Major response of a peritoneal mesothelioma to nivolumab and ipilimumab: a case report, molecular analysis and review of literature.

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare tumor associated with a poor prognosis and a lack of consensus regarding treatment strategies. While the Checkmate 743 trial demonstrated the superiority of first-line nivolumab and ipilimumab over chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPlM), few studies have assessed the effectiveness of immunotherapy against MPM, due to its rarity. Here, we report a major and sustained 12-month response in a 74-year-old female patient who received the anti-PD-1 nivolumab and the anti-CTLA4 ipilimumab as first-line therapy for diffuse MPM. PD-L1 was expressed and BAP1 expression was lost, as shown by immunohistochemistry, however the BAP1 gene was not mutated. Our findings suggest a role for ICI in non-resectable diffuse MPM exhibiting PD-L1 overexpression and loss of BAP1 expression, and instill new hope in their treatment. To our knowledge, this is the second reported case of dual immunotherapy used as first-line in MPM with a major clinical response. To investigate the clinical outcome, we conducted additional molecular analyses of the MPM tumor and we reviewed the literature on immunotherapy in MPM to discuss the role of PD-L1 and BAP1.

Intra-individual Dose Escalation of Abiraterone According to Its Plasma Exposure in Patients with Progressive Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results of the OPTIMABI Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Trough abiraterone concentration (ABI Cmin) of 8.4 ng/mL has been identified as an appropriate efficacy threshold in patients treated for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of the phase II OPTIMABI study was to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacokinetics (PK)-guided dose escalation of abiraterone acetate (AA) in underexposed patients with mCRPC with early tumour progression. METHODS: This multicentre, non-randomised study consisted of two sequential steps. In step 1, all patients started treatment with 1000 mg of AA once daily. Abiraterone Cmin was measured 22-26 h after the last dose intake each month during the first 12 weeks of treatment. In step 2, underexposed patients (Cmin < 8.4 ng/mL) with tumour progression within the first 6 months of treatment were enrolled and received AA 1000 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was the rate of non-progression at 12 weeks after the dose doubling. During step 1, adherence to ABI treatment was assessed using the Girerd self-reported questionnaire. A post-hoc analysis of pharmacokinetic (PK) data was conducted using Bayesian estimation of Cmin from samples collected outside the sampling guidelines (22-26 h). RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis (ITT), 81 patients were included in step 1. In all, 21 (26%) patients were underexposed in step 1, and 8 of them (38%) experienced tumour progression within the first 6 months. A total of 71 patients (88%) completed the Girerd self-reported questionnaire. Of the patients, 62% had a score of 0, and 38% had a score of 1 or 2 (minimal compliance failure), without a significant difference in mean ABI Cmin in the two groups. Four patients were enrolled in step 2, and all reached the exposure target (Cmin > 8.4 ng/mL) after doubling the dose, but none met the primary endpoint. In the post-hoc analysis of PK data, 32 patients (39%) were underexposed, and ABI Cmin was independently associated with worse progression-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-5.81; p = 0.03], in contrast to the ITT analysis. CONCLUSION: The ITT and per-protocol analyses showed no statistical association between ABI underexposure and an increased risk of early tumour progression in patients with mCRPC, while the Bayesian estimator showed an association. However, other strategies than dose escalation at the time of progression need to be evaluated. Treatment adherence appeared to be uniformly good in the present study. Finally, the use of a Bayesian approach to recover samples collected outside the predefined blood collection time window could benefit the conduct of clinical trials based on drug monitoring. OPTIMABI trial is registered as National Clinical Trial number NCT03458247, with the EudraCT number 2017-000560-15).

Mosaic BRCA1 promoter methylation contribution in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer pedigrees.

