Evaluation of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC): A patient-reported survey for genetic high-risk assessment for breast and ovarian cancers in women.

Identification of mutations that increase lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancer is critical to improving women's health. Because these mutations are relatively rare in the general population, there is a need for efficient methods to identify appropriate women to undergo genetic testing. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and performance of the NCCN guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC)-a patient-facing assessment for those affected and unaffected by cancer. This study enrolled a prospective cohort of 100 affected and 100 unaffected women that used N-TRAC in a clinical setting. Recommendations for referral to genetic counseling based on N-TRAC and other standard risk assessment methods were compared.Seventy-seven of the 100 affected women and 35 of the 100 unaffected women were identified as high risk by N-TRAC. The average completion time was approximately 2 min for both groups. N-TRAC accuracy for family history was exceptional in both groups (kappa > 0.96). N-TRAC and other risk assessment methods do not always identify the same high risk population. N-TRAC is an accurate and feasible tool that can assist in identifying women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and may lead to more informed decision-making.

Cross-platform pathway-based analysis identifies markers of response to the PARP inhibitor olaparib.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) is an enzyme involved in DNA repair. PARP inhibitors can act as chemosensitizers, or operate on the principle of synthetic lethality when used as single agent. Clinical trials have shown drugs in this class to be promising for BRCA mutation carriers. We postulated that inability to demonstrate response in non-BRCA carriers in which BRCA is inactivated by other mechanisms or with deficiency in homologous recombination for DNA repair is due to lack of molecular markers that define a responding subpopulation. We identified candidate markers for this purpose for olaparib (AstraZeneca) by measuring inhibitory effects of nine concentrations of olaparib in 22 breast cancer cell lines and identifying features in transcriptional and genome copy number profiles that were significantly correlated with response. We emphasized in this discovery process genes involved in DNA repair. We found that the cell lines that were sensitive to olaparib had a significant lower copy number of BRCA1 compared to the resistant cell lines (p value 0.012). In addition, we discovered seven genes from DNA repair pathways whose transcriptional levels were associated with response. These included five genes (BRCA1, MRE11A, NBS1, TDG, and XPA) whose transcript levels were associated with resistance and two genes (CHEK2 and MK2) whose transcript levels were associated with sensitivity. We developed an algorithm to predict response using the seven-gene transcription levels and applied it to 1,846 invasive breast cancer samples from 8 U133A/plus 2 (Affymetrix) data sets and found that 8-21 % of patients would be predicted to be responsive to olaparib. A similar response frequency was predicted in 536 samples analyzed on an Agilent platform. Importantly, tumors predicted to respond were enriched in basal subtype tumors. Our studies support clinical evaluation of the utility of our seven-gene signature as a predictor of response to olaparib.

Effects of lycopene on the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system in premenopausal breast cancer survivors and women at high familial breast cancer risk.

Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) is an important growth factor associated with increased risk of premenopausal breast cancer. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trial to evaluate whether tomato-derived lycopene supplementation (30 mg/day for 2 mo) decreases serum levels of total IGF-I in premenopausal women with 1) a history of breast cancer (n=24) or 2) a high familial breast cancer risk (n=36). Also, IGF binding protein (IGFBP) increasing effects were evaluated. Lycopene supplementation did not significantly alter serum total IGF-I and other IGF system components in the 2 study populations combined. However, statistically significant discordant results were observed between the 2 study populations (i.e., P<0.05 for total IGF-I, free IGF-I, and IGFBP-3). Total IGF-I and IGFBP-3 were increased in the breast cancer survivor population [total IGF-I=7.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI)= -0.2 to 14.3%; IGFBP-3=3.3%, 95% CI=0.7-6.0%), and free IGF-I was decreased in the family history population (-7.6%, 95% CI= -14.6 to -0.6%). This randomized controlled trial shows that 2 mo of lycopene supplementation has no effect on serum total IGF-I in the overall study population. However, lycopene effects were discordant between the 2 study populations showing beneficial effects in high-risk healthy women but not in breast cancer survivors.

