ABSTRACT
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/).
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein , BRCA2 Protein , Breast Neoplasms , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Heterozygote , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , Middle Aged , Adult , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Risk Assessment , Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide/geneticsABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Genes, BRCA2 , Adult , Female , Humans , Body Mass Index , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Risk , Retrospective Studies , Weight Gain/genetics , Heterozygote , Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseABSTRACT
Variant-specific loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analyses may be useful to classify BRCA1/2 germline variants of unknown significance (VUS). The sensitivity and specificity of this approach, however, remains unknown. We performed comparative next-generation sequencing analyses of the BRCA1/2 genes using blood-derived and tumour-derived DNA of 488 patients with ovarian cancer enrolled in the observational AGO-TR1 trial (NCT02222883). Overall, 94 pathogenic, 90 benign and 24 VUS were identified in the germline. A significantly increased variant fraction (VF) of a germline variant in the tumour indicates loss of the wild-type allele; a decreased VF indicates loss of the variant allele. We demonstrate that significantly increased VFs predict pathogenicity with high sensitivity (0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91), poor specificity (0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.73) and poor positive predictive value (PPV; 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79). Significantly decreased VFs predict benignity with low sensitivity (0.26, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), high specificity (1.0, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00) and PPV (1.0, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00). Variant classification based on significantly increased VFs results in an unacceptable proportion of false-positive results. A significantly decreased VF in the tumour may be exploited as a reliable predictor for benignity, with no false-negative result observed. When applying the latter approach, VUS identified in four patients can now be considered benign. Trial registration number NCT02222883.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Ovarian Neoplasms , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genes, BRCA1 , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Germ Cells/pathology , Germ-Line Mutation/genetics , Humans , Loss of Heterozygosity/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers has been shown to decrease with longer duration of oral contraceptive use. Although the effects of using oral contraceptives in the general population are well established (approximately 50% risk reduction in ovarian cancer), the estimated risk reduction in mutation carriers is much less precise because of potential bias and small sample sizes. In addition, only a few studies on oral contraceptive use have examined the associations of duration of use, time since last use, starting age, and calendar year of start with risk of ovarian cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate in more detail the associations of various characteristics of oral contraceptive use and risk of ovarian cancer, to provide healthcare providers and carriers with better risk estimates. STUDY DESIGN: In this international retrospective study, ovarian cancer risk associations were assessed using oral contraceptives data on 3989 BRCA1 and 2445 BRCA2 mutation carriers. Age-dependent-weighted Cox regression analyses were stratified by study and birth cohort and included breast cancer diagnosis as a covariate. To minimize survival bias, analyses were left truncated at 5 years before baseline questionnaire. Separate analyses were conducted for each aspect of oral contraceptive use and in a multivariate analysis, including all these aspects. In addition, the analysis of duration of oral contraceptive use was stratified by recency of use. RESULTS: Oral contraceptives were less often used by mutation carriers who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer (ever use: 58.6% for BRCA1 and 53.5% BRCA2) than by unaffected carriers (ever use: 88.9% for BRCA1 and 80.7% for BRCA2). The median duration of use was 7 years for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers who developed ovarian cancer and 9 and 8 years for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with ovarian cancer, respectively. For BRCA1 mutation carriers, univariate analyses have shown that both a longer duration of oral contraceptive use and more recent oral contraceptive use were associated with a reduction in the risk of ovarian cancer. However, in multivariate analyses, including duration of use, age at first use, and time since last use, duration of oral contraceptive use proved to be the prominent protective factor (compared with <5 years: 5-9 years [hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.12]; >10 years [hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.73]; Ptrend=.008). The inverse association between duration of use and ovarian cancer risk persisted for more than 15 years (duration of ≥10 years; BRCA1 <15 years since last use [hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.43]; BRCA1 >15 years since last use [hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.59]). Univariate results for BRCA2 mutation carriers were similar but were inconclusive because of limited sample size. CONCLUSION: For BRCA1 mutation carriers, longer duration of oral contraceptive use is associated with a greater reduction in ovarian cancer risk, and the protection is long term.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Contraceptives, Oral/administration & dosage , Mutation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Adult , Cohort Studies , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Middle Aged , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
