Cancer Core Europe: Leveraging Institutional Synergies to Advance Oncology Research and Care Globally.

Cancer Core Europe brings together the expertise, resources, and interests of seven leading cancer institutes committed to leveraging collective innovation and collaboration in precision oncology. Through targeted efforts addressing key medical challenges in cancer and partnerships with multiple stakeholders, the consortium seeks to advance cancer research and enhance equitable patient care.

Cancer risks for other sites in addition to breast in CHEK2 c.1100delC families.

PURPOSE: Female CHEK2 c.1100delC heterozygotes are eligible for additional breast surveillance due to an increased breast cancer risk. Increased risks for other cancers have been reported. We studied whether CHEK2 c.1100delC is associated with an increased risk for other cancers within these families. METHODS: Including 10,780 individuals from 609 families, we calculated standardized incidence rates (SIRs) and absolute excess risk (AER, per 10.000 person years) by comparing first-reported cancer derived from the pedigrees with general Dutch population rates from 1970 onwards. Attained-age analyses were performed for sites in which significant increased risks were found. Considering study design, we primarily focused on cancer risk in women. RESULTS: We found significant increased risks of colorectal cancer (CRC; SIR=1.43, 95%CI=1.14-1.76; AER=1.43) and hematological cancers (SIR=1.32; 95%CI=1.02-1.67; AER=0.87). CRC was significantly more frequent from age 45 onwards. CONCLUSION: A significantly increased risk of CRC, and hematological cancers in women was found, starting at a younger age than expected. Currently, colorectal surveillance starts at age 45 in high-risk individuals. Our results suggest that some CHEK2 c.1100delC families might benefit from this surveillance as well, however, further research is needed to determine who may profit from this additional colorectal surveillance.

Validation of the BOADICEA model in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers.

BACKGROUND: No validation has been conducted for the BOADICEA multifactorial breast cancer risk prediction model specifically in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers to date. Here, we evaluated the performance of BOADICEA in predicting 5-year breast cancer risks in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers ascertained through clinical genetic centres. METHODS: We evaluated the model calibration and discriminatory ability in the prospective TRANsIBCCS cohort study comprising 1614 BRCA1 and 1365 BRCA2 PV carriers (209 incident cases). Study participants had lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, anthropometric risk factor information, a polygenic risk score based on 313 SNPs and family history information. RESULTS: The full multifactorial model considering family history together with all other risk factors was well calibrated overall (E/O=1.07, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.24) and in quintiles of predicted risk. Discrimination was maximised when all risk factors were considered (Harrell's C-index=0.70, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.74; area under the curve=0.79, 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.82). The model performance was similar when evaluated separately in BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV carriers. The full model identified 5.8%, 12.9% and 24.0% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers with 5-year breast cancer risks of <1.65%, <3% and <5%, respectively, risk thresholds commonly used for different management and risk-reduction options. CONCLUSION: BOADICEA may be used to aid personalised cancer risk management and decision-making for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers. It is implemented in the free-access CanRisk tool (https://www.canrisk.org/).

Assessing the validity of driver gene identification tools for targeted genome sequencing data.

Motivation: Most cancer driver gene identification tools have been developed for whole-exome sequencing data. Targeted sequencing is a popular alternative to whole-exome sequencing for large cancer studies due to its greater depth at a lower cost per tumor. Unlike whole-exome sequencing, targeted sequencing only enables mutation calling for a selected subset of genes. Whether existing driver gene identification tools remain valid in that context has not previously been studied. Results: We evaluated the validity of seven popular driver gene identification tools when applied to targeted sequencing data. Based on whole-exome data of 14 different cancer types from TCGA, we constructed matching targeted datasets by keeping only the mutations overlapping with the pan-cancer MSK-IMPACT panel and, in the case of breast cancer, also the breast-cancer-specific B-CAST panel. We then compared the driver gene predictions obtained on whole-exome and targeted mutation data for each of the seven tools. Differences in how the tools model background mutation rates were the most important determinant of their validity on targeted sequencing data. Based on our results, we recommend OncodriveFML, OncodriveCLUSTL, 20/20+, dNdSCv, and ActiveDriver for driver gene identification in targeted sequencing data, whereas MutSigCV and DriverML are best avoided in that context. Availability and implementation: Code for the analyses is available at https://github.com/SchmidtGroupNKI/TGSdrivergene_validity.

