah E, Olopade OI, Solano AR, Teo SH, Thomassen M, Weitzel JN, Chan TL, Couch FJ, Goldgar DE, Kruse TA, Palmero EI, Park SK, Torres D, van Rensburg EJ, McGuffog L, Parsons MT, Leslie G, Aalfs CM, Abugattas J, Adlard J, Agata S, Aittomäki K, Andrews L, Andrulis IL, Arason A, Arnold N, Arun BK, Asseryanis E, Auerbach L, Azzollini J, Balmaña J, Barile M, Barkardottir RB, Barrowdale D, Benitez J, Berger A, Berger R, Blanco AM, Blazer KR, Blok MJ, Bonadona V, Bonanni B, Bradbury AR, Brewer C, Buecher B, Buys SS, Caldes T, Caliebe A, Caligo MA, Campbell I, Caputo S, Chiquette J, Chung WK, Claes KB, Collée JM, Cook J, Davidson R, de la Hoya M, De Leeneer K, de Pauw A, Delnatte C, Diez O, Ding YC, Ditsch N, Domchek SM, Dorfling CM, Velazquez C, Dworniczak B, Eason J, Easton DF, Eeles R, Ehrencrona H, Ejlertsen B, Engel C, Engert S, Evans DG, Faivre L, Feliubadaló L, Ferrer SF, Foretova L, Fowler J, Frost D, Galvão HCR, Ganz PA, Garber J, Gauthier-Villars M, Gehrig A, Gerdes AM, Gesta P, Giannini G, Giraud S, Glendon G, Godwin AK, Greene MH, Gronwald J, Gutierrez-Barrera A, Hahnen E, Hauke J, Henderson A, Hentschel J, Hogervorst FB, Honisch E, Imyanitov EN, Isaacs C, Izatt L, Izquierdo A, Jakubowska A, James P, Janavicius R, Jensen UB, John EM, Joseph V, Kaczmarek K, Karlan BY, Kast K, Kim SW, Konstantopoulou I, Korach J, Laitman Y, Lasa A, Lasset C, Lázaro C, Lee A, Lee MH, Lester J, Lesueur F, Liljegren A, Lindor NM, Longy M, Loud JT, Lu KH, Lubinski J, Machackova E, Manoukian S, Mari V, Martínez-Bouzas C, Matrai Z, Mebirouk N, Meijers-Heijboer HE, Meindl A, Mensenkamp AR, Mickys U, Miller A, Montagna M, Moysich KB, Mulligan AM, Musinsky J, Neuhausen SL, Nevanlinna H, Ngeow J, Nguyen HP, Niederacher D, Nielsen HR, Nielsen FC, Nussbaum RL, Offit K, Öfverholm A, Ong KR, Osorio A, Papi L, Papp J, Pasini B, Pedersen IS, Peixoto A, Peruga N, Peterlongo P, Pohl E, Pradhan N, Prajzendanc K, Prieur F, Pujol P, Radice P, Ramus SJ, Rantala J, Rashid MU, Rhiem K, Robson M, Rodriguez GC, Rogers MT, Rudaitis V, Schmidt AY, Schmutzler RK, Senter L, Shah PD, Sharma P, Side LE, Simard J, Singer CF, Skytte AB, Slavin TP, Snape K, Sobol H, Southey M, Steele L, Steinemann D, Sukiennicki G, Sutter C, Szabo CI, Tan YY, Teixeira MR, Terry MB, Teulé A, Thomas A, Thull DL, Tischkowitz M, Tognazzo S, Toland AE, Topka S, Trainer AH, Tung N, van Asperen CJ, van der Hout AH, van der Kolk LE, van der Luijt RB, Van Heetvelde M, Varesco L, Varon-Mateeva R, Vega A, Villarreal-Garza C, von Wachenfeldt A, Walker L, Wang-Gohrke S, Wappenschmidt B, Weber BHF, Yannoukakos D, Yoon SY, Zanzottera C, Zidan J, Zorn KK, Hutten Selkirk CG, Hulick PJ, Chenevix-Trench G, Spurdle AB, Antoniou AC, Nathanson KL. Mutational spectrum in a worldwide study of 29,700 families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Hum Mutat 2018; 39:593-620. [PMID: 29446198 PMCID: PMC5903938 DOI: 10.1002/humu.23406] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 216] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2017] [Revised: 01/09/2018] [Accepted: 01/19/2018] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