After publication of the original article [1], we were notified that columns in Table 2 were erroneously displayed.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is uncertain. Retrospective analyses have suggested a protective effect but may be substantially biased. Prospective studies have had limited power, particularly for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further, previous studies have not considered the effect of RRSO in the context of natural menopause. METHODS: A multi-centre prospective cohort of 2272 BRCA1 and 1605 BRCA2 mutation carriers was followed for a mean of 5.4 and 4.9 years, respectively; 426 women developed incident breast cancer. RRSO was modelled as a time-dependent covariate in Cox regression, and its effect assessed in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. RESULTS: There was no association between RRSO and breast cancer for BRCA1 (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.94-1.61) or BRCA2 (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.62-1.24) mutation carriers. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, HRs were 0.68 (95% CI 0.40-1.15) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64) for RRSO carried out before or after age 45 years, respectively. The HR for BRCA2 mutation carriers decreased with increasing time since RRSO (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.26-0.99 for 5 years or longer after RRSO). Estimates for premenopausal women were similar. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that RRSO reduces breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. A potentially beneficial effect for BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed, particularly after 5 years following RRSO. These results may inform counselling and management of carriers with respect to RRSO.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Mutation , Salpingo-oophorectomy/methods , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , International Agencies , Menopause , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Reduction BehaviorABSTRACT
Comparably little is known about breast cancer (BC) risks in women from families tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations despite an indicative family history, as opposed to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We determined the age-dependent risks of first and contralateral breast cancer (FBC, CBC) both in noncarriers and carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, who participated in an intensified breast imaging surveillance program. The study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2017, at 12 university centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Two cohorts were prospectively followed up for incident FBC (n = 4,380; 16,398 person-years [PY], median baseline age: 39 years) and CBC (n = 2,993; 10,090 PY, median baseline age: 42 years). Cumulative FBC risk at age 60 was 61.8% (95% CI 52.8-70.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 43.2% (95% CI 32.1-56.3%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 15.7% (95% CI 11.9-20.4%) for noncarriers. FBC risks were significantly higher than in the general population, with incidence rate ratios of 23.9 (95% CI 18.9-29.8) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 13.5 (95% CI 9.2-19.1) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 4.9 (95% CI 3.8-6.3) for BRCA1/2 noncarriers. Cumulative CBC risk 10 years after FBC was 25.1% (95% CI 19.6-31.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 6.6% (95% CI 3.4-12.5%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 3.6% (95% CI 2.2-5.7%) for noncarriers. CBC risk in noncarriers was similar to women with unilateral BC from the general population. Further studies are needed to confirm whether less intensified surveillance is justified in women from BRCA1/2 negative families with elevated risk.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Adult , Age Factors , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Epidemiological Monitoring , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Germany/epidemiology , Heterozygote , Humans , Incidence , Medical History Taking , Middle Aged , Mutation , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a high-risk cancer predisposition syndrome caused by pathogenic germline variants of TP53. Cancer surveillance has noted a significant survival advantage in individuals with LFS; however, little is known about the feasibility, acceptance, and psychosocial effects of such a program. METHODS: Pathogenic TP53 germline variant carriers completed a 7-part questionnaire evaluating sociodemographics, cancer history, surveillance participation, reasons for nonadherence, worries, and distress adapted from the Cancer Worry Scale. Counselees' common concerns and suggestions were assessed in MAXQDA Analytics Pro 12. RESULTS: Forty-nine participants (46 females and 3 males), aged 40.0 ± 12.6 years, formed the study population; 43 (88%) had a personal cancer history (including multiple cancers in 10 [20%]). Forty-three individuals participated (88%) in surveillance during the study or formerly. Willingness to undergo surveillance was influenced by satisfaction with genetic testing and counseling (P = .019 [Fisher-Yates test]) but not by sociodemographics, cancer history, or distress level. Almost one-third of the participants reported logistical difficulties in implementing surveillance because of the high frequency of medical visits, scheduling difficulties, and the travel distance to their surveillance providers. Self-reported distress and perceived emotional burden for family members and partners were moderate (median for self-reported distress, 3.3; median for perceived emotional burden, 3.0). For both, the interquartile range was moderate to very high (2.7-3.7 and 3.0-3.7, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with LFS require efficient counseling as well as an accessible, well-organized, interdisciplinary, standardized surveillance program to increase adherence and psychological coping.
