The Tumor Suppressor PALB2: Inside Out.

Partner and Localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2) has emerged as an important and versatile player in genome integrity maintenance. Biallelic mutations in PALB2 cause Fanconi anemia (FA) subtype FA-N, whereas monoallelic mutations predispose to breast, and pancreatic familial cancers. Herein, we review recent developments in our understanding of the mechanisms of regulation of the tumor suppressor PALB2 and its functional domains. Regulation of PALB2 functions in DNA damage response and repair occurs on multiple levels, including homodimerization, phosphorylation, and ubiquitylation. With a molecular emphasis, we present PALB2-associated cancer mutations and their detailed analysis by functional assays.

Associations of height, body mass index, and weight gain with breast cancer risk in carriers of a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2: the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Cohort Consortium.

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.

Ovarian cancer pathology characteristics as predictors of variant pathogenicity in BRCA1 and BRCA2.

BACKGROUND: The distribution of ovarian tumour characteristics differs between germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers and non-carriers. In this study, we assessed the utility of ovarian tumour characteristics as predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity, for application using the American College of Medical Genetics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) variant classification system. METHODS: Data for 10,373 ovarian cancer cases, including carriers and non-carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants, were collected from unpublished international cohorts and consortia and published studies. Likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated for the association of ovarian cancer histology and other characteristics, with BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity. Estimates were aligned to ACMG/AMP code strengths (supporting, moderate, strong). RESULTS: No histological subtype provided informative ACMG/AMP evidence in favour of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity. Evidence against variant pathogenicity was estimated for the mucinous and clear cell histologies (supporting) and borderline cases (moderate). Refined associations are provided according to tumour grade, invasion and age at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: We provide detailed estimates for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity based on ovarian tumour characteristics. This evidence can be combined with other variant information under the ACMG/AMP classification system, to improve classification and carrier clinical management.

Regulating cancer risk prediction: legal considerations and stakeholder perspectives on the Canadian context.

Risk prediction models hold great promise to reduce the impact of cancer in society through advanced warning of risk and improved preventative modalities. These models are evolving and becoming more complex, increasingly integrating genetic screening data and polygenic risk scores as well as calculating risk for multiple types of a disease. However, unclear regulatory compliance requirements applicable to these models raise significant legal uncertainty and new questions about the regulation of medical devices. This paper aims to address these novel regulatory questions by presenting an initial assessment of the legal status likely applicable to risk prediction models in Canada, using the CanRisk tool for breast and ovarian cancer as an exemplar. Legal analysis is supplemented with qualitative perspectives from expert stakeholders regarding the accessibility and compliance challenges of the Canadian regulatory framework. While the paper focuses on the Canadian context, it also refers to European and U.S. regulations in this domain to contrast them. Legal analysis and stakeholder perspectives highlight the need to clarify and update the Canadian regulatory framework for Software as a Medical Device as it applies to risk prediction models. Findings demonstrate how normative guidance perceived as convoluted, contradictory or overly burdensome can discourage innovation, compliance, and ultimately, implementation. This contribution aims to initiate discussion about a more optimal legal framework for risk prediction models as they continue to evolve and are increasingly integrated into landscape for public health.

Polymorphisms in genes of melatonin biosynthesis and signaling support the light-at-night hypothesis for breast cancer.

Light-at-night triggers the decline of pineal gland melatonin biosynthesis and secretion and is an IARC-classified probable breast-cancer risk factor. We applied a large-scale molecular epidemiology approach to shed light on the putative role of melatonin in breast cancer. We investigated associations between breast-cancer risk and polymorphisms at genes of melatonin biosynthesis/signaling using a study population of 44,405 women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (22,992 cases, 21,413 population-based controls). Genotype data of 97 candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at 18 defined gene regions were investigated for breast-cancer risk effects. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) by logistic regression for the main-effect analysis as well as stratified analyses by estrogen- and progesterone-receptor (ER, PR) status. SNP-SNP interactions were analyzed via a two-step procedure based on logic regression. The Bayesian false-discovery probability (BFDP) was used for all analyses to account for multiple testing. Noteworthy associations (BFDP < 0.8) included 10 linked SNPs in tryptophan hydroxylase 2 (TPH2) (e.g. rs1386492: OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12), and a SNP in the mitogen-activated protein kinase 8 (MAPK8) (rs10857561: OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.04-1.18). The SNP-SNP interaction analysis revealed noteworthy interaction terms with TPH2- and MAPK-related SNPs (e.g. rs1386483R ∧ rs1473473D ∧ rs3729931D: OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.09-1.32). In line with the light-at-night hypothesis that links shift work with elevated breast-cancer risks our results point to SNPs in TPH2 and MAPK-genes that may impact the intricate network of circadian regulation.