PURPOSE: Mosaic BRCA1 promoter methylation (BRCA1meth) increases the risk of early-onset breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer and ovarian cancer. As mosaic BRCA1meth are believed to occur de novo, their role in family breast/ovarian cancer has not been assessed. PATIENTS: Blood-derived DNA from 20 unrelated affected cases from families with aggregation of breast/ovarian cancer, but with no germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2, PALB2 or RAD51C/D, were screened by methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting. CpG analysis was performed by pyrosequencing on blood and buccal swab. Two probands carried a pathogenic variant in a moderate-penetrance gene (ATM and BARD1), and 8 of 18 others (44%) carried BRCA1meth (vs none of the 20 age-matched controls). Involvement of BRCA1 in tumourigenesis in methylated probands was demonstrated in most tested cases by detection of a loss of heterozygosity and a homologous recombination deficiency signature. Among the eight methylated probands, two had relatives with breast cancer with detectable BRCA1meth in blood, including one with high methylation levels in two non-tumour tissues. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of mosaic BRCA1meth in patients with breast/ovarian cancer with affected relatives, as well as this first description of a family aggregation of mosaic BRCA1meth, shows how this de novo event can contribute to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer pedigrees.

Familial uveal melanoma and other tumors in 25 families with monoallelic germline MBD4 variants.

BACKGROUND: Monoallelic germline MBD4 pathogenic variants were recently reported to cause a predisposition to uveal melanoma, associated with a specific tumor mutational signature and good response to immunotherapy. Monoallelic tumor pathogenic variants have also been described in brain tumors, breast cancers, and myxofibrosarcomas, whereas biallelic germline MBD4 pathogenic variants have been involved in a recessive hereditary adenomatous polyposis and a specific type of acute myeloid leukemia. METHODS: We analyzed MBD4 for all patients with a diagnosis of uveal melanoma at Institut Curie since July 2021 and in the 3240 consecutive female probands explored at the Institut Curie for suspicion of predisposition to breast cancer between July 2021 and February 2023. RESULTS: We describe 25 families whose probands carry a monoallelic germline pathogenic variant in MBD4. Eighteen of these families presented with uveal melanoma (including a case patient with multiple uveal melanoma), and 7 families presented with breast cancer. Family histories showed the first familial case of uveal melanoma in monoallelic MBD4 pathogenic variant carriers and other various types of cancers in relatives, especially breast, renal, and colorectal tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Monoallelic MBD4 pathogenic variant may explain some cases of familial and multiple uveal melanoma as well as various cancer types, expanding the tumor spectrum of this predisposition. Further genetic testing in relatives combined with molecular tumor analyses will help define the tumor spectrum and estimate each tumor's risk.

Clinical implications of incorporating genetic and non-genetic risk factors in CanRisk-based breast cancer risk prediction.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) risk prediction models consider cancer family history (FH) and germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in risk genes. It remains elusive to what extent complementation with polygenic risk score (PRS) and non-genetic risk factor (NGRFs) data affects individual intensified breast surveillance (IBS) recommendations according to European guidelines. METHODS: For 425 cancer-free women with cancer FH (mean age 40·6 years, range 21-74), recruited in France, Germany and the Netherlands, germline PV status, NGRFs, and a 306 variant-based PRS (PRS306) were assessed to calculate estimated lifetime risks (eLTR) and estimated 10-year risks (e10YR) using CanRisk. The proportions of women changing country-specific European risk categories for IBS recommendations, i.e. ≥20 % and ≥30 % eLTR, or ≥5 % e10YR were determined. FINDINGS: Of the women with non-informative PV status, including PRS306 and NGRFs changed clinical recommendations for 31·0 %, (57/184, 20 % eLTR), 15·8 % (29/184, 30 % eLTR) and 22·4 % (41/183, 5 % e10YR), respectively whereas of the women tested negative for a PV observed in their family, clinical recommendations changed for 16·7 % (25/150), 1·3 % (2/150) and 9·5 % (14/147). No change was observed for 82 women with PVs in high-risk genes (BRCA1/2, PALB2). Combined consideration of eLTRs and e10YRs identified BRCA1/2 PV carriers benefitting from IBS <30 years, and women tested non-informative/negative for whom IBS may be postponed. INTERPRETATION: For women who tested non-informative/negative, PRS and NGRFs have a considerable impact on IBS recommendations. Combined consideration of eLTRs and e10YRs allows personalizing IBS starting age. FUNDING: Horizon 2020, German Cancer Aid, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Köln Fortune.

Male breast cancer: No evidence for mosaic BRCA1 promoter methylation involvement.

