Hereditary breast cancer: syndromes, tumour pathology and molecular testing.

Hereditary factors account for a significant proportion of breast cancer risk. Approximately 20% of hereditary breast cancers are attributable to pathogenic variants in the highly penetrant BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. A proportion of the genetic risk is also explained by pathogenic variants in other breast cancer susceptibility genes, including ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D and BARD1, as well as genes associated with breast cancer predisposition syndromes - TP53 (Li-Fraumeni syndrome), PTEN (Cowden syndrome), CDH1 (hereditary diffuse gastric cancer), STK11 (Peutz-Jeghers syndrome) and NF1 (neurofibromatosis type 1). Polygenic risk, the cumulative risk from carrying multiple low-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles, is also a well-recognised contributor to risk. This review provides an overview of the established breast cancer susceptibility genes as well as breast cancer predisposition syndromes, highlights distinct genotype-phenotype correlations associated with germline mutation status and discusses molecular testing and therapeutic implications in the context of hereditary breast cancer.

Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; P = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. CONCLUSION: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals.

Whole-genome sequencing reveals clinically relevant insights into the aetiology of familial breast cancers.

BACKGROUND: Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is a powerful method for revealing the diversity and complexity of the somatic mutation burden of tumours. Here, we investigated the utility of tumour and matched germline WGS for understanding aetiology and treatment opportunities for high-risk individuals with familial breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out WGS on 78 paired germline and tumour DNA samples from individuals carrying pathogenic variants in BRCA1 (n = 26) or BRCA2 (n = 22) or from non-carriers (non-BRCA1/2; n = 30). RESULTS: Matched germline/tumour WGS and somatic mutational signature analysis revealed patients with unreported, dual pathogenic germline variants in cancer risk genes (BRCA1/BRCA2; BRCA1/MUTYH). The strategy identified that 100% of tumours from BRCA1 carriers and 91% of tumours from BRCA2 carriers exhibited biallelic inactivation of the respective gene, together with somatic mutational signatures suggestive of a functional deficiency in homologous recombination. A set of non-BRCA1/2 tumours also had somatic signatures indicative of BRCA-deficiency, including tumours with BRCA1 promoter methylation, and tumours from carriers of a PALB2 pathogenic germline variant and a BRCA2 variant of uncertain significance. A subset of 13 non-BRCA1/2 tumours from early onset cases were BRCA-proficient, yet displayed complex clustered structural rearrangements associated with the amplification of oncogenes and pathogenic germline variants in TP53, ATM and CHEK2. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the role that WGS of matched germline/tumour DNA and the somatic mutational signatures can play in the discovery of pathogenic germline variants and for providing supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. WGS-derived signatures were more robust than germline status and other genomic predictors of homologous recombination deficiency, thus impacting the selection of platinum-based or PARP inhibitor therapy. In this first examination of non-BRCA1/2 tumours by WGS, we illustrate the considerable heterogeneity of these tumour genomes and highlight that complex genomic rearrangements may drive tumourigenesis in a subset of cases.

COX-2 expression is predictive for early relapse and aromatase inhibitor resistance in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, and is a target for treatment.

BACKGROUND: Stratification of patients for treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is suboptimal, with high systemic overtreatment rates. METHODS: A training set of 95 tumours from women with pure DCIS were immunostained for proteins involved in cell survival, hypoxia, growth factor and hormone signalling. A generalised linear regression with regularisation and variable selection was applied to a multiple covariate Cox survival analysis with recurrence-free survival 10-fold cross-validation and leave-one-out iterative approach were used to build and test the model that was validated using an independent cohort of 58 patients with pure DCIS. The clinical role of a COX-2-targeting agent was then tested in a proof-of-concept neoadjuvant randomised trial in ER-positive DCIS treated with exemestane 25 mg day(-1)± celecoxib 800 mg day(-1). RESULTS: The COX-2 expression was an independent prognostic factor for early relapse in the training (HR 37.47 (95% CI: 5.56-252.74) P=0.0001) and independent validation cohort (HR 3.9 (95% CI: 1.8-8.3) P=0.002). There was no significant interaction with other clinicopathological variables. A statistically significant reduction of Ki-67 expression after treatment with exemestane ± celecoxib was observed (P<0.02) with greater reduction in the combination arm (P<0.004). Concomitant reduction in COX-2 expression was statistically significant in the exemestane and celecoxib arm (P<0.03) only. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DCIS, COX-2 may predict recurrence, aiding clinical decision making. A combination of an aromatase inhibitor and celecoxib has significant biological effect and may be integrated into treatment of COX2-positive DCIS at high risk of recurrence.

