Blood Lead Level as Marker of Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer in BRCA1 Carriers.

BRCA1 mutations substantially elevate the risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Various modifiers, including environmental factors, can influence cancer risk. Lead, a known carcinogen, has been associated with various cancers, but its impact on BRCA1 carriers remains unexplored. A cohort of 989 BRCA1 mutation carriers underwent genetic testing at the Pomeranian Medical University, Poland. Blood lead levels were measured using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Each subject was assigned to a category based on their tertile of blood lead. Cox regression analysis was used to assess cancer risk associations. Elevated blood lead levels (>13.6 µg/L) were associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer (univariable: HR = 3.33; 95% CI: 1.23-9.00; p = 0.02; multivariable: HR = 2.10; 95% CI: 0.73-6.01; p = 0.17). No significant correlation was found with breast cancer risk. High blood lead levels are associated with increased risk of ovarian cancer in BRCA1 carriers, suggesting priority for preventive salpingo-oophorectomy. Potential risk reduction strategies include detoxification. Validation in diverse populations and exploration of detoxification methods for lowering lead levels are required.

Zinc and Its Antioxidant Properties: The Potential Use of Blood Zinc Levels as a Marker of Cancer Risk in BRCA1 Mutation Carriers.

BRCA1 mutations predispose women to breast and ovarian cancer. The anticancer effect of zinc is typically linked to its antioxidant abilities and protecting cells against oxidative stress. Zinc regulates key processes in cancer development, including DNA repair, gene expression, and apoptosis. We took a blood sample from 989 female BRCA1 mutation carriers who were initially unaffected by cancer and followed them for a mean of 7.5 years thereafter. There were 172 incident cases of cancer, including 121 cases of breast cancer, 29 cases of ovarian cancers, and 22 cancers at other sites. A zinc level in the lowest tertile was associated with a modestly higher risk of ovarian cancer compared to women with zinc levels in the upper two tertiles (HR = 1.65; 95% CI 0.80 to 3.44; p = 0.18), but this was not significant. Among those women with zinc levels in the lowest tertile, the 10-year cumulative risk of ovarian cancer was 6.1%. Among those in the top two tertiles of zinc level, the ten-year cumulative risk of ovarian cancer was 4.7%. There was no significant association between zinc level and breast cancer risk. Our preliminary study does not support an association between serum zinc level and cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Association of recurrent mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, PALB2, and CHEK2 with the risk of borderline ovarian tumor.

BACKGROUND: There are several genes associated with ovarian cancer risk. Molecular changes in borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) indicate linkage of this disease to type I ovarian tumors (low-grade ovarian carcinomas). This study determined the prevalence and association of mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and CHEK2 with the risk of BOTs. METHODS: The study group consisted of 102 patients with histologically confirmed BOT and 1743 healthy controls. In addition, 167 cases with ovarian cancer G1 were analyzed. The analyses included genotyping of 21 founder and recurrent mutations localized in 5 genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and CHEK2). The risk for developing BOT and low-grade ovarian cancer, as well as the association of tested mutations with survival, was estimated. RESULTS: The CHEK2 missense mutation (c.470T>C) was associated with 2-times increased risk of BOT (OR=2.05, p=0.03), at an earlier age at diagnosis and about 10% worse rate of a 10-year survival. Mutations in BRCA1 and PALB2 were associated with a high risk of ovarian cancer G1 (OR=8.53, p=0.005 and OR=7.03, p=0.03, respectively) and were related to worse all-cause survival for BRCA1 carriers (HR=4.73, 95%CI 1.45-15.43, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that CHEK2 (c.470T>C) may possibly play a role in the pathogenesis of BOT, but due to the low number of BOT patients, obtained results should be considered as preliminary. Larger more in-depth studies are required.