Breast cancers (BC) are rare in men and are often caused by constitutional predisposing factors. In women, mosaic BRCA1 promoter methylations (MBPM) are frequent events, detected in 4-8% of healthy subjects. This constitutional epimutation increases risk of early-onset and triple-negative BC. However, the role of MBPM in male BC predisposition has never been assessed. We screened 40 blood samples from men affected by BC, and performed extensive tumour analysis on MBPM-positive patients. We detected two patients carrying MBPM. Surprisingly, tumour analysis revealed that neither of these two male BCs were caused by the constitutional BRCA1 epimutations carried by the patients.

Diffuse Infiltrating Retinoblastoma with Anterior Chamber Involvement: Conservative Management and Identification of RB1 Alterations in Aqueous Humor.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to describe the successful conservative management of diffuse infiltrating retinoblastoma (DIR). Identification of RB1 pathogenic variant was done after cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis in aqueous humor. Case presentation: Herein, we report 2 patients with unilateral, non-familial DIR with anterior and posterior involvement. Both patients underwent liquid biopsy for tumor cfDNA analysis in aqueous humor. Treatment consisted of a combination of systemic and intra-arterial chemotherapy, with consecutive intracameral and intravitreal injections of melphalan. One patient also required iodine-125 brachytherapy. In both cases, tumor cfDNA analysis revealed biallelic somatic alterations of the RB1 gene. These alterations were not found in germline DNA. Both patients retained their eyes and had a useful vision after a follow-up of 2 years. Conclusion: In selected cases, conservative management of DIR is safe and effective. Tumor cfDNA analysis in aqueous humor is an effective technique to disclose RB1 somatic alterations that guide the germline molecular explorations and improve genetic counseling after conservative treatment.

Germline HPF1 retrogene insertion in RB1 gene involved in cancer predisposition.

About half of the human genome is composed of repeated sequences derived from mobile elements, mainly retrotransposons, generally without pathogenic effect. Familial forms of retinoblastoma are caused by germline pathogenic variants in RB1 gene. Here, we describe a family with retinoblastoma affecting a father and his son. No pathogenic variant was identified after DNA analysis of RB1 gene coding sequence and exon-intron junctions. However, RB1 mRNA analysis showed a chimeric transcript with insertion of 114 nucleotides from HPF1 gene inside RB1 gene. This chimeric transcript led to an insertion of 38 amino acids in functional domain of retinoblastoma protein. Subsequent DNA analysis in RB1 intron 17 revealed the presence of a full-length HPF1 retrogene insertion in opposite orientation. Functional assay shows that this insertion has a deleterious impact on retinoblastoma protein function. This is the first report of a full-length retrogene insertion involved in human Mendelian disease leading to a chimeric transcript and a non-functional chimeric protein. Some retrogene insertions may be missed by standard diagnostic genetic testing, so contribution of retrogene insertions to human disease may be underestimated. The increasing use of whole genome sequencing in diagnostic settings will help to get a more comprehensive view of retrogenes.

MSH3: a confirmed predisposing gene for adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND: The MSH3 gene is part of the DNA mismatch repair system, but has never been shown to be involved in Lynch syndrome. A first report of four patients from two families, bearing biallelic MSH3 germline variants, with a phenotype of attenuated colorectal adenomatous polyposis raised the question of its involvement in hereditary cancer predisposition. The patients' tumours exhibited elevated microsatellite alterations at selected tetranucleotide repeats (EMAST), a hallmark of MSH3 deficiency. METHODS: We report five new unrelated patients with MSH3-associated polyposis. We describe their personal and familial history and study the EMAST phenotype in various normal and tumour samples, which are relevant findings based on the rarity of this polyposis subtype so far. RESULTS: All patients had attenuated colorectal adenomatous polyposis, with duodenal polyposis in two cases. Both women had breast carcinomas. EMAST phenotype was present at various levels in different samples of the five patients, confirming the MSH3 deficiency, with a gradient of instability in polyps depending on their degree of dysplasia. The negative EMAST phenotype ruled out the diagnosis of germline MSH3 deficiency for two patients: one homozygous for a benign variant and one with a monoallelic large deletion. CONCLUSION: This report lends further credence to biallelic MSH3 germline pathogenic variants being involved in colorectal and duodenal adenomatous polyposis. Large-scale studies may help clarify the tumour spectrum and associated risks. Ascertainment of EMAST may help with the interpretation of variants of unknown significance. We recommend adding MSH3 to dedicated diagnostic gene panels.