Mutations in EGFR, BRAF and RAS are rare in triple-negative and basal-like breast cancers from Caucasian women.

Basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers usually display a high level of genomic instability and often carry TP53 mutations. Mutations in EGFR have been reported in about 10 % triple-negative tumours from Chinese women, and there is some evidence that triple-negative and basal-like tumours might carry additional mutations against which targeted therapies are available. We, therefore, sought to determine the frequency of 238 targetable mutations in 19 oncogenes (including EGFR) in a panel of basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers from Caucasian women. We used the OncoCarta panel to screen for 238 mutations across 19 common oncogenes in 107 basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers from Caucasian women. Mutations were then verified using Sanger sequencing or primer extension by iPLEX. We identified and validated 10 mutations across five genes. Most of the mutations were observed in the PIK3CA gene (18/107, 16.8 %), while mutations in KRAS, NRAS, MET and AKT1 were present in only one tumour each (1/107, 0.9 %). Among the missense substitutions in PIK3CA the point mutation resulting in the amino acid change H1047R was the most frequent (8/18, 44 %). All mutations were mutually exclusive, apart from one basal-like breast tumour which harboured mutations in both MET (p.T992I) and PIK3CA (p.H1047R). We did not identify any mutations in the EGFR gene. In conclusion, we found that with the exception of mutations in PIK3CA, these actionable oncogenic mutations on the Oncocarta panel are rare in basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers from Caucasian women. Custom panels, designed to detect mutations identified by exome sequencing of basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers, are, therefore, needed to identify women who might be eligible for targeted treatment.

Microarray and histopathological analysis of tumours: the future and the past?

The excitement surrounding the development of DNA microarray analysis and proteomics has raised questions about the role of these techniques in clinical practice and patient management. But how did the traditional methods of cancer diagnosis and prognosis develop, and how can high-throughput techniques contribute?

Identification of the familial cylindromatosis tumour-suppressor gene.

Familial cylindromatosis is an autosomal dominant genetic predisposition to multiple tumours of the skin appendages. The susceptibility gene (CYLD) has previously been localized to chromosome 16q and has the genetic attributes of a tumour-suppressor gene (recessive oncogene). Here we have identified CYLD by detecting germline mutations in 21 cylindromatosis families and somatic mutations in 1 sporadic and 5 familial cylindromas. All mutations predict truncation or absence of the encoded protein. CYLD encodes three cytoskeletal-associated-protein-glycine-conserved (CAP-GLY) domains, which are found in proteins that coordinate the attachment of organelles to microtubules. CYLD also has sequence homology to the catalytic domain of ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolases (UCH).

Breast cancer special types: why bother?

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, encompassing multiple entities associated with distinct biological features and clinical behaviours. Microarray-based expression profiling analysis has been used to unravel the molecular underpinning of several characteristics of breast cancer, including its proclivity to disseminate to distant sites and the molecular basis of histological grade. Furthermore, a breast cancer molecular classification based on transcriptional analysis has been proposed. However, microarray studies have primarily analysed invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type. Histological special types of breast cancer, which account for up to 25% of all invasive breast cancers, have not been systematically studied. Despite the limited interest, in recent years it has become apparent that the histopathological characteristics of these cancers may be underpinned by distinct arrays of genetic changes, providing direct evidence for genotypic-phenotypic correlations between morphological patterns and molecular changes in breast cancer (eg t(12;15) in secretory carcinoma of the breast). Here we review the molecular characteristics of special types of breast cancer, with special emphasis on their microarray-based expression profiles and their impact on our understanding of breast cancer.