Prospective validation of the BOADICEA multifactorial breast cancer risk prediction model in a large prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The multifactorial Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) breast cancer risk prediction model has been recently extended to consider all established breast cancer risk factors. We assessed the clinical validity of the model in a large independent prospective cohort. METHODS: We validated BOADICEA (V.6) in the Swedish KARolinska Mammography Project for Risk Prediction of Breast Cancer (KARMA) cohort including 66 415 women of European ancestry (median age 54 years, IQR 45-63; 816 incident breast cancers) without previous cancer diagnosis. We calculated 5-year risks on the basis of questionnaire-based risk factors, pedigree-structured first-degree family history, mammographic density (BI-RADS), a validated breast cancer polygenic risk score (PRS) based on 313-SNPs, and pathogenic variant status in 8 breast cancer susceptibility genes: BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, RAD51C, RAD51D and BARD1. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed and expected risks in deciles of predicted risk and the calibration slope. The discriminatory ability was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Among the individual model components, the PRS contributed most to breast cancer risk stratification. BOADICEA was well calibrated in predicting the risks for low-risk and high-risk women when all, or subsets of risk factors are included in the risk prediction. Discrimination was maximised when all risk factors are considered (AUC=0.70, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.73; expected-to-observed ratio=0.88, 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.04; calibration slope=0.97, 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.99). The full multifactorial model classified 3.6% women as high risk (5-year risk ≥3%) and 11.1% as very low risk (5-year risk <0.33%). CONCLUSION: The multifactorial BOADICEA model provides valid breast cancer risk predictions and a basis for personalised decision-making on disease prevention and screening.

Enhancing the BOADICEA cancer risk prediction model to incorporate new data on RAD51C, RAD51D, BARD1 updates to tumour pathology and cancer incidence.

BACKGROUND: BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) for breast cancer and the epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer (EOC) models included in the CanRisk tool (www.canrisk.org) provide future cancer risks based on pathogenic variants in cancer-susceptibility genes, polygenic risk scores, breast density, questionnaire-based risk factors and family history. Here, we extend the models to include the effects of pathogenic variants in recently established breast cancer and EOC susceptibility genes, up-to-date age-specific pathology distributions and continuous risk factors. METHODS: BOADICEA was extended to further incorporate the associations of pathogenic variants in BARD1, RAD51C and RAD51D with breast cancer risk. The EOC model was extended to include the association of PALB2 pathogenic variants with EOC risk. Age-specific distributions of oestrogen-receptor-negative and triple-negative breast cancer status for pathogenic variant carriers in these genes and CHEK2 and ATM were also incorporated. A novel method to include continuous risk factors was developed, exemplified by including adult height as continuous. RESULTS: BARD1, RAD51C and RAD51D explain 0.31% of the breast cancer polygenic variance. When incorporated into the multifactorial model, 34%-44% of these carriers would be reclassified to the near-population and 15%-22% to the high-risk categories based on the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Under the EOC multifactorial model, 62%, 35% and 3% of PALB2 carriers have lifetime EOC risks of <5%, 5%-10% and >10%, respectively. Including height as continuous, increased the breast cancer relative risk variance from 0.002 to 0.010. CONCLUSIONS: These extensions will allow for better personalised risks for BARD1, RAD51C, RAD51D and PALB2 pathogenic variant carriers and more informed choices on screening, prevention, risk factor modification or other risk-reducing options.