Long-term outcome of high-grade serous carcinoma established in risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy specimens in asymptomatic BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variant carriers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the long-term outcome of asymptomatic BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variant (GPV) carriers with high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) in their risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) specimen. METHODS: In a previously described cohort of asymptomatic BRCA1/2 GPV carriers derived from the Hereditary Breast and Ovarian cancer in the Netherlands (HEBON) study, women with HGSC at RRSO were identified. Main outcome was ten-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes were time to recurrence, ten-year disease-specific survival (DSS), ten-year overall survival (OS). Patient, disease and treatment characteristics associated with recurrence were described. RESULTS: The 28 included women with HGSC at RRSO were diagnosed at a median age of 55.3 years (range: 33.5-74.3). After staging, eighteen women had (FIGO) stage I, three stage II and five had stage III disease. Two women did not undergo surgical staging and were classified as unknown stage. After a median follow-up of 13.5 years (range: 9.1-24.7), six women with stage I (33%), one woman with stage II (33%), two women with stage III (40%) and none of the women with unknown stage developed a recurrence. Median time to recurrence was 6.9 years (range: 0.8-9.2 years). Ten-year DFS was 68%, ten-year DSS was 88% and ten-year OS was 82%. CONCLUSION: Most asymptomatic BRCA1/2 GPV carriers with HGSC at RRSO were diagnosed at an early stage. Nevertheless, after a median follow-up of 13.5 years, nine of the 28 women with HGSC at RRSO developed a recurrence after a median of 6.9 years.

Long-term outcomes of young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve, triple-negative breast cancer patients according to BRCA1 status.

BACKGROUND: Due to the abundant usage of chemotherapy in young triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, the unbiased prognostic value of BRCA1-related biomarkers in this population remains unclear. In addition, whether BRCA1-related biomarkers modify the well-established prognostic value of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) is unknown. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve TNBC patients according to BRCA1 status, taking sTILs into account. METHODS: We included 485 Dutch women diagnosed with node-negative TNBC under age 40 between 1989 and 2000. During this period, these women were considered low-risk and did not receive chemotherapy. BRCA1 status, including pathogenic germline BRCA1 mutation (gBRCA1m), somatic BRCA1 mutation (sBRCA1m), and tumor BRCA1 promoter methylation (BRCA1-PM), was assessed using DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. sTILs were assessed according to the international guideline. Patients' outcomes were compared using Cox regression and competing risk models. RESULTS: Among the 399 patients with BRCA1 status, 26.3% had a gBRCA1m, 5.3% had a sBRCA1m, 36.6% had tumor BRCA1-PM, and 31.8% had BRCA1-non-altered tumors. Compared to BRCA1-non-alteration, gBRCA1m was associated with worse overall survival (OS) from the fourth year after diagnosis (adjusted HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.18-3.75), and this association attenuated after adjustment for second primary tumors. Every 10% sTIL increment was associated with 16% higher OS (adjusted HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90) in gBRCA1m, sBRCA1m, or BRCA1-non-altered patients and 31% higher OS in tumor BRCA1-PM patients. Among the 66 patients with tumor BRCA1-PM and ≥ 50% sTILs, we observed excellent 15-year OS (97.0%; 95% CI, 92.9-100%). Conversely, among the 61 patients with gBRCA1m and < 50% sTILs, we observed poor 15-year OS (50.8%; 95% CI, 39.7-65.0%). Furthermore, gBRCA1m was associated with higher (adjusted subdistribution HR, 4.04; 95% CI, 2.29-7.13) and tumor BRCA1-PM with lower (adjusted subdistribution HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.95) incidence of second primary tumors, compared to BRCA1-non-alteration. CONCLUSIONS: Although both gBRCA1m and tumor BRCA1-PM alter BRCA1 gene transcription, they are associated with different outcomes in young, node-negative, chemotherapy-naïve TNBC patients. By combining sTILs and BRCA1 status for risk classification, we were able to identify potential subgroups in this population to intensify and optimize adjuvant treatment.

The benefit of adding polygenic risk scores, lifestyle factors, and breast density to family history and genetic status for breast cancer risk and surveillance classification of unaffected women from germline CHEK2 c.1100delC families.