First report of medulloblastoma in a patient with MUTYH-associated polyposis.

AIMS: The mutY DNA glycosylase encoded by the MUTYH gene prevents G:C → T:A transversions through the base excision repair DNA repair system. Germline biallelic pathogenic variants in MUTYH cause an adenomatous polyposis called MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), an autosomal recessive disease (OMIM: 608456), with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Digestive lesions in this context show an excess of G:C → T:A transversions, individualising a specific mutational signature associated with MUTYH deficiency called signature SBS36. Predisposition to other tumours in patients with germline biallelic pathogenic variants in MUTYH is suspected but remains unclear. We report the first case of medulloblastoma in a patient with MAP, carrying the homozygous pathogenic variant c.1227_1228dup, p.(Glu410Glyfs*43) in MUTYH. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing was performed on the medulloblastoma to enlighten single nucleotide variants of interest, microsatellite status and mutational signature. The objective was to determine the involvement of MUTYH deficiency in the oncogenesis of this medulloblastoma. RESULTS: The medulloblastoma has the mutational signature SBS36 and driver pathogenic variants in CTNNB1, PTCH1 and KDM6A corresponding to G:C → T:A transversions, suggesting a role of MUTYH deficiency in oncogenesis. CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, medulloblastoma could be a rare manifestation associated with germline biallelic pathogenic variants in MUTYH.

Adaptive nanopore sequencing to determine pathogenicity of BRCA1 exonic duplication.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumour suppressor genes that have been characterised as predisposition genes for the development of hereditary breast and ovarian cancers among other malignancies. The molecular diagnosis of this predisposition syndrome is based on the detection of inactivating variants of any type in those genes. But in the case of structural variants, functional consequences can be difficult to assess using standard molecular methods, as the precise resolution of their sequence is often impossible with short-read next generation sequencing techniques. It has been recently demonstrated that Oxford Nanopore long-read sequencing technology can accurately and rapidly provide genetic diagnoses of Mendelian diseases, including those linked to pathogenic structural variants. Here, we report the accurate resolution of a germline duplication event of exons 18-20 of BRCA1 using Nanopore sequencing with adaptive sampling target enrichment. This allowed us to classify this variant as pathogenic within a short timeframe of 10 days. This study provides a proof-of-concept that nanopore adaptive sampling is a highly efficient technique for the investigation of structural variants of tumour suppressor genes in a clinical context.

Hereditary cancer predispositions: Comparison of multigene panel sequencing on fresh-frozen breast/ovarian tumor versus blood.

In breast or ovarian cancer (BC/OC) patients with evocative personal and/or family history, multigene panel sequencing is performed on blood to diagnose hereditary predispositions. Additionally, BRCA1/BRCA2 testing can be performed on tumor sample for therapeutic purpose. The accuracy of multigene panel tumor analysis on BC/OC to detect predisposing germline pathogenic variants (gPV) has not been precisely assessed. By comparing sequencing data from blood and fresh-frozen tumor we show that tumor genomic instability causes pitfalls to consider when performing tumor testing to detect gPV. Even if loss of heterozygosity increases germline signal in most cases, somatic copy number variants (CNV) can mask germline CNV and collapse point gPV variant allele frequency (VAF). Moreover, VAF does not allow an accurate distinction between germline and somatic pathogenic variants.

Association and performance of polygenic risk scores for breast cancer among French women presenting or not a familial predisposition to the disease.

BACKGROUND: Three partially overlapping breast cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) comprising 77, 179 and 313 SNPs have been proposed for European-ancestry women by the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) for improving risk prediction in the general population. However, the effect of these SNPs may vary from one country to another and within a country because of other factors. OBJECTIVE: To assess their associated risk and predictive performance in French women from (1) the CECILE population-based case-control study, (2) BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) pathogenic variant (PV) carriers from the GEMO study, and (3) familial breast cancer cases with no BRCA1/2 PV and unrelated controls from the GENESIS study. RESULTS: All three PRS were associated with breast cancer in all studies, with odds ratios per standard deviation varying from 1.7 to 2.0 in CECILE and GENESIS, and hazard ratios varying from 1.1 to 1.4 in GEMO. The predictive performance of PRS313 in CECILE was similar to that reported in BCAC but lower than that in GENESIS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.67 and 0.75, respectively). PRS were less performant in BRCA2 and BRCA1 PV carriers (AUC = 0.58 and 0.54 respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results are in line with previous validation studies in the general population and in BRCA1/2 PV carriers. Additionally, we showed that PRS may be of clinical utility for women with a strong family history of breast cancer and no BRCA1/2 PV, and for those carrying a predicted PV in a moderate-risk gene like ATM, CHEK2 or PALB2.

