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ovarian cancer cases, including carriers and non-carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants, were collected from unpublished international cohorts and consortia and published studies.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.

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.

DNA glycosylases involved in base excision repair may be associated with cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in the DNA Base Excision Repair (BER) pathway could be associated with cancer risk in carriers of mutations in the high-penetrance susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, given the relation of synthetic lethality that exists between one of the components of the BER pathway, PARP1 (poly ADP ribose polymerase), and both BRCA1 and BRCA2. In the present study, we have performed a comprehensive analysis of 18 genes involved in BER using a tagging SNP approach in a large series of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. 144 SNPs were analyzed in a two stage study involving 23,463 carriers from the CIMBA consortium (the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2). Eleven SNPs showed evidence of association with breast and/or ovarian cancer at p<0.05 in the combined analysis. Four of the five genes for which strongest evidence of association was observed were DNA glycosylases. The strongest evidence was for rs1466785 in the NEIL2 (endonuclease VIII-like 2) gene (HR: 1.09, 95% CI (1.03-1.16), p = 2.7 × 10(-3)) for association with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and rs2304277 in the OGG1 (8-guanine DNA glycosylase) gene, with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR: 1.12 95%CI: 1.03-1.21, p = 4.8 × 10(-3)). DNA glycosylases involved in the first steps of the BER pathway may be associated with cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and should be more comprehensively studied.

Male breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: pathology data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1 and, more commonly, BRCA2 mutations are associated with increased risk of male breast cancer (MBC). However, only a paucity of data exists on the pathology of breast cancers (BCs) in men with BRCA1/2 mutations. Using the largest available dataset, we determined whether MBCs arising in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers display specific pathologic features and whether these features differ from those of BRCA1/2 female BCs (FBCs). METHODS: We characterised the pathologic features of 419 BRCA1/2 MBCs and, using logistic regression analysis, contrasted those with data from 9675 BRCA1/2 FBCs and with population-based data from 6351 MBCs in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. RESULTS: Among BRCA2 MBCs, grade significantly decreased with increasing age at diagnosis (P = 0.005). Compared with BRCA2 FBCs, BRCA2 MBCs were of significantly higher stage (P for trend = 2 × 10(-5)) and higher grade (P for trend = 0.005) and were more likely to be oestrogen receptor-positive [odds ratio (OR) 10.59; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 5.15-21.80] and progesterone receptor-positive (OR 5.04; 95 % CI 3.17-8.04). With the exception of grade, similar patterns of associations emerged when we compared BRCA1 MBCs and FBCs. BRCA2 MBCs also presented with higher grade than MBCs from the SEER database (P for trend = 4 × 10(-12)). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the largest series analysed to date, our results show that BRCA1/2 MBCs display distinct pathologic characteristics compared with BRCA1/2 FBCs, and we identified a specific BRCA2-associated MBC phenotype characterised by a variable suggesting greater biological aggressiveness (i.e., high histologic grade). These findings could lead to the development of gender-specific risk prediction models and guide clinical strategies appropriate for MBC management.

An international survey of surveillance schemes for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Female BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and/or ovarian cancer, and are offered enhanced surveillance including screening from a young age and risk-reducing surgery (RRS)-mastectomy (RRM) and/or salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). While there are established guidelines for early detection of breast cancer in high-risk women who have not undergone RRM, there are less developed guidelines after RRM. We evaluated the schemes offered before and after RRS in internationally diverse high-risk clinics. An e-mailed survey was distributed to high-risk clinics affiliated with CIMBA. Overall, 22 centers from 16 countries responded. Pre RRS surveillance schemes overwhelmingly included breast imaging (primarily MRI) from 18 to 30 years and clinical breast exam (CBE) at 6-12 month intervals. For ovarian cancer, all but 6 centers offered semiannual/annual gynecological exam, transvaginal ultrasound, and CA 125 measurements. Post RRM, most centers offered only annual CBE while 4 centers offered annual MRI, primarily for substantial residual breast tissue. After RRSO only 4 centers offered specific gynecological surveillance. Existing guidelines for breast/ovarian cancer detection in BRCA carriers are being applied pre RRS but are not globally harmonized, and most centers offer no specific surveillance post RRS. From this comprehensive multinational study it is clear that evidence-based, long-term prospective data on the most effective scheme for BRCA carriers post RRS is needed.