The prevalence and spectrum of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in single populations, with the majority of reports focused on White in Europe and North America. The Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) has assembled data on 18,435 families with BRCA1 mutations and 11,351 families with BRCA2 mutations ascertained from 69 centers in 49 countries on six continents. This study comprehensively describes the characteristics of the 1,650 unique BRCA1 and 1,731 unique BRCA2 deleterious (disease-associated) mutations identified in the CIMBA database. We observed substantial variation in mutation type and frequency by geographical region and race/ethnicity. In addition to known founder mutations, mutations of relatively high frequency were identified in specific racial/ethnic or geographic groups that may reflect founder mutations and which could be used in targeted (panel) first pass genotyping for specific populations. Knowledge of the population-specific mutational spectrum in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could inform efficient strategies for genetic testing and may justify a more broad-based oncogenetic testing in some populations.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
7 |
216 |
23
|
Couch FJ, Wang X, McGuffog L, Lee A, Olswold C, Kuchenbaecker KB, Soucy P, Fredericksen Z, Barrowdale D, Dennis J, Gaudet MM, Dicks E, Kosel M, Healey S, Sinilnikova OM, Lee A, Bacot F, Vincent D, Hogervorst FBL, Peock S, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Jakubowska A, Investigators KC, Radice P, Schmutzler RK, Domchek SM, Piedmonte M, Singer CF, Friedman E, Thomassen M, Hansen TVO, Neuhausen SL, Szabo CI, Blanco I, Greene MH, Karlan BY, Garber J, Phelan CM, Weitzel JN, Montagna M, Olah E, Andrulis IL, Godwin AK, Yannoukakos D, Goldgar DE, Caldes T, Nevanlinna H, Osorio A, Terry MB, Daly MB, van Rensburg EJ, Hamann U, Ramus SJ, Ewart Toland A, Caligo MA, Olopade OI, Tung N, Claes K, Beattie MS, Southey MC, Imyanitov EN, Tischkowitz M, Janavicius R, John EM, Kwong A, Diez O, Balmaña J, Barkardottir RB, Arun BK, Rennert G, Teo SH, Ganz PA, Campbell I, van der Hout AH, van Deurzen CHM, Seynaeve C, Gómez Garcia EB, van Leeuwen FE, Meijers-Heijboer HEJ, Gille JJP, Ausems MGEM, Blok MJ, Ligtenberg MJL, Rookus MA, Devilee P, Verhoef S, van Os TAM, Wijnen JT, Frost D, Ellis S, Fineberg E, Platte R, Evans DG, Izatt L, Eeles RA, Adlard J, Eccles DM, Cook J, Brewer C, Douglas F, et alCouch FJ, Wang X, McGuffog L, Lee A, Olswold C, Kuchenbaecker KB, Soucy P, Fredericksen Z, Barrowdale D, Dennis J, Gaudet MM, Dicks E, Kosel M, Healey S, Sinilnikova OM, Lee A, Bacot F, Vincent D, Hogervorst FBL, Peock S, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Jakubowska A, Investigators KC, Radice P, Schmutzler RK, Domchek SM, Piedmonte M, Singer CF, Friedman E, Thomassen M, Hansen TVO, Neuhausen SL, Szabo CI, Blanco I, Greene MH, Karlan BY, Garber J, Phelan CM, Weitzel JN, Montagna M, Olah E, Andrulis IL, Godwin AK, Yannoukakos D, Goldgar DE, Caldes T, Nevanlinna H, Osorio A, Terry MB, Daly MB, van Rensburg EJ, Hamann U, Ramus SJ, Ewart Toland A, Caligo MA, Olopade OI, Tung N, Claes K, Beattie MS, Southey MC, Imyanitov EN, Tischkowitz M, Janavicius R, John EM, Kwong A, Diez O, Balmaña J, Barkardottir RB, Arun BK, Rennert G, Teo SH, Ganz PA, Campbell I, van der Hout AH, van Deurzen CHM, Seynaeve C, Gómez Garcia EB, van Leeuwen FE, Meijers-Heijboer HEJ, Gille JJP, Ausems MGEM, Blok MJ, Ligtenberg MJL, Rookus MA, Devilee P, Verhoef S, van Os TAM, Wijnen JT, Frost D, Ellis S, Fineberg E, Platte R, Evans DG, Izatt L, Eeles RA, Adlard J, Eccles DM, Cook J, Brewer C, Douglas F, Hodgson S, Morrison PJ, Side LE, Donaldson A, Houghton C, Rogers MT, Dorkins H, Eason J, Gregory H, McCann E, Murray A, Calender A, Hardouin A, Berthet P, Delnatte C, Nogues