The impact of inversions across 33,924 families with rare disease from a national genome sequencing project.

Detection of structural variants (SVs) is currently biased toward those that alter copy number. The relative contribution of inversions toward genetic disease is unclear. In this study, we analyzed genome sequencing data for 33,924 families with rare disease from the 100,000 Genomes Project. From a database hosting >500 million SVs, we focused on 351 genes where haploinsufficiency is a confirmed disease mechanism and identified 47 ultra-rare rearrangements that included an inversion (24 bp to 36.4 Mb, 20/47 de novo). Validation utilized a number of orthogonal approaches, including retrospective exome analysis. RNA-seq data supported the respective diagnoses for six participants. Phenotypic blending was apparent in four probands. Diagnostic odysseys were a common theme (>50 years for one individual), and targeted analysis for the specific gene had already been performed for 30% of these individuals but with no findings. We provide formal confirmation of a European founder origin for an intragenic MSH2 inversion. For two individuals with complex SVs involving the MECP2 mutational hotspot, ambiguous SV structures were resolved using long-read sequencing, influencing clinical interpretation. A de novo inversion of HOXD11-13 was uncovered in a family with Kantaputra-type mesomelic dysplasia. Lastly, a complex translocation disrupting APC and involving nine rearranged segments confirmed a clinical diagnosis for three family members and resolved a conundrum for a sibling with a single polyp. Overall, inversions play a small but notable role in rare disease, likely explaining the etiology in around 1/750 families across heterogeneous clinical cohorts.

Pathogenic variant detection rate varies considerably in male breast cancer families and sporadic cases: minimal additional contribution beyond BRCA2, BRCA1 and CHEK2.

BACKGROUND: Male breast cancer (MBC) affects around 1 in 1000 men and is known to have a higher underlying component of high and moderate risk gene pathogenic variants (PVs) than female breast cancer, particularly in BRCA2. However, most studies only report overall detection rates without assessing detailed family history. METHODS: We reviewed germline testing in 204 families including at least one MBC for BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100DelC and an extended panel in 93 of these families. Individuals had MBC (n=118), female breast cancer (FBC)(n=80), ovarian cancer (n=3) or prostate cancer-(n=3). Prior probability of having a BRCA1/2 PV was assessed using the Manchester Scoring System (MSS). RESULTS: In the 204 families, BRCA2 was the major contributor, with 51 (25%) having PVs, followed by BRCA1 and CHEK2, with five each (2.45%) but no additional PVs identified, including in families with high genetic likelihood on MSS. Detection rates were 85.7% (12/14) in MSS ≥40 and 65.5% with MSS 30-39 but only 12.8% (6/47) for sporadic breast cancer. PV rates were low and divided equally between BRCA1/2 and CHEK2. CONCLUSION: As expected, BRCA2 PVs predominate in MBC families with rates 10-fold those in CHEK2 and BRCA1. The MSS is an effective tool in assessing the likelihood of BRCA1/2 PVs.

Germline testing of BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and CHEK2 c.1100delC in 1514 triple negative familial and isolated breast cancers from a single centre, with extended testing of ATM, RAD51C and RAD51D in over 400.

BACKGROUND: The identification of germline pathogenic gene variants (PGVs) in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is important to inform further primary cancer risk reduction and TNBC treatment strategies. We therefore investigated the contribution of breast cancer associated PGVs to familial and isolated invasive TNBC. METHODS: Outcomes of germline BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2_c.1100delC testing were recorded in 1514 women (743-isolated, 771-familial), and for PALB2 in 846 women (541-isolated, 305-familial), with TNBC and smaller numbers for additional genes. Breast cancer free controls were identified from Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening and BRIDGES (Breast cancer RIsk after Diagnostic GEne Sequencing) studies. RESULTS: BRCA1_PGVs were detected in 52 isolated (7.0%) and 195 (25.3%) familial cases (isolated-OR=58.9, 95% CI: 16.6 to 247.0), BRCA2_PGVs in 21 (2.8%) isolated and 67 (8.7%) familial cases (isolated-OR=5.0, 95% CI: 2.3 to 11.2), PALB2_PGVs in 9 (1.7%) isolated and 12 (3.9%) familial cases (isolated-OR=8.8, 95% CI: 2.5 to 30.4) and CHEK2_c.1100delC in 0 isolated and 3 (0.45%) familial cases (isolated-OR=0.0, 95% CI: 0.00 to 2.11). BRCA1_PGV detection rate was >10% for all familial TNBC age groups and significantly higher for younger diagnoses (familial: <50 years, n=165/538 (30.7%); ≥50 years, n=30/233 (12.9%); p<0.0001). Women with a G3_TNBC were more likely to have a BRCA1_PGV as compared with a BRCA2 or PALB2_PGV (p<0.0001). 0/743 isolated TNBC had the CHEK2_c.1100delC PGV and 0/305 any ATM_PGV, but 2/240 (0.83%) had a RAD51D_PGV. CONCLUSION: PGVs in BRCA1 are associated with G3_TNBCs. Familial TNBCs and isolated TNBCs <30 years have a >10% likelihood of a PGV in BRCA1. BRCA1_PGVs are associated with younger age of familial TNBC. There was no evidence for any increased risk of TNBC with CHEK2 or ATM PGVs.