To determine the changes in surveillance category by adding a polygenic risk score based on 311 breast cancer (BC)-associated variants (PRS311), questionnaire-based risk factors and breast density on personalized BC risk in unaffected women from Dutch CHEK2 c.1100delC families. In total, 117 unaffected women (58 heterozygotes and 59 non-carriers) from CHEK2 families were included. Blood-derived DNA samples were genotyped with the GSAMDv3-array to determine PRS311. Lifetime BC risk was calculated in CanRisk, which uses data from the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA). Women, were categorized into three surveillance groups. The surveillance advice was reclassified in 37.9 % of heterozygotes and 32.2 % of non-carriers after adding PRS311. Including questionnaire-based risk factors resulted in an additional change in 20.0 % of heterozygotes and 13.2 % of non-carriers; and a subanalysis showed that adding breast density on top shifted another 17.9 % of heterozygotes and 33.3 % of non-carriers. Overall, the majority of heterozygotes were reclassified to a less intensive surveillance, while non-carriers would require intensified surveillance. The addition of PRS311, questionnaire-based risk factors and breast density to family history resulted in a more personalized BC surveillance advice in CHEK2-families, which may lead to more efficient use of surveillance.

External validation and clinical utility assessment of PREDICT breast cancer prognostic model in young, systemic treatment-naïve women with node-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The validity of the PREDICT breast cancer prognostic model is unclear for young patients without adjuvant systemic treatment. This study aimed to validate PREDICT and assess its clinical utility in young women with node-negative breast cancer who did not receive systemic treatment. METHODS: We selected all women from the Netherlands Cancer Registry who were diagnosed with node-negative breast cancer under age 40 between 1989 and 2000, a period when adjuvant systemic treatment was not standard practice for women with node-negative disease. We evaluated the calibration and discrimination of PREDICT using the observed/expected (O/E) mortality ratio, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), respectively. Additionally, we compared the potential clinical utility of PREDICT for selectively administering chemotherapy to the chemotherapy-to-all strategy using decision curve analysis at predefined thresholds. RESULTS: A total of 2264 women with a median age at diagnosis of 36 years were included. Of them, 71.2% had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors and 44.0% had grade 3 tumors. Median tumor size was 16 mm. PREDICT v2.2 underestimated 10-year all-cause mortality by 33% in all women (O/E ratio:1.33, 95%CI:1.22-1.43). Model discrimination was moderate overall (AUC10-year:0.65, 95%CI:0.62-0.68), and poor for women with ER-negative tumors (AUC10-year:0.56, 95%CI:0.51-0.62). Compared to the chemotherapy-to-all strategy, PREDICT only showed a slightly higher net benefit in women with ER-positive tumors, but not in women with ER-negative tumors. CONCLUSIONS: PREDICT yields unreliable predictions for young women with node-negative breast cancer. Further model updates are needed before PREDICT can be routinely used in this patient subset.

Association of DCIS size and margin status with risk of developing breast cancer post-treatment: multinational, pooled cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between size and margin status of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and risk of developing ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and ipsilateral DCIS after treatment, and stage and subtype of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer. DESIGN: Multinational, pooled cohort study. SETTING: Four large international cohorts. PARTICIPANTS: Patient level data on 47 695 women with a diagnosis of pure, primary DCIS between 1999 and 2017 in the Netherlands, UK, and US who underwent surgery, either breast conserving or mastectomy, often followed by radiotherapy or endocrine treatment, or both. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes were 10 year cumulative incidence of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and ipsilateral DCIS estimated in relation to DCIS size and margin status, and adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals, estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses with multiple imputed data RESULTS: The 10 year cumulative incidence of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer was 3.2%. In women who underwent breast conserving surgery with or without radiotherapy, only adjusted risks for ipsilateral DCIS were significantly increased for larger DCIS (20-49 mm) compared with DCIS <20 mm (hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.72). Risks for both ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and ipsilateral DCIS were significantly higher with involved compared with clear margins (invasive breast cancer 1.40, 1.07 to 1.83; DCIS 1.39, 1.04 to 1.87). Use of adjuvant endocrine treatment was not significantly associated with a lower risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer compared to treatment with breast conserving surgery only (0.86, 0.62 to 1.21). In women who received breast conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy, higher DCIS grade was not significantly associated with ipsilateral invasive breast cancer, only with a higher risk of ipsilateral DCIS (grade 1: 1.42, 1.08 to 1.87; grade 3: 2.17, 1.66 to 2.83). Higher age at diagnosis was associated with lower risk (per year) of ipsilateral DCIS (0.98, 0.97 to 0.99) but not ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (1.00, 0.99 to 1.00). Women with large DCIS (≥50 mm) more often developed stage III and IV ipsilateral invasive breast cancer compared to women with DCIS <20 mm. No such association was found between involved margins and higher stage of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer. Associations between larger DCIS and hormone receptor negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and involved margins and hormone receptor negative ipsilateral invasive breast cancer were found. CONCLUSIONS: The association of DCIS size and margin status with ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and ipsilateral DCIS was small. When these two factors were added to other known risk factors in multivariable models, clinicopathological risk factors alone were found to be limited in discriminating between low and high risk DCIS.