C, Lasset C, Houdayer C, Leroux D, Rouleau E, Prieur F, Damiola F, Sobol H, Coupier I, Venat-Bouvet L, Castera L, Gauthier-Villars M, Léoné M, Pujol P, Mazoyer S, Bignon YJ, Złowocka-Perłowska E, Gronwald J, Lubinski J, Durda K, Jaworska K, Huzarski T, Spurdle AB, Viel A, Peissel B, Bonanni B, Melloni G, Ottini L, Papi L, Varesco L, Tibiletti MG, Peterlongo P, Volorio S, Manoukian S, Pensotti V, Arnold N, Engel C, Deissler H, Gadzicki D, Gehrig A, Kast K, Rhiem K, Meindl A, Niederacher D, Ditsch N, Plendl H, Preisler-Adams S, Engert S, Sutter C, Varon-Mateeva R, Wappenschmidt B, Weber BHF, Arver B, Stenmark-Askmalm M, Loman N, Rosenquist R, Einbeigi Z, Nathanson KL, Rebbeck TR, Blank SV, Cohn DE, Rodriguez GC, Small L, Friedlander M, Bae-Jump VL, Fink-Retter A, Rappaport C, Gschwantler-Kaulich D, Pfeiler G, Tea MK, Lindor NM, Kaufman B, Shimon Paluch S, Laitman Y, Skytte AB, Gerdes AM, Pedersen IS, Moeller ST, Kruse TA, Jensen UB, Vijai J, Sarrel K, Robson M, Kauff N, Mulligan AM, Glendon G, Ozcelik H, Ejlertsen B, Nielsen FC, Jønson L, Andersen MK, Ding YC, Steele L, Foretova L, Teulé A, Lazaro C, Brunet J, Pujana MA, Mai PL, Loud JT, Walsh C, Lester J, Orsulic S, Narod SA, Herzog J, Sand SR, Tognazzo S, Agata S, Vaszko T, Weaver J, Stavropoulou AV, Buys SS, Romero A, de la Hoya M, Aittomäki K, Muranen TA, Duran M, Chung WK, Lasa A, Dorfling CM, Miron A, Benitez J, Senter L, Huo D, Chan SB, Sokolenko AP, Chiquette J, Tihomirova L, Friebel TM, Agnarsson BA, Lu KH, Lejbkowicz F, James PA, Hall P, Dunning AM, Tessier D, Cunningham J, Slager SL, Wang C, Hart S, Stevens K, Simard J, Pastinen T, Pankratz VS, Offit K, Easton DF, Chenevix-Trench G, Antoniou AC. Genome-wide association study in BRCA1 mutation carriers identifies novel loci associated with breast and ovarian cancer risk. PLoS Genet 2013; 9:e1003212. [PMID: 23544013 PMCID: PMC3609646 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003212] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 211] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2012] [Accepted: 11/14/2012] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BRCA1-associated breast and ovarian cancer risks can be modified by common genetic variants. To identify further cancer risk-modifying loci, we performed a multi-stage GWAS of 11,705 BRCA1 carriers (of whom 5,920 were diagnosed with breast and 1,839 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer), with a further replication in an additional sample of 2,646 BRCA1 carriers. We identified a novel breast cancer risk modifier locus at 1q32 for BRCA1 carriers (rs2290854, P = 2.7 × 10(-8), HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09-1.20). In addition, we identified two novel ovarian cancer risk modifier loci: 17q21.31 (rs17631303, P = 1.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38) and 4q32.3 (rs4691139, P = 3.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38). The 4q32.3 locus was not associated with ovarian cancer risk in the general population or BRCA2 carriers, suggesting a BRCA1-specific association. The 17q21.31 locus was also associated with ovarian cancer risk in 8,211 BRCA2 carriers (P = 2×10(-4)). These loci may lead to an improved understanding of the etiology of breast and ovarian tumors in BRCA1 carriers. Based on the joint distribution of the known BRCA1 breast cancer risk-modifying loci, we estimated that the breast cancer lifetime risks for the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk are 28%-50% compared to 81%-100% for the 5% at highest risk. Similarly, based on the known ovarian cancer risk-modifying loci, the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk have an estimated lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer of 28% or lower, whereas the 5% at highest risk will have a risk of 63% or higher. Such differences in risk may have important implications for risk prediction and clinical management for BRCA1 carriers.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