Polygenic risk scores and risk-stratified breast cancer screening: Familiarity and perspectives of health care professionals.

PURPOSE: Health care professionals are expected to take on an active role in the implementation of risk-based cancer prevention strategies. This study aimed to explore health care professionals' (1) self-reported familiarity with the concept of polygenic risk score (PRS), (2) perceived level of knowledge regarding risk-stratified breast cancer (BC) screening, and (3) preferences for continuing professional development. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a bilingual-English/French-online questionnaire disseminated by health care professional associations across Canada between November 2020 and May 2021. RESULTS: A total of 593 professionals completed more than 2 items and 453 responded to all questions. A total of 432 (94%) participants were female, 103 (22%) were physicians, and 323 (70%) were nurses. Participants reported to be unfamiliar with (20%), very unfamiliar (32%) with, or did not know (41%) the concept of PRS. Most participants reported not having enough knowledge about risk-stratified BC screening (61%) and that they would require more training (77%). Online courses and webinar conferences were the preferred continuing professional development modalities. CONCLUSION: The study indicates that health care professionals are currently not familiar with the concept of PRS or a risk-stratified approach for BC screening. Online information and training seem to be an essential knowledge transfer modality.

Women's perceptions of PERSPECTIVE: a breast cancer risk stratification e-platform.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer risk stratification categorizes a woman's potential risk of developing the disease as near-population, intermediate, or high. In accordance, screening and follow up for breast cancer can readily be tailored following risk assessment. Recent efforts have focussed on developing more accessible means to convey this information to women. This study sought to document the relevance of an informational e-platform developed for these purposes. OBJECTIVE: To begin to assess a newly developed breast cancer risk stratification and decision support e-platform called PERSPECTIVE (PErsonalised Risk Stratification for Prevention and Early deteCTIon of breast cancer) among women who do not know their personal breast cancer risk (Phase 1). Changes (pre- and post- e-platform exposure) in knowledge of breast cancer risk and interest in undergoing genetic testing were assessed in addition to perceptions of platform usability and acceptability. METHODS: Using a pre-post design, women (N = 156) of differing literacy and education levels, aged 30 to 60, with no previous breast cancer diagnosis were recruited from the general population and completed self-report e-questionnaires. RESULTS: Mean e-platform viewing time was 18.67 min (SD 0.65) with the most frequently visited pages being breast cancer-related risk factors and risk assessment. Post-exposure, participants reported  significantly higher breast cancer-related knowledge (p < .001). Increases in knowledge relating to obesity, alcohol, breast density, menstruation, and the risk estimation process remained even when sociodemographic variables age and education were controlled. There were no significant changes in genetic testing interest post-exposure. Mean ratings for e-platform acceptability and usability were high: 26.19 out of 30 (SD 0.157) and 42.85 out of 50 (SD 0.267), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: An informative breast cancer risk stratification e-platform targeting healthy women in the general population can significantly increase knowledge as well as support decisions around breast cancer risk and assessment. Currently underway, Phase 2, called PERSPECTIVE, is seeking further content integration and broader implementation .

Sequence kernel association test for survival outcomes in the presence of a non-susceptible fraction.