DCIS and LCIS: Are the Risk Factors for Developing In Situ Breast Cancer Different?

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is widely accepted as a precursor of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is considered a risk factor for invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), and it is unclear whether LCIS is also a precursor. Therefore, it would be expected that similar risk factors predispose to both DCIS and IDC, but not necessarily LCIS and ILC. This study examined associations with risk factors using data from 3075 DCIS cases, 338 LCIS cases, and 1584 controls aged 35-60, recruited from the UK-based GLACIER and ICICLE case-control studies between 2007 and 2012. Analysis showed that breastfeeding in parous women was protective against DCIS and LCIS, which is consistent with research on invasive breast cancer (IBC). Additionally, long-term use of HRT in post-menopausal women increased the risk of DCIS and LCIS, with a stronger association in LCIS, similar to the association with ILC. Contrary to findings with IBC, parity and the number of births were not protective against DCIS or LCIS, while oral contraceptives showed an unexpected protective effect. These findings suggest both similarities and differences in risk factors for DCIS and LCIS compared to IBC and that there may be justification for increased breast surveillance in post-menopausal women taking long-term HRT.

Exome sequencing identifies breast cancer susceptibility genes and defines the contribution of coding variants to breast cancer risk.

Linkage and candidate gene studies have identified several breast cancer susceptibility genes, but the overall contribution of coding variation to breast cancer is unclear. To evaluate the role of rare coding variants more comprehensively, we performed a meta-analysis across three large whole-exome sequencing datasets, containing 26,368 female cases and 217,673 female controls. Burden tests were performed for protein-truncating and rare missense variants in 15,616 and 18,601 genes, respectively. Associations between protein-truncating variants and breast cancer were identified for the following six genes at exome-wide significance (P < 2.5 × 10-6): the five known susceptibility genes ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and PALB2, together with MAP3K1. Associations were also observed for LZTR1, ATR and BARD1 with P < 1 × 10-4. Associations between predicted deleterious rare missense or protein-truncating variants and breast cancer were additionally identified for CDKN2A at exome-wide significance. The overall contribution of coding variants in genes beyond the previously known genes is estimated to be small.

Obesity-associated changes in molecular biology of primary breast cancer.

Obesity is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer (BC) and worse prognosis in BC patients, yet its impact on BC biology remains understudied in humans. This study investigates how the biology of untreated primary BC differs according to patients' body mass index (BMI) using data from >2,000 patients. We identify several genomic alterations that are differentially prevalent in overweight or obese patients compared to lean patients. We report evidence supporting an ageing accelerating effect of obesity at the genetic level. We show that BMI-associated differences in bulk transcriptomic profile are subtle, while single cell profiling allows detection of more pronounced changes in different cell compartments. These analyses further reveal an elevated and unresolved inflammation of the BC tumor microenvironment associated with obesity, with distinct characteristics contingent on the estrogen receptor status. Collectively, our analyses imply that obesity is associated with an inflammaging-like phenotype. We conclude that patient adiposity may play a significant role in the heterogeneity of BC and should be considered for BC treatment tailoring.

Associations of height, body mass index, and weight gain with breast cancer risk in carriers of a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2: the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Cohort Consortium.