The impact of oophorectomy on survival from breast cancer in patients with CHEK2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: To estimate the impact of oophorectomy and other treatments on the survival of breast cancer patients with a CHEK2 mutation. METHODS: Women with Stage I-III breast cancer who were treated at 17 hospitals in Poland were tested for four founder mutations in the CHEK2 gene. 974 women (10%) were positive for a CHEK2 mutation. Control patients without a CHEK2 mutation were selected from a database of patients treated over the same time period. Information on treatments received and distant recurrences were retrieved from medical records. Treatments included chemotherapy, hormonal therapy (tamoxifen) and radiation therapy. Oophorectomies were performed for the treatment of breast cancer or for benign conditions. Dates of death were obtained from the Polish Vital Statistics Registry. Causes of death were determined by medical record review. Predictors of survival were determined using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: In all, 839 patients with a CHEK2 mutation were matched to 839 patients without a mutation. The mean follow-up was 12.0 years. The 15-year survival for CHEK2 carriers was 76.6% and the 15-year survival for non-carrier control patients was 78.8% (adjusted HR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.84-1.34; P = 0.61). Among CHEK2 carriers, the 15-year survival for women who had an oophorectomy was 86.3% and for women who did not have an oophorectomy was 72.1% (adjusted HR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.38-0.90; P = 0.02). Among controls, the 15-year survival for patients who had an oophorectomy was 84.5% and for women who did not have an oophorectomy was 77.6% (adjusted HR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.66-1.61; P = 0.90). CONCLUSION: Among women with breast cancer and a CHEK2 mutation, oophorectomy is associated with a reduced risk of death from breast cancer.

Do BARD1 Mutations Confer an Elevated Risk of Prostate Cancer?

The current cancer testing gene panels tend to be comprehensive rather than site-specific. BARD1 is one of the genes commonly included in the multi-cancer testing panels. Mutations in BARD1 confer an increase in the risk for breast cancer, but it is not studied whether or not they predispose to prostate cancer. To establish if BARD1 mutations also predispose to prostate cancer, we screened BARD1 in 390 Polish patients with hereditary prostate cancer. No truncating mutations were identified by sequencing. We also genotyped 5715 men with unselected prostate cancer, and 10,252 controls for three recurrent BARD1 variants, including p.Q564X, p.R658C and p.R659=. Neither variant conferred elevated risk of prostate cancer (ORs between 0.84 and 1.15, p-values between 0.57 and 0.93) nor did they influence prostate cancer characteristics or survival. We conclude that men with a BARD1 mutation are not at elevated prostate cancer risk. It is not justified to inform men about increased prostate cancer risk in case of identification of a BARD1 mutation. However, a female relative of a man with a BARD1 mutation may benefit from this information and be tested for the mutation, because BARD1 is a breast cancer susceptibility gene.

Genetic predisposition to male breast cancer in Poland.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer in men accounts for fewer than 1 % of all breast cancer cases diagnosed in men and women. Genes which predispose to male breast cancer include BRCA1 and BRCA2. The role of other genes is less clear. In Poland, 20 founder mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, NBN, RECQL are responsible for the majority of hereditary breast cancer cases in women, but the utility this genes panel has not been tested in men. METHODS: We estimated the prevalence of 20 alleles in six genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, NBN, RECQL) in 165 Polish male breast cancer patients. We compared the frequency of selected variants in male breast cancer cases and controls. RESULTS: One of the 20 mutations was seen in 22 of 165 cases (13.3%). Only one BRCA1 mutation and two BRCA2 mutations were found. We observed statistically significant associations for PALB2 and CHEK2 truncating mutations. A PALB2 mutation was detected in four cases (OR = 11.66; p < 0.001). A CHEK2 truncating mutation was detected in five cases (OR = 2.93;p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we recommend that a molecular test for BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and CHEK2 recurrent mutations should be offered to male breast cancer patients in Poland.

Recurrent Mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, PALB2 and CHEK2 in Polish Patients with Ovarian Cancer.