In this work, we propose a single nucleotide polymorphism set association test for survival phenotypes in the presence of a non-susceptible fraction. We consider a mixture model with a logistic regression for the susceptibility indicator and a proportional hazards regression to model survival in the susceptible group. We propose a joint test to assess the significance of the genetic variant in both logistic and survival regressions simultaneously. We adopt the spirit of SKAT and conduct a variance-component test treating the genetic effects of multiple variants as random. We derive score-type test statistics, and we investigate several approaches to compute their $p$-values. The finite-sample properties of the proposed tests are assessed and compared to existing approaches by simulations and their use is illustrated through an application to ovarian cancer data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Potential of polygenic risk scores for improving population estimates of women's breast cancer genetic risks.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer risk has conventionally been assessed using family history (FH) and rare high/moderate penetrance pathogenic variants (PVs), notably in BRCA1/2, and more recently PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM. In addition to these PVs, it is now possible to use increasingly predictive polygenic risk scores (PRS) as well. The comparative population-level predictive capability of these three different indicators of genetic risk for risk stratification is, however, unknown. METHODS: The Canadian heritable breast cancer risk distribution was estimated using a novel genetic mixing model (GMM). A realistically representative sample of women was synthesized based on empirically observed demographic patterns for appropriately correlated family history, inheritance of rare PVs, PRS, and residual risk from an unknown polygenotype. Risk assessment was simulated using the BOADICEA risk algorithm for 10-year absolute breast cancer incidence, and compared to heritable risks as if the overall polygene, including its measured PRS component, and PV risks were fully known. RESULTS: Generally, the PRS was most predictive for identifying women at high risk, while family history was the weakest. Only the PRS identified any women at low risk of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: PRS information would be the most important advance in enabling effective risk stratification for population-wide breast cancer screening.

Oral contraceptive use and ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: an international cohort study.

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.

A global functional analysis of missense mutations reveals two major hotspots in the PALB2 tumor suppressor.

While biallelic mutations in the PALB2 tumor suppressor cause Fanconi anemia subtype FA-N, monoallelic mutations predispose to breast and familial pancreatic cancer. Although hundreds of missense variants in PALB2 have been identified in patients to date, only a few have clear functional and clinical relevance. Herein, we investigate the effects of 44 PALB2 variants of uncertain significance found in breast cancer patients and provide detailed analysis by systematic functional assays. Our comprehensive functional analysis reveals two hotspots for potentially deleterious variations within PALB2, one at each terminus. PALB2 N-terminus variants p.P8L [c.23C>T], p.Y28C [c.83A>G], and p.R37H [c.110G>A] compromised PALB2-mediated homologous recombination. At the C-terminus, PALB2 variants p.L947F [c.2841G>T], p.L947S [c.2840T>C], and most strikingly p.T1030I [c.3089C>T] and p.W1140G [c.3418T>C], stood out with pronounced PARP inhibitor sensitivity and cytoplasmic accumulation in addition to marked defects in recruitment to DNA damage sites, interaction with BRCA2 and homologous recombination. Altogether, our findings show that a combination of functional assays is necessary to assess the impact of germline missense variants on PALB2 function, in order to guide proper classification of their deleteriousness.

Correction to: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

After publication of the original article [1], we were notified that columns in Table 2 were erroneously displayed.

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

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.

Evaluation of associations between genetically predicted circulating protein biomarkers and breast cancer risk.

A small number of circulating proteins have been reported to be associated with breast cancer risk, with inconsistent results. Herein, we attempted to identify novel protein biomarkers for breast cancer via the integration of genomics and proteomics data. In the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC), with 122,977 cases and 105,974 controls of European descendants, we evaluated the associations of the genetically predicted concentrations of >1,400 circulating proteins with breast cancer risk. We used data from a large-scale protein quantitative trait loci (pQTL) analysis as our study instrument. Summary statistics for these pQTL variants related to breast cancer risk were obtained from the BCAC and used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for each protein using the inverse-variance weighted method. We identified 56 proteins significantly associated with breast cancer risk by instrumental analysis (false discovery rate <0.05). Of these, the concentrations of 32 were influenced by variants close to a breast cancer susceptibility locus (ABO, 9q34.2). Many of these proteins, such as insulin receptor, insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 and other membrane receptors (OR: 0.82-1.18, p values: 6.96 × 10-4 -3.28 × 10-8 ), are linked to insulin resistance and estrogen receptor signaling pathways. Proteins identified at other loci include those involved in biological processes such as alcohol and lipid metabolism, proteolysis, apoptosis, immune regulation and cell motility and proliferation. Consistent associations were observed for 22 proteins in the UK Biobank data (p < 0.05). The study identifies potential novel biomarkers for breast cancer, but further investigation is needed to replicate our findings.

Functional characterization of 84 PALB2 variants of uncertain significance.