Association of type and location of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists. OBJECTIVE: To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational study of women who were ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents. We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position. We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk. EXPOSURES: Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Breast and ovarian cancer risks. RESULTS: Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10(-9)). We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002). We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

PREDICT validity for prognosis of breast cancer patients with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants.

We assessed the PREDICT v 2.2 for prognosis of breast cancer patients with pathogenic germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants, using follow-up data from 5453 BRCA1/2 carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). PREDICT for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer had modest discrimination for BRCA1 carrier patients overall (Gönen & Heller unbiased concordance 0.65 in CIMBA, 0.64 in BCAC), but it distinguished clearly the high-mortality group from lower risk categories. In an analysis of low to high risk categories by PREDICT score percentiles, the observed mortality was consistently lower than the expected mortality, but the confidence intervals always included the calibration slope. Altogether, our results encourage the use of the PREDICT ER-negative model in management of breast cancer patients with germline BRCA1 variants. For the PREDICT ER-positive model, the discrimination was slightly lower in BRCA2 variant carriers (concordance 0.60 in CIMBA, 0.65 in BCAC). Especially, inclusion of the tumor grade distorted the prognostic estimates. The breast cancer mortality of BRCA2 carriers was underestimated at the low end of the PREDICT score distribution, whereas at the high end, the mortality was overestimated. These data suggest that BRCA2 status should also be taken into consideration with tumor characteristics, when estimating the prognosis of ER-positive breast cancer patients.

The KL-VS sequence variant of Klotho and cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Klotho (KL) is a putative tumor suppressor gene in breast and pancreatic cancers located at chromosome 13q12. A functional sequence variant of Klotho (KL-VS) was previously reported to modify breast cancer risk in Jewish BRCA1 mutation carriers. The effect of this variant on breast and ovarian cancer risks in non-Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers has not been reported. The KL-VS variant was genotyped in women of European ancestry carrying a BRCA mutation: 5,741 BRCA1 mutation carriers (2,997 with breast cancer, 705 with ovarian cancer, and 2,039 cancer free women) and 3,339 BRCA2 mutation carriers (1,846 with breast cancer, 207 with ovarian cancer, and 1,286 cancer free women) from 16 centers. Genotyping was accomplished using TaqMan(®) allelic discrimination or matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Data were analyzed within a retrospective cohort approach, stratified by country of origin and Ashkenazi Jewish origin. The per-allele hazard ratio (HR) for breast cancer was 1.02 (95% CI 0.93-1.12, P = 0.66) for BRCA1 mutation carriers and 0.92 (95% CI 0.82-1.04, P = 0.17) for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Results remained unaltered when analysis excluded prevalent breast cancer cases. Similarly, the per-allele HR for ovarian cancer was 1.01 (95% CI 0.84-1.20, P = 0.95) for BRCA1 mutation carriers and 0.9 (95% CI 0.66-1.22, P = 0.45) for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The risk did not change when carriers of the 6174delT mutation were excluded. There was a lack of association of the KL-VS Klotho variant with either breast or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Common variants in LSP1, 2q35 and 8q24 and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Genome-wide association studies of breast cancer have identified multiple single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are associated with increased breast cancer risks in the general population. In a previous study, we demonstrated that the minor alleles at three of these SNPs, in FGFR2, TNRC9 and MAP3K1, also confer increased risks of breast cancer for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Three additional SNPs rs3817198 at LSP1, rs13387042 at 2q35 and rs13281615 at 8q24 have since been reported to be associated with breast cancer in the general population, and in this study we evaluated their association with breast cancer risk in 9442 BRCA1 and 5665 BRCA2 mutation carriers from 33 study centres. The minor allele of rs3817198 was associated with increased breast cancer risk only for BRCA2 mutation carriers [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.07-1.25, P-trend = 2.8 x 10(-4)]. The best fit for the association of SNP rs13387042 at 2q35 with breast cancer risk was a dominant model for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA1: HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.25, P = 0.0047; BRCA2: HR = 1.18 95% CI: 1.04-1.33, P = 0.0079). SNP rs13281615 at 8q24 was not associated with breast cancer for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, but the estimated association for BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele HR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.98-1.14) was consistent with odds ratio estimates derived from population-based case-control studies. The LSP1 and 2q35 SNPs appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers. There was no evidence that the associations vary by mutation type depending on whether the mutated protein is predicted to be stable or not.