Validation of the BOADICEA model in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers.

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/).

Breast cancer after ovarian cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant heterozygotes: Lower rates for 5 years post chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: The identification of germline BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants (PV) infer high remaining lifetime breast/ovarian cancer risks, but there is paucity of studies assessing breast cancer risk after ovarian cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We reviewed the history of breast cancer in 895 PV heterozygotes (BRCA1 = 541). Cumulative annual breast cancer incidence was assessed at 2, 5, 10, and >10 years after ovarian cancer diagnosis date. RESULTS: Breast cancer annual rates were evaluated in 701 assessable women with no breast cancer at ovarian diagnosis (BRCA1 = 425). Incidence was lower at 2 years (1.18%) and 2 to 5 years (1.13%) but rose thereafter for BRCA1 with incidence post 10 years in excess of 4% annually. Breast cancer pathology in BRCA1 PV heterozygotes showed less high-grade triple-negative breast cancer and more lower-grade hormone-receptor-positive cancer than women with no prior ovarian cancer. In the prospective cohort from ovarian cancer diagnosis, <4% of all deaths were caused by breast cancer, although 50% of deaths in women with breast cancer after ovarian cancer diagnosis were due to breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Women can be reassured that incidence of breast cancer after ovarian cancer diagnosis is relatively low. It appears likely that this effect is due to platinum-based chemotherapy. Nonetheless women need to be aware that incidence increases thereafter, especially after 10 years.

Extended panel testing in ovarian cancer reveals BRIP1 as the third most important predisposition gene.

PURPOSE: The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in homologous recombination repair (HRR) and Lynch syndrome (LS) genes in ovarian cancer (OC) is uncertain. METHODS: An observational study reporting the detection rate of germline PVs in HRR and LS genes in all OC cases tested in the North West Genomic Laboratory Hub between September 1996 and May 2024. Effect sizes are reported using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for unselected cases tested between April 2021 and May 2024 versus 50703 controls from the Breast Cancer Risk after Diagnostic Gene Sequencing study. RESULTS: 2934 women were tested for BRCA1/2 and 433 (14.8%) had a PV. In up to 1572 women tested for PVs in non-BRCA1/2 HRR genes, detection rates were PALB2=0.8%, BRIP1=1.1%, RAD51C=0.4% and RAD51D=0.4%. In 940 unselected cases, BRIP1 (OR=8.7, 95% CI 4.6-15.8) was the third commonest OC predisposition gene followed by RAD51C (OR=8.3, 95% CI 3.1-23.1), RAD51D (OR=6.5, 95% CI 2.1-19.7) and PALB2 (OR=3.9, 95% CI 1.5-10.3). No PVs in LS genes were detected in unselected cases. CONCLUSIONS: Panel testing in OC resulted in a detection rate of 2-3% for germline PVs in non-BRCA1/2 HRR genes, with the largest contributor being BRIP1. Screening for LS in unselected cases of OC is unnecessary.

Cascade screening in HBOC and Lynch syndrome: guidelines and procedures in a UK centre.

In the 33 years since the first diagnostic cancer predisposition gene (CPG) tests in the Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, there has been substantial changes in the identification of index cases and cascade testing for at-risk family members. National guidelines in England and Wales are usually determined from the National Institute of healthcare Evidence and these have impacted on the thresholds for testing BRCA1/2 in Hereditary Breast Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) and in determining that all cases of colorectal and endometrial cancer should undergo screening for Lynch syndrome. Gaps for testing other CPGs relevant to HBOC have been filled by the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project (web ref. https://www.cangene-canvaruk.org/ ). We present time trends (1990-2020) of identification of index cases with germline CPG variants and numbers of subsequent cascade tests, for BRCA1, BRCA2, and the Lynch genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2). For BRCA1/2 there was a definite increase in the proportion of index cases with ovarian cancer only and pre-symptomatic index tests both doubling from 16 to 32% and 3.2 to > 8% respectively. A mean of 1.73-1.74 additional family tests were generated for each BRCA1/2 index case within 2 years. Overall close to one positive cascade test was generated per index case resulting in > 1000 risk reducing surgery operations. In Lynch syndrome slightly more cascade tests were performed in the first two years potentially reflecting the increased actionability in males with 42.2% of pre-symptomatic tests in males compared to 25.8% in BRCA1/2 (p < 0.0001).