Subject(s)
Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/genetics , Neoplasms/genetics , Tumor Suppressor Protein p53/genetics , Adult , Female , Genetic Testing , Germ-Line Mutation/genetics , Germany/epidemiology , Heterozygote , Humans , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/complications , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/epidemiology , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/pathology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: For individuals with ovarian cancer (OC), therapy options mainly depend on BRCA1/2 germline status. What is the prevalence of deleterious somatic variants, that is, does genetic tumour testing identify subgroups of individuals who also might benefit from targeted therapy? METHODS: Paired analysis of tumour-derived versus blood-derived DNA to determine the prevalence of deleterious somatic variants in OC predisposition genes (ATM, BRCA1/2, BRIP1, MSH2/6, PALB2, RAD51C/D and TP53) and the PIK3CA and PTEN genes in individuals with OC (AGO-TR1 study, NCT02222883). Results were complemented by BRCA1, PALB2 and RAD51C promoter methylation analyses and stratified by histological subtype; 473 individuals were included. RESULTS: The combined analyses revealed that deleterious germline variants in established OC predisposition genes (all: 125/473, 26.4%; BRCA1/2: 97/473, 20.5%), deleterious somatic variants in established OC predisposition genes excluding TP53 (all: 39/473, 8.2%; BRCA1/2: 30/473, 6.3%) and promoter methylation (all: 67/473, 14.2%; BRCA1: 57/473, 12.1%; RAD51C: 10/473, 2.1%; PALB2: 0/473) were mutually exclusive, with a few exceptions. The same holds true for deleterious somatic PIK3CA and/or PTEN variants (33/473, 7.0%) found to be enriched in endometrioid and clear cell OC (16/35, 45.7%); 84.3 % of the deleterious single-nucleotide/indel germline variants in established OC predisposition genes showed significantly higher variant fractions (VFs) in the tumour-derived versus blood-derived DNA, indicating a loss of the wild-type alleles. CONCLUSION: Tumour sequencing of the BRCA1, BRCA2, PIK3CA and PTEN genes along with BRCA1 and RAD51C promoter methylation analyses identified large subgroups of germline mutation-negative individuals who may be addressed in interventional studies using PARP or PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02222883.
Subject(s)
Genetic Association Studies , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Sequence Deletion , BRCA1 Protein , BRCA2 Protein , Biomarkers, Tumor , Computational Biology/methods , DNA Copy Number Variations , DNA Methylation , Female , Genetic Association Studies/methods , Genetic Testing , Germ-Line Mutation , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Humans , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prevalence , Promoter Regions, GeneticABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To report on 10 years of high-risk service screening with annual MRI in the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC). METHODS: A cohort of 4,573 high-risk, previously unaffected women (954 BRCA1 carriers, 598 BRCA2 carriers, 3021 BRCA1/2 non-carriers) participating in the GC-HBOC surveillance program was prospectively followed. Screening outcomes for 14,142 screening rounds with MRI between 2006 and 2015 were analyzed and stratified by risk group, type of screening round, and age. RESULTS: A total of 221 primary breast cancers (185 invasive, 36 in situ) were diagnosed within 12 months of an annual screening round with MRI. Of all cancers, 84.5% (174/206, 15 unknown) were stage 0 or I. In BRCA1 carriers, 16.9% (10/59, 5 unknown) of all incident cancers (screen-detected and interval cancers combined) and in BRCA2 carriers 12.5% (3/24, 4 unknown) were stage IIA or higher, compared to only 4.8% (2/42, 2 unknown) in high-risk BRCA1/2 non-carriers. Program sensitivity was 89.6% (95% CI 84.9-93.0) with no significant differences in sensitivity between risk groups or by age. Specificity was significantly lower in the first screening round (84.6%, 95% CI 83.6-85.7) than in subsequent screening rounds (91.1%, 95% CI 90.6-91.7), p < 0.001. Cancer detection rates (CDRs) and as a result positive predictive values were strongly dependent on type of screening round, risk group and patient age. CDRs ranged from 43.5 (95% CI 29.8-62.9) for the first screening round in BRCA2 carriers to 2.9 (95% CI 1.3-6.3) for subsequent screening rounds in high-risk non-carriers in the age group 30 to 39 years. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk screening with MRI was successfully implemented in the GC-HBOC with high sensitivity and specificity. Risk prediction and inclusion criteria in high-risk non-carriers need to be adjusted to improve CDRs and thus screening efficacy in these patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers, Tumor , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Germany/epidemiology , Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome/epidemiology , Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome/pathology , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Staging , Public Health Surveillance , Reproducibility of Results , Risk , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: With the introduction of Olaparib treatment for BRCA-deficient recurrent ovarian cancer, testing for somatic and/or germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes in tumor tissues became essential for treatment