Correction: DUB3 and USP7 de-ubiquitinating enzymes control replication inhibitor Geminin: molecular characterization and associations with breast cancer.

The final sentence of the Acknowledgements should be as follows: This work was supported by grants from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (BA15/00092), Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness/EU-ERDF (SAF2016-80626-R, SAF2013-49149-R, BFU2014-51672-REDC), Fundación CajaCanarias (AP2015/008) to RF, and the Australian National Health and Medical Research (NHMRC program grant to SRL and KKK (APP1017028).

DUB3 and USP7 de-ubiquitinating enzymes control replication inhibitor Geminin: molecular characterization and associations with breast cancer.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/onc.2017.21.

DUB3 and USP7 de-ubiquitinating enzymes control replication inhibitor Geminin: molecular characterization and associations with breast cancer.

Correct control of DNA replication is crucial to maintain genomic stability in dividing cells. Inappropriate re-licensing of replicated origins is associated with chromosomal instability (CIN), a hallmark of cancer progression that at the same time provides potential opportunities for therapeutic intervention. Geminin is a critical inhibitor of the DNA replication licensing factor Cdt1. To properly achieve its functions, Geminin levels are tightly regulated through the cell cycle by ubiquitin-dependent proteasomal degradation, but the de-ubiquitinating enzymes (DUBs) involved had not been identified. Here we report that DUB3 and USP7 control human Geminin. Overexpression of either DUB3 or USP7 increases Geminin levels through reduced ubiquitination. Conversely, depletion of DUB3 or USP7 reduces Geminin levels, and DUB3 knockdown increases re-replication events, analogous to the effect of Geminin depletion. In exploring potential clinical implications, we found that USP7 and Geminin are strongly correlated in a cohort of invasive breast cancers (P<1.01E-08). As expected, Geminin expression is highly prognostic. Interestingly, we found a non-monotonic relationship between USP7 and breast cancer-specific survival, with both very low or high levels of USP7 associated with poor outcome, independent of estrogen receptor status. Altogether, our data identify DUB3 and USP7 as factors that regulate DNA replication by controlling Geminin protein stability, and suggest that USP7 may be involved in Geminin dysregulation during breast cancer progression.

Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS).

BACKGROUND: Women genetically predisposed to breast cancer often develop the disease at a young age when dense breast tissue reduces the sensitivity of X-ray mammography. Our aim was, therefore, to compare contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) with mammography for screening. METHODS: We did a prospective multicentre cohort study in 649 women aged 35-49 years with a strong family history of breast cancer or a high probability of a BRCA1, BRCA2, or TP53 mutation. We recruited participants from 22 centres in the UK, and offered the women annual screening with CE MRI and mammography for 2-7 years. FINDINGS: We diagnosed 35 cancers in the 649 women screened with both mammography and CE MRI (1881 screens): 19 by CE MRI only, six by mammography only, and eight by both, with two interval cases. Sensitivity was significantly higher for CE MRI (77%, 95% CI 60-90) than for mammography (40%, 24-58; p=0.01), and was 94% (81-99) when both methods were used. Specificity was 93% (92-95) for mammography, 81% (80-83) for CE MRI (p<0.0001), and 77% (75-79) with both methods. The difference between CE MRI and mammography sensitivities was particularly pronounced in BRCA1 carriers (13 cancers; 92%vs 23%, p=0.004). INTERPRETATION: Our findings indicate that CE MRI is more sensitive than mammography for cancer detection. Specificity for both procedures was acceptable. Despite a high proportion of grade 3 cancers, tumours were small and few women were node positive. Annual screening, combining CE MRI and mammography, would detect most tumours in this risk group.