Genotype-first approach to identify associations between CDH1 germline variants and cancer phenotypes: a multicentre study by the European Reference Network on Genetic Tumour Risk Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Truncating pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants of CDH1 cause hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), a tumour risk syndrome that predisposes carrier individuals to diffuse gastric and lobular breast cancer. Rare CDH1 missense variants are often classified as variants of unknown significance. We conducted a genotype-phenotype analysis in families carrying rare CDH1 variants, comparing cancer spectrum in carriers of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPV; analysed jointly) or missense variants of unknown significance, assessing the frequency of families with lobular breast cancer among PV/LPV carrier families, and testing the performance of lobular breast cancer-expanded criteria for CDH1 testing. METHODS: This genotype-first study used retrospective diagnostic and clinical data from 854 carriers of 398 rare CDH1 variants and 1021 relatives, irrespective of HDGC clinical criteria, from 29 institutions in ten member-countries of the European Reference Network on Tumour Risk Syndromes (ERN GENTURIS). Data were collected from Oct 1, 2018, to Sept 20, 2022. Variants were classified by molecular type and clinical actionability with the American College of Medical Genetics and Association for Molecular Pathology CDH1 guidelines (version 2). Families were categorised by whether they fulfilled the 2015 and 2020 HDGC clinical criteria. Genotype-phenotype associations were analysed by Student's t test, Kruskal-Wallis, χ2, and multivariable logistic regression models. Performance of HDGC clinical criteria sets were assessed with an equivalence test and Youden index, and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were compared by Z test. FINDINGS: From 1971 phenotypes (contributed by 854 probands and 1021 relatives aged 1-93 years), 460 had gastric and breast cancer histology available. CDH1 truncating PV/LPVs occurred in 176 (21%) of 854 families and missense variants of unknown significance in 169 (20%) families. Multivariable logistic regression comparing phenotypes occurring in families carrying PV/LPVs or missense variants of unknown significance showed that lobular breast cancer had the greatest positive association with the presence of PV/LPVs (odds ratio 12·39 [95% CI 2·66-57·74], p=0·0014), followed by diffuse gastric cancer (8·00 [2·18-29·39], p=0·0017) and gastric cancer (7·81 [2·03-29·96], p=0·0027). 136 (77%) of 176 families carrying PV/LPVs fulfilled the 2015 HDGC criteria. Of the remaining 40 (23%) families, who did not fulfil the 2015 criteria, 11 fulfilled the 2020 HDGC criteria, and 18 had lobular breast cancer only or lobular breast cancer and gastric cancer, but did not meet the 2020 criteria. No specific CDH1 variant was found to predispose individuals specifically to lobular breast cancer, although 12 (7%) of 176 PV/LPV carrier families had lobular breast cancer only. Addition of three new lobular breast cancer-centred criteria improved testing sensitivity while retaining high specificity. The probability of finding CDH1 PV/LPVs in patients fulfilling the lobular breast cancer-expanded criteria, compared with the 2020 criteria, increased significantly (AUC 0·92 vs 0·88; Z score 3·54; p=0·0004). INTERPRETATION: CDH1 PV/LPVs were positively associated with HDGC-related phenotypes (lobular breast cancer, diffuse gastric cancer, and gastric cancer), and no evidence for a positive association with these phenotypes was found for CDH1 missense variants of unknown significance. CDH1 PV/LPVs occurred often in families with lobular breast cancer who did not fulfil the 2020 HDGC criteria, supporting the expansion of lobular breast cancer-centred criteria. FUNDING: European Reference Network on Genetic Tumour Risk Syndromes, European Regional Development Fund, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portugal), Cancer Research UK, and European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.