decisions. In most cases only formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples, containing fragmented and chemically modified DNA of minor quality, are available. Thus, multiplex PCR-based sequencing is most commonly applied in routine molecular testing, which is predominantly focused on the identification of known hot spot mutations in oncogenes. METHODS: We compared the overall performance of an adjusted targeted capture-based enrichment protocol and a multiplex PCR-based approach for calling of pathogenic SNVs and InDels using DNA extracted from 13 FFPE tissue samples. We further applied both strategies to seven blood samples and five matched FFPE tumor tissues of patients with known germline exon-spanning deletions and gene-wide duplications in BRCA1/2 to evaluate CNV detection based solely on panel NGS data. Finally, we analyzed DNA from FFPE tissues of 11 index patients from families suspected of having hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, of whom no blood samples were available for testing, in order to identify underlying pathogenic germline BRCA1/2 mutations. RESULTS: The multiplex PCR-based protocol produced inhomogeneous coverage among targets of each sample and between samples as well as sporadic amplicon drop out, leading to insufficiently or non-covered nucleotides, which subsequently hindered variant detection. This protocol further led to detection of PCR-artifacts that could easily have been misinterpreted as pathogenic mutations. No such limitations were observed by application of an adjusted targeted capture-based protocol, which allowed for CNV calling with 86% sensitivity and 100% specificity. All pathogenic CNVs were confirmed in the five matched FFPE tumor samples from patients carrying known pathogenic germline mutations and we additionally identified somatic loss of the second allele in BRCA1/2. Furthermore we detected pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants in four the eleven FFPE samples from patients of whom no blood was available for analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that an adjusted targeted capture-based enrichment protocol is superior to commonly applied multiplex PCR-based protocols for reliable BRCA1/2 variant detection, including CNV-detection, using FFPE tumor samples.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Germ-Line Mutation , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing/methods , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/blood , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , DNA Copy Number Variations/genetics , Female , Formaldehyde/chemistry , Humans , INDEL Mutation , Male , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Ovarian Neoplasms/blood , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Paraffin Embedding , Pedigree , Reproducibility of Results , Tissue FixationABSTRACT
The increasing application of gene panels for familial cancer susceptibility disorders will probably lead to an increased proposal of susceptibility gene candidates. Using ERCC2 DNA repair gene as an example, we show that proof of a possible role in cancer susceptibility requires a detailed dissection and characterization of the underlying mutations for genes with diverse cellular functions (in this case mainly DNA repair and basic cellular transcription). In case of ERCC2, panel sequencing of 1345 index cases from 587 German, 405 Lithuanian and 353 Czech families with breast and ovarian cancer (BC/OC) predisposition revealed 25 mutations (3 frameshift, 2 splice-affecting, 20 missense), all absent or very rare in the ExAC database. While 16 mutations were unique, 9 mutations showed up repeatedly with population-specific appearance. Ten out of eleven mutations that were tested exemplarily in cell-based functional assays exert diminished excision repair efficiency and/or decreased transcriptional activation capability. In order to provide evidence for BC/OC predisposition, we performed familial segregation analyses and screened ethnically matching controls. However, unlike the recently published RECQL example, none of our recurrent ERCC2 mutations showed convincing co-segregation with BC/OC or significant overrepresentation in the BC/OC cohort. Interestingly, we detected that some deleterious founder mutations had an unexpectedly high frequency of > 1% in the corresponding populations, suggesting that either homozygous carriers are not clinically recognized or homozygosity for these mutations is embryonically lethal. In conclusion, we provide a useful resource on the mutational landscape of ERCC2 mutations in hereditary BC/OC patients and, as our key finding, we demonstrate the complexity of correct interpretation for the discovery of "bonafide" breast cancer susceptibility genes.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , DNA Repair/genetics , Female , Germ-Line Mutation , Heterozygote , Humans , Mutation, Missense , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein/chemistryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is no international consensus up to which age women with a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and no family history of breast or ovarian cancer should be offered genetic testing for germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (gBRCA) mutations. Here, we explored the association of age at TNBC diagnosis with the prevalence of pathogenic gBRCA mutations in this patient group. METHODS: The study comprised 802 women (median age 40 years, range 19-76) with oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 negative breast cancers, who had no relatives with breast or ovarian cancer. All women were tested for pathogenic gBRCA mutations. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the association between age at TNBC diagnosis and the presence of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation. RESULTS: A total of 127 women with TNBC (15.8%) were gBRCA mutation carriers (BRCA1: n = 118, 14.7%; BRCA2: n = 9, 1.1%). The mutation prevalence was 32.9% in the age group 20-29 years compared to 6.9% in the age group 60-69 years. Logistic regression analysis revealed a significant increase of mutation frequency with decreasing age at diagnosis (odds ratio 1.87 per 10 year decrease, 95%CI 1.50-2.32, p < 0.001). gBRCA mutation risk was predicted to be > 10% for women diagnosed below approximately 50 years. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the general understanding that a heterozygous mutation probability of 10% or greater justifies gBRCA mutation screening, women with TNBC diagnosed before the age of 50 years and no familial history of breast and ovarian cancer should be tested for gBRCA mutations. In Germany, this would concern approximately 880 women with newly diagnosed TNBC per year, of whom approximately 150 are expected to be identified as carriers of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Genetic Testing , Germ-Line Mutation , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Unilateral Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Adult , Aged , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Prognosis , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Unilateral Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Unilateral Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Young AdultABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Classification of variants of unknown significance (VUS) in the breast cancer genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 changes with accumulating evidence for clinical relevance. In most cases down-staging towards neutral variants without clinical significance is possible. METHODS: We searched the database of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) for changes in classification of genetic variants as an update to our earlier publication on genetic variants in the Centre of Dresden. Changes between 2015 and 2017 were recorded. RESULTS: In the group of variants of unclassified significance (VUS, Class 3, uncertain), only changes of classification towards neutral genetic variants were noted. In BRCA1, 25% of the Class 3 variants (n = 2/8) changed to Class 2 (likely benign) and Class 1 (benign). In BRCA2, in 50% of the Class 3 variants (n = 16/32), a change to Class 2 (n = 10/16) or Class 1 (n = 6/16) was observed. No change in classification was noted in Class 4 (likely pathogenic) and Class 5 (pathogenic) genetic variants in both genes. No up-staging from Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 to more clinical significance was observed. CONCLUSION: All variants with a change in classification in our cohort were down-staged towards no clinical significance by a panel of experts of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC). Prevention in families with Class 3 variants should be based on pedigree based risks and should not be guided by the presence of a VUS.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/classification , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/classification , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Variation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Germany , HumansABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal obstruction presents many burdens for patients with end-stage abdominal cancer, such as nausea and vomiting. Few detailed data on the efficacy of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) for decompression exists. This retrospective cohort study investigates the quantity of symptom relief realized with PEG and the corresponding complications. METHODS: Chart reviews of 75 patients with malignant gastrointestinal obstruction, who received a PEG for decompression, were performed. Abstracted data includes symptoms (vomiting, nausea, abdominal pain) and medication up to 7 days before and after the intervention, complications, demographics, potential influencing factors and survival. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) models determined symptom reduction. RESULTS: PEG decreased the mean frequency of vomiting per day from 2.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-2.7) to 0.4 (95% CI 0.3-0.6) (p < 0.001). The probability of the occurrence of nausea on a given day was 80% (95% CI 74-85%) prior to the PEG placement and 40% (95% CI 34-47%) afterwards (p < 0.001). One hundred twelve complications were reported in 56 patients (none 19/75 patients (25%), minor 52/75 (69%), major 18/75 (24%)). Stomal leakage (18/75 patients), mild wound pain (17/75) and tube occlusion (13/75) occurred most frequently. The failure of the first attempt of the PEG placement (7/75) presented as the leading major complication. CONCLUSIONS: The PEG for decompression significantly reduces vomiting and nausea in patients with malignant gastrointestinal obstruction (p < 0.001). Minor complications are common and should be discussed prior to the intervention. Nevertheless, the PEG appears to demonstrate prevailing benefits in comparison to the risks.
