How to improve the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting? The French NAVI study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) still remain frequent. The procedure for announcing the diagnosis (PAD) was an emblematic measure of the first French Plan Cancer aiming at providing patients with time to listen, information after cancer diagnosis, and discussion on treatments and their side effects. We aimed at assessing the risk factors of CINV, focusing on patients' satisfaction with the PAD. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study assessed the frequency and intensity of CINV among chemonaïve patients during the first cycle of treatment. CINV was defined by ≥1 emetic episode or reported nausea intensity ≥3 on a 0-10 scale. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors related to global CINV onset including satisfaction with the PAD (satisfaction score ≥the median on a 0-10 scale). RESULTS: Data from 291 patients (women, 85.2%; mean age, 57 years) were analyzed. Most patients (69.4%) received highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens and 77.7% received antiemetic drugs consistent with international guidelines. Acute, delayed and overall CINV were experienced by 40.4, 34.8 and 52.4% of patients, respectively. Sixty-seven per cent of patients were satisfied with the PAD. No relation was noted between PAD satisfaction and CINV onset. The nausea and vomiting dimension of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire before chemotherapy (OR 3.62), motion sickness history (OR 2.73), highly emetogenic CT (OR 2.73), anxiety (OR 1.99) and younger age (OR 1.96) were independent predictive factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients were mostly satisfied with the PAD, half of them experienced CINV. A state of anxiety could be identified during the PAD to be managed.

Contribution of germline deleterious variants in the RAD51 paralogs to breast and ovarian cancers.

RAD51 paralogs (RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, XRCC2, and XRCC3) have recently been involved in breast and ovarian cancer predisposition: RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D in ovarian cancer, RAD51B and XRCC2 in breast cancer. The aim of this study was to estimate the contribution of deleterious variants in the five RAD51 paralogs to breast and ovarian cancers. The five RAD51 paralog genes were analyzed by next-generation sequencing technologies in germline DNA from 2649 consecutive patients diagnosed with breast and/or ovarian cancer. Twenty-one different deleterious variants were identified in the RAD51 paralogs in 30 patients: RAD51B (n = 4), RAD51C (n = 12), RAD51D (n = 7), XRCC2 (n = 2), and XRCC3 (n = 5). The overall deleterious variant rate was 1.13% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-1.55%) (30/2649), including 15 variants in breast cancer only cases (15/2063; 0.73% (95% CI: 0.34-1.11%)) and 15 variants in cases with at least one ovarian cancer (15/570; 2.63% (95% CI: 1.24-4.02%)). This study is the first evaluation of the five RAD51 paralogs in breast and ovarian cancer predisposition and it demonstrates that deleterious variants can be present in breast cancer only cases. Moreover, this is the first time that XRCC3 deleterious variants have been identified in breast and ovarian cancer cases.

BRCA1 allele-specific expression in genetic predisposed breast/ovarian cancer.

Germline allele specific expression (ASE), resulting in a lowered expression of one of the BRCA1 alleles, has been described as a possible predisposition marker in Hereditary Breast or Ovarian Cancer (HBOC), usable for molecular diagnosis in HBOC. The main objective of this prospective case-control study was to compare the proportion of ASE between controls without familial history of breast or ovarian cancer, and HBOC cases without BRCA1 or BRCA2 deleterious mutation. BRCA1 ASE evaluated on three SNPs among controls and HBOC patients without deleterious mutation were assessed by pyrosequencing. The allelic ratios and the proportion of ASE were compared between controls and cases using a Student's t test and a Fisher exact test, respectively. The linearity and reproducibility of the ASE dosage was demonstrated with R2 > 0.99 and a coefficient of variation below 10 %, and ASE was detected in two positive controls harbouring BRCA1 truncated mutations. In the heterozygote population, composed of 99/264 controls (37.5 %) and 96/227 patients (42.3 %), we detected a 5 % ASE without truncated mutations, in each population. We failed to detect any significant difference of ASE between controls and patients. So far, BRCA1 Allelic specific expression is not usable in routine diagnosis as a possible predisposition marker in HBOC patients except for the detection of truncated mutations.

Next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes.

To optimize the molecular diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), we developed a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based screening based on the capture of a panel of genes involved, or suspected to be involved in HBOC, on pooling of indexed DNA and on paired-end sequencing in an Illumina GAIIx platform, followed by confirmation by Sanger sequencing or MLPA/QMPSF. The bioinformatic pipeline included CASAVA, NextGENe, CNVseq and Alamut-HT. We validated this procedure by the analysis of 59 patients' DNAs harbouring SNVs, indels or large genomic rearrangements of BRCA1 or BRCA2. We also conducted a blind study in 168 patients comparing NGS versus Sanger sequencing or MLPA analyses of BRCA1 and BRCA2. All mutations detected by conventional procedures were detected by NGS. We then screened, using three different versions of the capture set, a large series of 708 consecutive patients. We detected in these patients 69 germline deleterious alterations within BRCA1 and BRCA2, and 4 TP53 mutations in 468 patients also tested for this gene. We also found 36 variations inducing either a premature codon stop or a splicing defect among other genes: 5/708 in CHEK2, 3/708 in RAD51C, 1/708 in RAD50, 7/708 in PALB2, 3/708 in MRE11A, 5/708 in ATM, 3/708 in NBS1, 1/708 in CDH1, 3/468 in MSH2, 2/468 in PMS2, 1/708 in BARD1, 1/468 in PMS1 and 1/468 in MLH3. These results demonstrate the efficiency of NGS in performing molecular diagnosis of HBOC. Detection of mutations within other genes than BRCA1 and BRCA2 highlights the genetic heterogeneity of HBOC.