APC germline pathogenic variants and epithelial ovarian cancer: causal or coincidental findings?

APC germline pathogenic variants result in predisposition to familial adenomatous polyposis and extraintestinal tumours such as desmoid fibromatosis, medulloblastomas and thyroid cancers. They have also been recently involved in ovarian microcystic stromal tumours. APC inactivation has been described at the tumour level in epithelial ovarian cancers (EOCs). Here, we report the identification of APC germline pathogenic variants in two patients diagnosed with premenopausal EOC in early 30s, with no other pathogenic variant detected in the known ovarian cancer predisposing genes. Subsequent tumour analysis showed neither a second hit of APC inactivation nor ß-catenin activation. Both tumours did not have a homologous recombination (HR) deficiency, pointing towards the implication of other genes than those involved in HR. APC may contribute to the carcinogenesis of EOC in a multifactorial context. Further studies are required to clarify the role of APC in predisposition to EOC.

First estimates of diffuse gastric cancer risks for carriers of CTNNA1 germline pathogenic variants.

BACKGROUND: Pathogenic variants (PV) of CTNNA1 are found in families fulfilling criteria for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) but no risk estimates were available until now. The aim of this study is to evaluate diffuse gastric cancer (DGC) risks for carriers of germline CTNNA1 PV. METHODS: Data from published CTNNA1 families were updated and new families were identified through international collaborations. The cumulative risk of DGC by age for PV carriers was estimated with the genotype restricted likelihood (GRL) method, taking into account non-genotyped individuals and conditioning on all observed phenotypes and genotypes of the index case to obtain unbiased estimates. A non-parametric (NP) and the Weibull functions were used to model the shape of penetrance function with the GRL. Kaplan-Meier incidence curve and standardised incidence ratios were also computed. A 'leave-one-out' strategy was used to evaluate estimate uncertainty. RESULTS: Thirteen families with 46 carriers of PV were included. The cumulative risks of DGC at 80 years for carriers of CTNNA1 PV are 49% and 57%, respectively with the Weibull GRL and NP GRL methods. Risk ratios to population incidence reach particularly high values at early ages and decrease with age. At 40 years, they are equal to 65 and 833, respectively with the Weibull GRL and NP GRL. CONCLUSION: This is the largest series of CTNNA1 families that provides the first risk estimates of GC. These data will help to improve management and surveillance for these patients and support inclusion of CTNNA1 in germline testing panels.

Cancer Risks Associated With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Pathogenic Variants.

PURPOSE: To provide precise age-specific risk estimates of cancers other than female breast and ovarian cancers associated with pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 for effective cancer risk management. METHODS: We used data from 3,184 BRCA1 and 2,157 BRCA2 families in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 to estimate age-specific relative (RR) and absolute risks for 22 first primary cancer types adjusting for family ascertainment. RESULTS: BRCA1 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 4.30; 95% CI, 1.09 to 16.96), pancreatic (RR = 2.36; 95% CI, 1.51 to 3.68), and stomach (RR = 2.17; 95% CI, 1.25 to 3.77) cancers. Associations with colorectal and gallbladder cancers were also suggested. BRCA2 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 44.0; 95% CI, 21.3 to 90.9), stomach (RR = 3.69; 95% CI, 2.40 to 5.67), pancreatic (RR = 3.34; 95% CI, 2.21 to 5.06), and prostate (RR = 2.22; 95% CI, 1.63 to 3.03) cancers. The stomach cancer RR was higher for females than males (6.89 v 2.76; P = .04). The absolute risks to age 80 years ranged from 0.4% for male breast cancer to approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer for BRCA1 carriers and from approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer to 27% for prostate cancer for BRCA2 carriers. CONCLUSION: In addition to female breast and ovarian cancers, BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs are associated with increased risks of male breast, pancreatic, stomach, and prostate (only BRCA2 PVs) cancers, but not with the risks of other previously suggested cancers. The estimated age-specific risks will refine cancer risk management in men and women with BRCA1/2 PVs.

Feasibility of personalized screening and prevention recommendations in the general population through breast cancer risk assessment: results from a dedicated risk clinic.