12 |
211 |
24
|
Scheuer L, Kauff N, Robson M, Kelly B, Barakat R, Satagopan J, Ellis N, Hensley M, Boyd J, Borgen P, Norton L, Offit K. Outcome of preventive surgery and screening for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20:1260-8. [PMID: 11870168 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2002.20.5.1260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 204] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To prospectively determine the impact of genetic counseling and testing on risk-reduction strategies and cancer incidence in a cohort of individuals at hereditary risk for breast and ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred fifty-one individuals with BRCA mutations were identified at a single comprehensive cancer center from May 1, 1995, through October 31, 2000. Uniform recommendations regarding screening and preventive surgery were provided in the context of genetic counseling. Patients were followed for a mean of 24.8 months (range, 1.6 to 66.0 months) using standardized questionnaires, chart reviews, and contact with primary physicians. RESULTS Frequency of cancer surveillance by physical examinations and imaging studies increased after genetic counseling and testing. Twenty-one breast, ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers were detected after receipt of genetic test results. Among 29 individuals choosing risk-reducing mastectomy after testing, two were found to have occult intraductal breast cancers. Among 90 individuals who underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, one early-stage ovarian neoplasm and one early-stage fallopian tube neoplasm were found. Radiographic or tumor marker-based screening detected six breast cancers, five of which were stage 0/I, one early-stage primary peritoneal cancer, and three stage I or II ovarian cancers. Six additional breast cancers were detected by physical examination between radiographic screening intervals; four of these six tumors were stage I. No stage III or stage IV malignancies were detected after genetic testing. CONCLUSION This study provides prospective evidence that genetic counseling and testing increased surveillance and led to risk-reducing operations, which resulted in diagnosis of early-stage tumors in patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.
Collapse
|
|
23 |
204 |
25
|
Kuchenbaecker KB, McGuffog L, Barrowdale D, Lee A, Soucy P, Healey S, Dennis J, Lush M, Robson M, Spurdle AB, Ramus SJ, Mavaddat N, Terry MB, Neuhausen SL, Hamann U, Southey M, John EM, Chung WK, Daly MB, Buys SS, Goldgar DE, Dorfling CM, van Rensburg EJ, Ding YC, Ejlertsen B, Gerdes AM, Hansen TVO, Slager S, Hallberg E, Benitez J, Osorio A, Cohen N, Lawler W, Weitzel JN, Peterlongo P, Pensotti V, Dolcetti R, Barile M, Bonanni B, Azzollini J, Manoukian S, Peissel B, Radice P, Savarese A, Papi L, Giannini G, Fostira F, Konstantopoulou I, Adlard J, Brewer C, Cook J, Davidson R, Eccles D, Eeles