Subject(s)
Gastrostomy/methods , Intestinal Obstruction/surgery , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Female , Gastrostomy/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To characterise the prevalence of pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in families with breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) history. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 21â 401 families were gathered between 1996 and 2014 in a clinical setting in the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, comprising full pedigrees with cancer status of all individual members at the time of first counselling, and BRCA1/2 mutation status of the index patient. RESULTS: The overall BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence was 24.0% (95% CI 23.4% to 24.6%). Highest mutation frequencies were observed in families with at least two OCs (41.9%, 95% CI 36.1% to 48.0%) and families with at least one breast and one OC (41.6%, 95% CI 40.3% to 43.0%), followed by male BC with at least one female BC or OC (35.8%; 95% CI 32.2% to 39.6%). In families with a single case of early BC (<36â years), mutations were found in 13.7% (95% CI 11.9% to 15.7%). Postmenopausal unilateral or bilateral BC did not increase the probability of mutation detection. Occurrence of premenopausal BC and OC in the same woman led to higher mutation frequencies compared with the occurrence of these two cancers in different individuals (49.0%; 95% CI 41.0% to 57.0% vs 31.5%; 95% CI 28.0% to 35.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide guidance for healthcare professionals and decision-makers to identify individuals who should undergo genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Moreover, it supports informed decision-making of counselees on the uptake of genetic testing.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms, Male/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Germ-Line Mutation/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Adult , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease/genetics , Genetic Testing/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , PrevalenceABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Prognosis of Her2-positive breast cancer has changed since the introduction of trastuzumab for treatment in metastatic and early breast cancer. It was described to be even better compared to prognosis of Her2-negative metastatic breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of trastuzumab in our cohort. Besides the effect of adjuvant pretreatment with trastuzumab on survival of patients with metastatic Her2-positive breast cancer was analyzed. METHODS: All patients with primary breast cancer of the Regional Breast Cancer Center Dresden diagnosed during the years 2001-2013 were analyzed for treatment with or without trastuzumab in the adjuvant and in the metastatic treatment setting using Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and Cox regression. Age and tumor stage at time of first diagnosis of breast cancer as well as hormone receptor status, grading, time, and site of metastasis at first diagnosis of distant metastatic disease were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 4.481 female patients with primary breast cancer, 643 presented with metastatic disease. Her2-positive status was documented in 465 patients, including 116 patients with primary or secondary metastases. Median survival of patients with Her2-positive primary metastatic disease was 3.0 years (95% CI 2.3-4.0). After adjustment for other factors, survival was better in patients with Her2-positive breast cancer with trastuzumab therapy compared to Her2-negative metastatic disease (HR 2.10; 95% CI 1.58-2.79). Analysis of influence of adjuvant therapy with and without trastuzumab by Kaplan-Meier showed a trend for better survival in not pretreated patients. Median survival was highest in hormone receptor-positive Her2-positive (triple-positive) primary metastatic breast cancer patients with 3.3 years (95% CI 2.3-4.6). CONCLUSION: Prognosis of patients with Her2-positive metastatic breast cancer after trastuzumab treatment is more favorable than for Her2-negative breast cancer. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab warrants further research. Survival is best in triple-positive metastatic breast cancer. This will effect counseling at the time of first diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Receptor, ErbB-2/genetics , Trastuzumab/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Trastuzumab/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Determination of mutation status of BRCA1 and BRCA2 has become part of the clinical routine. However, the spectrum of genetic variants differs between populations. The aim of this study was to deliver a comprehensive description of all detected variants. METHODS: In families fulfilling one of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) criteria for genetic testing, one affected was chosen for analysis. DNA of blood lymphocytes was amplified by PCR and prescreened by DHPLC. Aberrant fragments were sequenced. All coding exons and splice sites of BRCA1 and BRCA2 were analyzed. Screening for large rearrangements in both genes was performed by MLPA. RESULTS: Of 523 index patients, 121 (23.1%) were found to carry a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (class 4/5) mutation. A variant of unknown significance (VUS) was detected in 73/523 patients (13.9%). Two mutations p.Gln1756Profs*74 and p.Cys61Gly comprised 42.3% (n = 33/78) of all detected pathogenic mutations in BRCA1. Most of the other mutations were unique mutations. The most frequently detected mutation in BRCA2 was p.Val1283Lys (13.9%; n = 6/43). Altogether, 101 different neutral genetic variants were counted in BRCA1 (n = 35) and in BRCA2 (n = 66). CONCLUSION: The two most frequently detected mutations are founder mutations in Poland and Czech Republic. More similarities seem to be shared with our direct neighbor countries compared to other European countries. For comparison of the extended genotype, a shared database is needed.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Mutation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Female , HumansABSTRACT