PURPOSE: A personalized approach to prevention and early detection based on known risk factors should contribute to early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. We initiated a risk assessment clinic for all women wishing to undergo an individual breast cancer risk assessment. METHODS: Women underwent a complete breast cancer assessment including a questionnaire, mammogram with evaluation of breast density, collection of saliva sample, consultation with a radiologist, and a breast cancer specialist. Women aged 40 or older, with 0 or 1 first-degree relative with breast cancer diagnosed after the age of 40 were eligible for risk assessment using MammoRisk, a machine learning-based tool that provides an individual 5-year estimated risk of developing breast cancer based on the patient's clinical data and breast density, with or without polygenic risk scores (PRSs). DNA was extracted from saliva samples for genotyping of 76 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. The individual risk was communicated to the patient, with individualized screening and prevention recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 290 women underwent breast cancer assessment, among which 196 women (68%) were eligible for risk assessment using MammoRisk (median age 52, range 40-72). When PRS was added to MammoRisk, 40% (n = 78) of patients were assigned a different risk category, with 28% (n = 55) of patients changing from intermediate to moderate or high risk. CONCLUSION: Individual risk assessment is feasible in the general population. Screening recommendations could be given based on individual risk. The use of PRS changed the risk score and screening recommendations in 40% of women.

Highly Sensitive Detection Method of DICER1 Tumor Hotspot Mutations by Drop-off Droplet Digital PCR.

BACKGROUND: DICER1 syndrome is an autosomal dominant inherited syndrome predisposing to various benign and malignant tumors, mainly occurring in children and young adults, requiring broad surveillance starting at birth with repeated irradiating imaging exams and sedations for young patients. It is caused by monoallelic germline pathogenic variants in the DICER1 gene. More than 90% of tumors bear an additional somatic DICER1 missense hotspot mutation, as a second hit, involving 1 of 6 codons clustered in exons 24 and 25. We designed and in vitro validated a drop-off droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) system to scan all DICER1 hotspot codons, allowing for a liquid biopsy test, an alternative to sedation and radiation exposure. METHODS: Three drop-off ddPCR assays were designed, with 2 TaqMan probes per assay, 1 complementary to the wild-type sequence of the region containing hotspots and another 1 used as a reference. Eight tumor-derived DNAs and 5 synthetic oligonucleotides bearing DICER1 hotspot mutations were tested. RESULTS: All tested mutations were detected, with a limit of detection ranging from 0.07% to 0.31% for codons p. E1705, p. D1709, and p. D1713 in exon 24 and from 0.06% to 0.15% for codons p. G1809, p. D1810, and p. E1813 in exon 25. CONCLUSIONS: The high sensitivity of this method is compatible with its use for plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis for early tumor detection in DICER1 syndrome patients. It may reduce the need for radiation exposure and sedation in surveillance protocols and may also improve patient prognosis. Clinical trials are needed to evaluate ctDNA analysis in these patients.

Testicular Sertoli cell tumour and potentially testicular Leydig cell tumour are features of DICER1 syndrome.

DICER1 syndrome is a rare paediatric autosomal dominant inherited disorder predisposing to various benign and malignant tumours. It is caused by a germline pathogenic variant in DICER1, and the second hit for tumour development is usually a missense hotspot pathogenic variant in the DICER1 ribonuclease IIIb domain. While DICER1 predisposing variants account for about 60% of ovarian Sertoli-Leydig cell tumours, no DICER1-related testicular stromal tumours have been described. Here we report the first two cases of testicular stromal tumours in children carrying a DICER1 germline pathogenic variant: a case of Sertoli cell tumour and a case of Leydig cell tumour diagnosed at 2 and 12 years of age, respectively. A somatic DICER1 hotspot pathogenic variant was detected in the Sertoli cell tumour. This report extends the spectrum of DICER1-related tumours to include testicular Sertoli cell tumour and potentially testicular Leydig cell tumour. Diagnosis of a testicular Sertoli cell tumour should prompt DICER1 genetic testing so that patients with a DICER1 germline pathogenic variant can benefit from established surveillance guidelines. DICER1 genetic evaluation may be considered for testicular Leydig cell tumour. Our findings suggest that miRNA dysregulation underlies the aetiology of some testicular stromal tumours.