PURPOSE: Inherited pathogenic variants in PALB2 are associated with increased risk of breast and pancreatic cancer. However, the functional and clinical relevance of many missense variants of uncertain significance (VUS) identified through clinical genetic testing is unclear. The ability of patient-derived germline missense VUS to disrupt PALB2 function was assessed to identify variants with potential clinical relevance. METHODS: The influence of 84 VUS on PALB2 function was evaluated using a cellular homology directed DNA repair (HDR) assay and VUS impacting activity were further characterized using secondary functional assays. RESULTS: Four (~5%) variants (p.L24S,c.71T>C; p.L35P,c.104T>C; pI944N,c.2831T>A; and p.L1070P,c.3209T>C) disrupted PALB2-mediated HDR activity. These variants conferred sensitivity to cisplatin and a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor and reduced RAD51 foci formation in response to DNA damage. The p.L24S and p.L35P variants disrupted BRCA1-PALB2 protein complexes, p.I944N was associated with protein instability, and both p.I944N and p.L1070P mislocalized PALB2 to the cytoplasm. CONCLUSION: These findings show that the HDR assay is an effective method for screening the influence of inherited variants on PALB2 function, that four missense variants impact PALB2 function and may influence cancer risk and response to therapy, and suggest that few inherited PALB2 missense variants disrupt PALB2 function in DNA repair.

Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants in a large, unselected breast cancer cohort.

Breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2-driven tumors may benefit from targeted therapy. It is not clear whether current BRCA screening guidelines are effective at identifying these patients. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of inherited BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants in a large, clinically representative breast cancer cohort and to estimate the proportion of BRCA1/2 carriers not detected by selectively screening individuals with the highest probability of being carriers according to current clinical guidelines. The study included 5,122 unselected Swedish breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2008. Target sequence enrichment (48.48 Fluidigm Access Arrays) and sequencing were performed (Illumina Hi-Seq 2,500 instrument, v4 chemistry). Differences in patient and tumor characteristics of BRCA1/2 carriers who were already identified as part of clinical BRCA1/2 testing routines and additional BRCA1/2 carriers found by sequencing the entire study population were compared using logistic regression models. Ninety-two of 5,099 patients with valid variant calls were identified as BRCA1/2 carriers by screening all study participants (1.8%). Only 416 study participants (8.2%) were screened as part of clinical practice, but this identified 35 out of 92 carriers (38.0%). Clinically identified carriers were younger, less likely postmenopausal and more likely to be associated with familiar ovarian cancer compared to the additional carriers identified by screening all patients. More BRCA2 (34/42, 81.0%) than BRCA1 carriers (23/50, 46%) were missed by clinical screening. In conclusion, BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence in unselected breast cancer patients was 1.8%. Six in ten BRCA carriers were not detected by selective clinical screening of individuals.

Correction: BOADICEA: a comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and nongenetic risk factors.

This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. The authors regret this error.

BOADICEA: a comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and nongenetic risk factors.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer (BC) risk prediction allows systematic identification of individuals at highest and lowest risk. We extend the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) risk model to incorporate the effects of polygenic risk scores (PRS) and other risk factors (RFs). METHODS: BOADICEA incorporates the effects of truncating variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM; a PRS based on 313 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explaining 20% of BC polygenic variance; a residual polygenic component accounting for other genetic/familial effects; known lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive RFs; and mammographic density, while allowing for missing information. RESULTS: Among all factors considered, the predicted UK BC risk distribution is widest for the PRS, followed by mammographic density. The highest BC risk stratification is achieved when all genetic and lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive/anthropomorphic factors are considered jointly. With all factors, the predicted lifetime risks for women in the UK population vary from 2.8% for the 1st percentile to 30.6% for the 99th percentile, with 14.7% of women predicted to have a lifetime risk of ≥17-<30% (moderate risk according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guidelines) and 1.1% a lifetime risk of ≥30% (high risk). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive model should enable high levels of BC risk stratification in the general population and women with family history, and facilitate individualized, informed decision-making on prevention therapies and screening.