Importance: The clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers requires accurate, prospective cancer risk estimates. Objectives: To estimate age-specific risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for mutation carriers and to evaluate risk modification by family cancer history and mutation location. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of 6036 BRCA1 and 3820 BRCA2 female carriers (5046 unaffected and 4810 with breast or ovarian cancer or both at baseline) recruited in 1997-2011 through the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study, the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, with ascertainment through family clinics (94%) and population-based studies (6%). The majority were from large national studies in the United Kingdom (EMBRACE), the Netherlands (HEBON), and France (GENEPSO). Follow-up ended December 2013; median follow-up was 5 years. Exposures: BRCA1/2 mutations, family cancer history, and mutation location. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual incidences, standardized incidence ratios, and cumulative risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer. Results: Among 3886 women (median age, 38 years; interquartile range [IQR], 30-46 years) eligible for the breast cancer analysis, 5066 women (median age, 38 years; IQR, 31-47 years) eligible for the ovarian cancer analysis, and 2213 women (median age, 47 years; IQR, 40-55 years) eligible for the contralateral breast cancer analysis, 426 were diagnosed with breast cancer, 109 with ovarian cancer, and 245 with contralateral breast cancer during follow-up. The cumulative breast cancer risk to age 80 years was 72% (95% CI, 65%-79%) for BRCA1 and 69% (95% CI, 61%-77%) for BRCA2 carriers. Breast cancer incidences increased rapidly in early adulthood until ages 30 to 40 years for BRCA1 and until ages 40 to 50 years for BRCA2 carriers, then remained at a similar, constant incidence (20-30 per 1000 person-years) until age 80 years. The cumulative ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years was 44% (95% CI, 36%-53%) for BRCA1 and 17% (95% CI, 11%-25%) for BRCA2 carriers. For contralateral breast cancer, the cumulative risk 20 years after breast cancer diagnosis was 40% (95% CI, 35%-45%) for BRCA1 and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) for BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] for comparing BRCA2 vs BRCA1, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P=.001 for difference). Breast cancer risk increased with increasing number of first- and second-degree relatives diagnosed as having breast cancer for both BRCA1 (HR for ≥2 vs 0 affected relatives, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.41-2.82; P<.001 for trend) and BRCA2 carriers (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.08-3.37; P=.02 for trend). Breast cancer risk was higher if mutations were located outside vs within the regions bounded by positions c.2282-c.4071 in BRCA1 (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P=.007) and c.2831-c.6401 in BRCA2 (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.36-2.74; P<.001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Mutation , Neoplasms, Second Primary/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Adult , Age Distribution , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Family , Female , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Neoplasms, Second Primary/epidemiology , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Time FactorsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Detection of predisposing copy number variants (CNV) in 330 families affected with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). METHODS: In order to complement mutation detection with Illumina's TruSight Cancer panel, we designed a customized high-resolution 8 × 60k array for CGH (aCGH) that covers all 94 genes from the panel. RESULTS: Copy number variants with immediate clinical relevance were detected in 12 families (3.6%). Besides 3 known CNVs in CHEK2, RAD51C, and BRCA1, we identified 3 novel pathogenic CNVs in BRCA1 (deletion of exons 4-13, deletion of exons 12-18) and ATM (deletion exons 57-63) plus an intragenic duplication of BRCA2 (exons 3-11) and an intronic BRCA1 variant with unknown pathogenicity. The precision of high-resolution aCGH enabled straight forward breakpoint amplification of a BRCA1 deletion which subsequently allowed for fast and economic CNV verification in family members of the index patient. Furthermore, we used our aCGH data to validate an algorithm that was able to detect all identified copy number changes from next-generation sequencing (NGS) data. CONCLUSIONS: Copy number detection is a mandatory analysis in HBOC families at least if no predisposing mutations were found by sequencing. Currently, high-resolution array CGH is our first choice of method of analysis due to unmatched detection precision. Although it seems possible to detect CNV from sequencing data, there currently is no satisfying tool to do so in a routine diagnostic setting.