INTRODUCTION: Height, body mass index (BMI), and weight gain are associated with breast cancer risk in the general population. It is unclear whether these associations also exist for carriers of pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An international pooled cohort of 8091 BRCA1/2 variant carriers was used for retrospective and prospective analyses separately for premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cox regression was used to estimate breast cancer risk associations with height, BMI, and weight change. RESULTS: In the retrospective analysis, taller height was associated with risk of premenopausal breast cancer for BRCA2 variant carriers (HR 1.20 per 10 cm increase, 95% CI 1.04-1.38). Higher young-adult BMI was associated with lower premenopausal breast cancer risk for both BRCA1 (HR 0.75 per 5 kg/m2, 95% CI 0.66-0.84) and BRCA2 (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.89) variant carriers in the retrospective analysis, with consistent, though not statistically significant, findings from the prospective analysis. In the prospective analysis, higher BMI and adult weight gain were associated with higher postmenopausal breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers (HR 1.20 per 5 kg/m2, 95% CI 1.02-1.42; and HR 1.10 per 5 kg weight gain, 95% CI 1.01-1.19, respectively). CONCLUSION: Anthropometric measures are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant carriers, with relative risk estimates that are generally consistent with those for women from the general population.

Health Research with Data in a Time of Privacy: Which Information do Patients Want?

When hospitals ask broad consent for the secondary use of patient data for scientific research, it is unknown for which studies the data will be used. We investigated what patients at a cancer hospital consider to be an adequate level and most suitable method of information provision using questionnaires (n = 71) and interviews (n = 24). A part of the respondents indicated that they would feel sufficiently informed by either being notified about potential further use, or by receiving a general brochure before being asked for consent. Others stated that additional information would be interesting and appreciated. Yet, when discussing required resources needed to provide additional information, interviewees lowered the bar of what they considered minimally required, voicing the importance of spending resources on research.

Contralateral breast cancer risk in patients with breast cancer and a germline-BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant undergoing radiation.

BACKGROUND: Radiation-induced secondary breast cancer (BC) may be a concern after radiation therapy (RT) for primary breast cancer (PBC), especially in young patients with germline (g)BRCA-associated BC who already have high contralateral BC (CBC) risk and potentially increased genetic susceptibility to radiation. We sought to investigate whether adjuvant RT for PBC increases the risk of CBC in patients with gBRCA1/2-associated BC. METHODS: The gBRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers diagnosed with PBC were selected from the prospective International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the association between RT (yes vs no) and CBC risk. We further stratified for BRCA status and age at PBC diagnosis (<40 and >40 years). Statistical significance tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of 3602 eligible patients, 2297 (64%) received adjuvant RT. Median follow-up was 9.6 years. The RT group had more patients with stage III PBC than the non-RT group (15% vs 3%, P < .001), received chemotherapy more often (81% vs 70%, P < .001), and received endocrine therapy more often (50% vs 35%, P < .001). The RT group had an increased CBC risk compared with the non-RT group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12 to 1.86). Statistical significance was observed in gBRCA2 (HR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.13 to 2.77) but not in gBRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers (HR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.77; P = .39 for interaction). In the combined gBRCA1/2 group, patients irradiated when they were younger than or older than 40 years of age at PBC diagnosis showed similar risks (HR = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.93 to 2.04 and HR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.19, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RT regimens minimizing contralateral breast dose should be considered in gBRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers.

Agreement on risk assessment and chemotherapy recommendations among breast cancer specialists: A survey within the MINDACT cohort.

PURPOSE: Tailored recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients is of great importance. This survey assessed agreement among oncologists on risk assessment and chemotherapy recommendation, the impact of adding the 70-gene signature to clinical-pathological characteristics, and changes over time. METHODS: A survey consisting of 37 discordant patient cases from the MINDACT trial (T1-3N0-1M0) was sent to European breast cancer specialists for assessment of risk (high or low) and chemotherapy administration (yes or no). In 2015 the survey was sent twice (survey 1 and 2), several weeks apart, and in 2021 a third time (survey 3). Only the second and third surveys included the 70-gene signature result. RESULTS: 41 breast cancer specialists participated in all three surveys. Overall agreement between respondents decreased slightly between survey 1 and 2, but increased again in survey 3. Over time there was an increase in agreement with the 70-gene signature result on risk assessment, 23% in survey 2 versus 1 and 11% in survey 3 versus 2. With information available indicating a low risk 70-gene signature (n = 25 cases), 20% of risk assessments changed from high to low and 19% of recommendations changed from yes to no chemotherapy in survey 2 versus 1, further increasing with 18% and 21%, respectively, in survey 3 versus 2. CONCLUSION: There is a variability in risk assessment of early breast cancer patients among breast cancer specialists. The 70-gene signature provided valuable information, resulting in fewer patients being assessed as high risk and fewer recommendations for chemotherapy, increasing over time.