Basal-like breast carcinomas: clinical outcome and response to chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Grade-III invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDCs-NST) constitute a heterogeneous group of tumours with different clinical behaviour and response to chemotherapy. As many as 25% of all grade-III IDCs-NST are known to harbour a basal-like phenotype, as defined by gene expression profiling or immunohistochemistry for basal cytokeratins. Patients with basal-like breast carcinomas (BLBC) are reported to have a shorter disease-free and overall survival. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 49 patients with BLBC (as defined by basal cytokeratin expression) and 49 controls matched for age, nodal status and grade was carried out. Histological features, immunohistochemical findings for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and HER2, and clinical outcome and survival after adjuvant chemotherapy were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: It was more likely for patients with BLBCs to be found negative for ER (p<0.0001), PgR (p<0.0001) and HER2 (p<0.01) than controls. Patients with BLBCs were found to have a significantly higher recurrence rate (p<0.05) and were associated with significantly shorter disease-free and overall survival (both p<0.05). In the group of patients who received anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy (BLBC group, n = 47; controls, n = 49), both disease-free and overall survival were found to be significantly shorter in the BLBC group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: BLBCs are a distinct clinical and pathological entity, characterised by high nuclear grade, lack of hormone receptors and HER2 expression and a more aggressive clinical course. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be less effective in these tumours and new therapeutic approaches are indicated.

Multifactorial analysis of differences between sporadic breast cancers and cancers involving BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: We have previously demonstrated that breast cancers associated with inherited BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations differ from each other in their histopathologic appearances and that each of these types differs from breast cancers in patients unselected for family history (i.e., sporadic cancers). We have now conducted a more detailed examination of cytologic and architectural features of these tumors. METHODS: Specimens of tumor tissue (5-microm-thick sections) were examined independently by two pathologists, who were unaware of the case or control subject status, for the presence of cell mitosis, lymphocytic infiltration, continuous pushing margins, and solid sheets of cancer cells; cell nuclei, cell nucleoli, cell necrosis, and cell borders were also evaluated. The resulting data were combined with previously available information on tumor type and tumor grade and further evaluated by multifactorial analysis. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: Cancers associated with BRCA1 mutations exhibited higher mitotic counts (P = .001), a greater proportion of the tumor with a continuous pushing margin (P<.0001), and more lymphocytic infiltration (P = .002) than sporadic (i.e., control) cancers. Cancers associated with BRCA2 mutations exhibited a higher score for tubule formation (fewer tubules) (P = .0002), a higher proportion of the tumor perimeter with a continuous pushing margin (P<.0001), and a lower mitotic count (P = .003) than control cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has identified key features of the histologic phenotypes of breast cancers in carriers of mutant BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. This information may improve the classification of breast cancers in individuals with a family history of the disease and may ultimately aid in the clinical management of patients.

Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia and potential roles for gains and losses of genetic material in breast neoplasia.

Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) of the breast are cytologically similar breast lesions that reportedly carry different relative risks of subsequent development of invasive carcinoma. They are frequently multifocal and bilateral. We have identified the chromosomal copy number changes in 31 LCIS and 14 ALH lesions from 28 cases and also the 7 invasive carcinomas that subsequently developed in 6 of these cases. This was achieved by comparative genomic hybridization analysis of microdissected formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded material. There was no significant difference between the aberrations found in the unilateral versus the bilateral cases of LCIS. Loss of material from 16p, 16q, 17p, and 22q and also gain of material from 6q were found at a similar high frequency in LCIS and ALH. Loss of these genomic regions may indicate the locations of genes that predispose to the development of the lesions, and the results are consistent with LCIS and ALH representing the same genetic stage of development. Comparison of the comparative genomic hybridization results from LCIS/ALH with those from ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive cancer showed some similarities at the chromosomal level, but it also showed significant differences, including gain of 1q and 8q and evidence for genomic amplification, which were not found in LCIS/ALH. A genetic model is postulated for the possible relationships between noninvasive lobular lesions and invasive breast carcinoma, delineating potential roles for specific chromosome copy number changes.

The cylindromatosis gene (cyld1) on chromosome 16q may be the only tumour suppressor gene involved in the development of cylindromas.