Lycopene supplementation elevates circulating insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 and -2 concentrations in persons at greater risk of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Higher circulating insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) concentrations have been related to a greater risk of cancer. Lycopene intake is inversely associated with cancer risk, and experimental studies have shown that it may affect the IGF system, possibly through an effect on IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs). OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to investigate the effect of an 8-wk supplementation with tomato-derived lycopene (30 mg/d) on serum concentrations of total IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2, and IGFBP-3. DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded crossover study in 40 men and 31 postmenopausal women with a family history of colorectal cancer, a personal history of colorectal adenoma, or both. RESULTS: Lycopene supplementation significantly (P = 0.01) increased serum IGFBP-1 concentrations in women (median relative difference between serum IGFBP-1 concentrations after lycopene supplementation and after placebo, 21.7%). Serum IGFBP-2 concentrations were higher in both men and women after lycopene supplementation than after placebo, but to a lesser extent (mean relative difference 8.2%; 95% CI: 0.7%, 15.6% in men and 7.8%; 95% CI: -5.0%, 20.6% in women). Total IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 concentrations were not significantly altered by lycopene supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study known to show that lycopene supplementation may increase circulating IGFBP-1 and IGFBP-2 concentrations. Because of high interindividual variations in IGFBP-1 and IGFBP-2 effects, these results should be confirmed in larger randomized intervention studies.

Isolated isoflavones do not affect the circulating insulin-like growth factor system in men at increased colorectal cancer risk.

Epidemiological studies show that increased insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I concentrations are related to increased colorectal cancer risk. A reduced colorectal cancer risk has been associated with isoflavones, which might affect the IGF-system because of their weak estrogenic activity. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover study to investigate the effect of an 8-wk isolated isoflavone supplementation (84 mg/d) on serum concentrations of total IGF-I, free IGF-I, total IGF-II, IGF binding protein (BP)-1, IGFBP-2, and IGFBP-3. Additionally, we investigated whether IGF-system component differences were related to concentrations of the more potent estrogenic isoflavone metabolite, equol. Our study population consisted of 37 men with a family history of colorectal cancer or a personal history of colorectal adenomas. Isoflavone supplementation did not significantly affect serum total IGF-I concentrations (relative difference between serum total IGF-I concentrations after isoflavone supplementation and after placebo: -1.3%, 95% CI -8.6 to 6.0%). Neither free IGF-I, nor total IGF-II, IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2, or IGFBP-3 concentrations were significantly altered. Interestingly, the change in serum IGF-I concentrations after isoflavone supplementation was negatively associated with serum equol concentrations (r=-0.49, P=0.002). In conclusion, isolated isoflavones did not affect the circulating IGF-system in a male high-risk population for colorectal cancer. However, to our knowledge, this is the first study that suggests isoflavones might have an IGF-I lowering effect in equol producers only. This underlines the importance of taking into account equol status in future isoflavone intervention studies.

Gene expression profiling and breast cancer care: what are the potential benefits and policy implications?

PURPOSE: Gene expression profiling has been proposed as an alternative to clinical guidelines to identify high-risk patients for adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the outcomes associated with gene expression profiling are not clear, and guidelines for the appropriate use of genomic technologies have not been established. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model to evaluate the incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years of gene expression profiling versus NIH clinical guidelines in a hypothetical cohort of premenopausal early stage breast cancer patients 44 years of age. We conducted empirical analyses and identified literature-based data to inform the model, and performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate uncertainty in the results. We interpreted the implications of our findings for treatment guidelines and policies. RESULTS: Use of gene expression profiling resulted in an absolute 5% decrease in the proportion of cases of distant recurrence prevented, 0.21 fewer quality-adjusted life years, and a cost savings of USD 2882. The chosen test cutoff value to identify a tumor as poor prognosis and the cost of adjuvant chemotherapy were the most influential parameters in the analysis, but our findings did not change substantially in sensitivity analyses. Regardless of the test cutoff used to identify a poor prognosis tumor, the gene expression profiling assay studied in our analysis, at its current level of performance, did not attain the threshold sensitivity (95%) necessary to produce equal or greater quality-adjusted life years than NIH guidelines. CONCLUSION: Although the use of gene expression profiling in breast cancer care holds great promise, our analysis suggests additional refinement and validation are needed before use in clinical practice.