Breast cancer genomes from CHEK2 c.1100delC mutation carriers lack somatic TP53 mutations and display a unique structural variant size distribution profile.

BACKGROUND: CHEK2 c.1100delC was the first moderate-risk breast cancer (BC) susceptibility allele discovered. Despite several genomic, transcriptomic and functional studies, however, it is still unclear how exactly CHEK2 c.1100delC promotes tumorigenesis. Since the mutational landscape of a tumor reflects the processes that have operated on its development, the aim of this study was to uncover the somatic genomic landscape of CHEK2-associated BC. METHODS: We sequenced primary BC (pBC) and normal genomes of 20 CHEK2 c.1100delC mutation carriers as well as their pBC transcriptomes. Including pre-existing cohorts, we exhaustively compared CHEK2 pBC genomes to those from BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, those that displayed homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and ER- and ER+ pBCs, totaling to 574 pBC genomes. Findings were validated in 517 metastatic BC genomes subdivided into the same subgroups. Transcriptome data from 168 ER+ pBCs were used to derive a TP53-mutant gene expression signature and perform cluster analysis with CHEK2 BC transcriptomes. Finally, clinical outcome of CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers was compared with BC patients displaying somatic TP53 mutations in two well-described retrospective cohorts totaling to 942 independent pBC cases. RESULTS: BC genomes from CHEK2 mutation carriers were most similar to ER+ BC genomes and least similar to those of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in terms of tumor mutational burden as well as mutational signatures. Moreover, CHEK2 BC genomes did not show any evidence of HRD. Somatic TP53 mutation frequency and the size distribution of structural variants (SVs), however, were different compared to ER+ BC. Interestingly, BC genomes with bi-allelic CHEK2 inactivation lacked somatic TP53 mutations and transcriptomic analysis indicated a shared biology with TP53 mutant BC. Moreover, CHEK2 BC genomes had an increased frequency of > 1 Mb deletions, inversions and tandem duplications with peaks at specific sizes. The high chromothripsis frequency among CHEK2 BC genomes appeared, however, not associated with this unique SV size distribution profile. CONCLUSIONS: CHEK2 BC genomes are most similar to ER+ BC genomes, but display unique features that may further unravel CHEK2-driven tumorigenesis. Increased insight into this mechanism could explain the shorter survival of CHEK2 mutation carriers that is likely driven by intrinsic tumor aggressiveness rather than endocrine resistance.

High-Grade Serous Carcinoma at Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy in Asymptomatic Carriers of BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variants: Prevalence and Clinical Factors.

PURPOSE: To investigate the prevalence of and clinical factors associated with high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) at risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in asymptomatic BRCA1/2-pathogenic variant (PV) carriers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included BRCA1/2-PV carriers who underwent RRSO between 1995 and 2018 from the Hereditary Breast and Ovarian cancer in the Netherlands study. All pathology reports were screened, and histopathology reviews were performed for RRSO specimens with epithelial abnormalities or where HGSC developed after normal RRSO. We then compared clinical characteristics, including parity and oral contraceptive pill (OCP) use, for women with and without HGSC at RRSO. RESULTS: Of the 2,557 included women, 1,624 had BRCA1, 930 had BRCA2, and three had both BRCA1/2-PV. The median age at RRSO was 43.0 years (range: 25.3-73.8) for BRCA1-PV and 46.8 years (27.6-77.9) for BRCA2-PV carriers. Histopathologic review confirmed 28 of 29 HGSCs and two further HGSCs from among 20 apparently normal RRSO specimens. Thus, 24 (1.5%) BRCA1-PV and 6 (0.6%) BRCA2-PV carriers had HGSC at RRSO, with the fallopian tube identified as the primary site in 73%. The prevalence of HGSC in women who underwent RRSO at the recommended age was 0.4%. Among BRCA1/2-PV carriers, older age at RRSO increased the risk of HGSC and long-term OCP use was protective. CONCLUSION: We detected HGSC in 1.5% (BRCA1-PV) and 0.6% (BRCA2-PV) of RRSO specimens from asymptomatic BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Consistent with the fallopian tube hypothesis, we found most lesions in the fallopian tube. Our results highlight the importance of timely RRSO with total removal and assessment of the fallopian tubes and show the protective effects of long-term OCP.