Hereditary cylindromatosis is a rare autosomal dominant disease characterised by the development of multiple benign neoplasms of the skin. We recently localised the gene responsible for this disease (cyld1) to chromosome 16q12-q13 and provided evidence that it is a tumour suppressor gene (Biggs et al., 1995). We have now examined polymorphic markers on every chromosome, some of which are close to known tumour suppressor genes, in 25 tumours from 4 individuals with familial cylindromatosis. No loss of heterozygosity (LOH) was detected other than at loci on chromosome 16q. This observation suggests that the cyld1 gene may be the only tumour suppressor gene implicated in the development of cylindromas. We have also demonstrated LOH using markers on chromosome 16q in 8/14 (57%) sporadic cylindromas, indicating that the cyld1 gene is likely to be involved in the genesis of both familial and sporadic cylindromas.

Consistent loss of the wild type allele in breast cancers from a family linked to the BRCA2 gene on chromosome 13q12-13.

A small proportion of breast cancer is attributable to the inheritance of dominant, high penetrance susceptibility genes. One of these genes, BRCA2, has recently been localised by genetic linkage analysis to chromosome 13q12-13. This is a region known to exhibit loss of heterozygosity in 20-40% sporadic breast cancers. In this study, we have examined cancers from a family showing strong evidence of linkage to BRCA2. LOH was seen in seven out of eight informative cancers. In all cases the allele lost was the wild type allele that does not segregate with the disease in the family. The data suggest that both alleles of BRCA2 are inactivated in cancers, the pattern expected of a recessive oncogene or tumour suppressor gene.

The pathology of familial breast cancer: histological features of cancers in families not attributable to mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2.

Breast cancers arising in carriers of mutations in the breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, differ histologically from each other and from breast cancers unselected for a family history. However, a substantial proportion of families with multiple cases of breast cancer is not attributable to these two genes (non-BRCA1/2 families). We have now characterized the pathology of 82 breast cancers from non-BRCA1/2 families. Breast cancers in non-BRCA1/2 families were of lower grade (P = 0.0018), showed fewer mitoses (P < 0.0001), less nuclear pleomorphism (P = 0.0014), less lymphocytic infiltrate (P < 0.0001), a lesser extent of the tumor with a continuous pushing margin (P = 0.004), a lesser extent of the tumor composed of solid sheets of cells (P = 0.0047), less necrosis (P = 0.002), and wereparison with BRCA2 tumors, non-BRCA1/2 tumors were lower grade (P = 0.017) and exhibited less pleomorphism (P = 0.01) and more tubule formation (P = 0.05). In comparison with control breast cancers unselected for a family history of the disease, non-BRCA1/2 tumors were of significantly lower grade (P = 0.001), showed less pleomorphism (P = 0.0002), and had a lower mitotic count (P = 0.003). The results indicate that non-BRCA1/2 breast cancers differ histologically from both BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancers and are overall of lower grade. They also suggest that non-BRCA1/2 breast cancers differ from nonfamilial breast cancers, but these differences may be attributable to various types of bias.

Contribution of germline MLH1 and MSH2 mutations to lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is an unusual histological pattern of non-invasive neoplastic disease of the breast occurring predominantly in women aged between 40 and 50 years. LCIS is frequently multicentric and bilateral suggesting a genetic basis to the disease. The high frequency of microsatellite instability in lobular breast cancers, coupled with increased risk of breast cancer associated with germline mismatch repair gene mutations raises the possibility that mutations MSH2 or MLH1 might confer susceptibility to LCIS. To explore this possibility we have examined a series of 71 LCIS patients for germline MSH2 and MLH1 mutations. No mutations were detected in MSH2. Two sequence variants were identified in MLH1. The first was a CTT-->CAT substitution, codon 607 (exon 16) changing leucine to histidine. The other mutation detected in MLH1 was a TAC-->TAA substitution codon 750 (exon 19) creating a stop codon, predicted to generate a truncated protein. These findings suggest that mutations in MLH1 may underlie a subset of LCIS cases.