R, Ellis S, Frost D, Hodgson S, Izatt L, Lalloo F, Ong KR, Godwin AK, Arnold N, Dworniczak B, Engel C, Gehrig A, Hahnen E, Hauke J, Kast K, Meindl A, Niederacher D, Schmutzler RK, Varon-Mateeva R, Wang-Gohrke S, Wappenschmidt B, Barjhoux L, Collonge-Rame MA, Elan C, Golmard L, Barouk-Simonet E, Lesueur F, Mazoyer S, Sokolowska J, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Isaacs C, Claes KBM, Poppe B, de la Hoya M, Garcia-Barberan V, Aittomäki K, Nevanlinna H, Ausems MGEM, de Lange JL, Gómez Garcia EB, Hogervorst FBL, Kets CM, Meijers-Heijboer HEJ, Oosterwijk JC, Rookus MA, van Asperen CJ, van den Ouweland AMW, et alKuchenbaecker KB, McGuffog L, Barrowdale D, Lee A, Soucy P, Healey S, Dennis J, Lush M, Robson M, Spurdle AB, Ramus SJ, Mavaddat N, Terry MB, Neuhausen SL, Hamann U, Southey M, John EM, Chung WK, Daly MB, Buys SS, Goldgar DE, Dorfling CM, van Rensburg EJ, Ding YC, Ejlertsen B, Gerdes AM, Hansen TVO, Slager S, Hallberg E, Benitez J, Osorio A, Cohen N, Lawler W, Weitzel JN, Peterlongo P, Pensotti V, Dolcetti R, Barile M, Bonanni B, Azzollini J, Manoukian S, Peissel B, Radice P, Savarese A, Papi L, Giannini G, Fostira F, Konstantopoulou I, Adlard J, Brewer C, Cook J, Davidson R, Eccles D, Eeles R, Ellis S, Frost D, Hodgson S, Izatt L, Lalloo F, Ong KR, Godwin AK, Arnold N, Dworniczak B, Engel C, Gehrig A, Hahnen E, Hauke J, Kast K, Meindl A, Niederacher D, Schmutzler RK, Varon-Mateeva R, Wang-Gohrke S, Wappenschmidt B, Barjhoux L, Collonge-Rame MA, Elan C, Golmard L, Barouk-Simonet E, Lesueur F, Mazoyer S, Sokolowska J, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Isaacs C, Claes KBM, Poppe B, de la Hoya M, Garcia-Barberan V, Aittomäki K, Nevanlinna H, Ausems MGEM, de Lange JL, Gómez Garcia EB, Hogervorst FBL, Kets CM, Meijers-Heijboer HEJ, Oosterwijk JC, Rookus MA, van Asperen CJ, van den Ouweland AMW, van Doorn HC, van Os TAM, Kwong A, Olah E, Diez O, Brunet J, Lazaro C, Teulé A, Gronwald J, Jakubowska A, Kaczmarek K, Lubinski J, Sukiennicki G, Barkardottir RB, Chiquette J, Agata S, Montagna M, Teixeira MR, Park SK, Olswold C, Tischkowitz M, Foretova L, Gaddam P, Vijai J, Pfeiler G, Rappaport-Fuerhauser C, Singer CF, Tea MKM, Greene MH, Loud JT, Rennert G, Imyanitov EN, Hulick PJ, Hays JL, Piedmonte M, Rodriguez GC, Martyn J, Glendon G, Mulligan AM, Andrulis IL, Toland AE, Jensen UB, Kruse TA, Pedersen IS, Thomassen M, Caligo MA, Teo SH, Berger R, Friedman E, Laitman Y, Arver B, Borg A, Ehrencrona H, Rantala J, Olopade OI, Ganz PA, Nussbaum RL, Bradbury AR, Domchek SM, Nathanson KL, Arun BK, James P, Karlan BY, Lester J, Simard J, Pharoah PDP, Offit K, Couch FJ, Chenevix-Trench G, Easton DF, Antoniou AC. Evaluation of Polygenic Risk Scores for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109:3064534. [PMID: 28376175 PMCID: PMC5408990 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw302] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 203] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2016] [Revised: 10/15/2016] [Accepted: 11/16/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through population-based GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1 carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, P = 8.2×10 -53 ). In BRCA2 carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, P = 7.2×10 -20 ). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2 carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management.
Collapse
|
research-article |
8 |
203 |