The aim of the study was to analyze the frequency and magnitude of association of 21 recurrent founder germline mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and CHEK2 genes with ovarian cancer risk among unselected patients in Poland. We genotyped 21 recurrent germline mutations in BRCA1 (9 mutations), BRCA2 (4 mutations), RAD51C (3 mutations), PALB2 (2 mutations), and CHEK2 (3 mutations) among 2270 Polish ovarian cancer patients and 1743 healthy controls, and assessed the odds ratios (OR) for developing ovarian cancer for each gene. Mutations were detected in 369 out of 2095 (17.6%) unselected ovarian cancer cases and 117 out of 1743 (6.7%) unaffected controls. The ovarian cancer risk was associated with mutations in BRCA1 (OR = 40.79, 95% CI: 18.67-114.78; p = 0.29 × 10-15), in BRCA2 (OR = 25.98; 95% CI: 1.55-434.8; p = 0.001), in RAD51C (OR = 6.28; 95% CI 1.77-39.9; p = 0.02), and in PALB2 (OR 3.34; 95% CI: 1.06-14.68; p = 0.06). There was no association found for CHEK2. We found that pathogenic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C or PALB2 are responsible for 12.5% of unselected cases of ovarian cancer. We recommend that all women with ovarian cancer in Poland and first-degree female relatives should be tested for this panel of 18 mutations.

BRCA1 promoter methylation in peripheral blood is associated with the risk of triple-negative breast cancer.

Methylation of the promoter of the BRCA1 gene in DNA derived from peripheral blood cells is a possible risk factor for breast cancer. It is not clear if this association is restricted to certain types of breast cancer or is a general phenomenon. We evaluated BRCA1 methylation status in peripheral blood cells from 942 breast cancer patients and from 500 controls. We also assessed methylation status in 262 paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissues. Methylation status was assessed using methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting and was categorized as positive or negative. BRCA1 methylation in peripheral blood cells was strongly associated with the risk of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (odds ratio [OR] 4.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.13-7.07; p < 0.001), but not of estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.46-1.42; p = 0.46). Methylation was also overrepresented among patients with high-grade cancers (OR 4.53; 95% CI: 2.91-7.05; p < 0.001) and medullary cancers (OR 3.08; 95% CI: 1.38-6.88; p = 0.006). Moreover, we detected a significant concordance of BRCA1 promoter methylation in peripheral blood and paired tumor tissue (p < 0.001). We found that BRCA1 promoter methylation in peripheral blood cells is associated with approximately five times greater risk of TNBC. We propose that BRCA1 methylation in blood-derived DNA could be a novel biomarker of increased breast cancer susceptibility, in particular for triple-negative tumors.

Inherited variants in XRCC2 and the risk of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: XRCC2 participates in homologous recombination and in DNA repair. XRCC2 has been reported to be a breast cancer susceptibility gene and is now included in several breast cancer susceptibility gene panels. METHODS: We sequenced XRCC2 in 617 Polish women with familial breast cancer and found a founder mutation. We then genotyped 12,617 women with breast cancer and 4599 controls for the XRCC2 founder mutation. RESULTS: We identified a recurrent truncating mutation of XRCC2 (c.96delT, p.Phe32fs) in 3 of 617 patients with familial breast cancer who were sequenced. The c.96delT mutation was then detected in 29 of 12,617 unselected breast cancer cases (0.23%) compared to 11 of 4599 cancer-free women (0.24%) (OR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.48-1.93). The mutation frequency in 1988 women with familial breast cancer was 0.2% (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.27-2.65). Breast cancers in XRCC2 mutation carriers and non-carriers were similar with respect to age of diagnosis and clinical characteristics. Loss of the wild-type XRCC2 allele was observed only in one of the eight breast cancers from patients who carried the XRCC2 mutation. No cancer type was more common in first- or second-degree relatives of XRCC2 mutation carriers than in relatives of the non-carriers. CONCLUSION: XRCC2 c.96delT is a protein-truncating founder variant in Poland. There is no evidence that this mutation predisposes to breast cancer (and other cancers). It is premature to consider XRCC2 as a breast cancer-predisposing gene.