PHIP - a novel candidate breast cancer susceptibility locus on 6q14.1.

Most non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families have no identified genetic cause. We used linkage and haplotype analyses in familial and sporadic breast cancer cases to identify a susceptibility locus on chromosome 6q. Two independent genome-wide linkage analysis studies suggested a 3 Mb locus on chromosome 6q and two unrelated Swedish families with a LOD >2 together seemed to share a haplotype in 6q14.1. We hypothesized that this region harbored a rare high-risk founder allele contributing to breast cancer in these two families. Sequencing of DNA and RNA from the two families did not detect any pathogenic mutations. Finally, 29 SNPs in the region were analyzed in 44,214 cases and 43,532 controls from BCAC, and the original haplotypes in the two families were suggested as low-risk alleles for European and Swedish women specifically. There was also some support for one additional independent moderate-risk allele in Swedish familial samples. The results were consistent with our previous findings in familial breast cancer and supported a breast cancer susceptibility locus at 6q14.1 around the PHIP gene.

Detection and delineation of an unusual 17p11.2 deletion by array-CGH and refinement of the Smith-Magenis syndrome minimum deletion to approximately 650 kb.

Smith-Magenis syndrome (SMS) is a multiple congenital anomaly/mental retardation syndrome and it is characterized by an interstitial deletion of chromosome 17p11.2. SMS patients have a distinct phenotype which is believed to be caused by haploinsufficiency of one or more genes in the associated deleted region. Five non-deletion patients with classical phenotypic features of SMS have been reported with mutations in the retinoic acid induced 1 (RAI1) gene, located within the SMS critical interval. Happloinsufficiency of the RAI1 gene is likely to be the responsible gene for the majority of the SMS features, but other deleted genes in the SMS region may modify the overall phenotype in the patients with 17p11.2 deletions. SMS is usually diagnosed in the clinical genetic setting by FISH analysis using commercially available probes. We detected a submicroscopic deletion in 17p11.2 using array-CGH with a resolution of approximately 1 Mb in a patient with the SMS phenotype, who was not deleted for the commercially available SMS microdeletion FISH probe. Delineation of the deletion was performed using a 32K tiling BAC-array, containing 32,500 BAC clones. The deletion in this patient was size mapped to 2.7 Mb and covered the RAI1 gene. This case enabled the refinement of the SMS minimum deletion to approximately 650 kb containing eight putative genes and one predicted gene. In addition, it demonstrates the importance to investigate deletion of RAI1 in SMS patients.

Whole-genome Linkage Analysis and Sequence Analysis of Candidate Loci in Familial Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Known breast cancer-predisposing genes account for fewer than 25% of all familial breast cancer cases and further studies are required to find the remaining high- and moderate-risk genes. We set-out to couple linkage analysis using microsatellite marker data and sequence analysis of linked regions in 13 non-BRCA1/2 families in order to find novel susceptibility loci and high-penetrant genes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Genotyping with 540 fluorescently-labeled microsatellite markers located on the 23 chromosomes at 7.25 cM resolution was used for primary linkage analysis and an additional 40 markers were used for fine-mapping of loci with a logarithm of odds (LOD) or heterogeneity LOD (HLOD) score greater than one. Whole-exome sequencing data of 28 members from all 13 families were used for the bioinformatics sequence analysis on the linked regions of these families. RESULTS: Linkage analysis identified three loci on chromosome 18q as a putative region of interest (overall LOD=1, HLOD=1.2). Sequencing analysis of the three linked regions on 18q and mutation prediction algorithms did reveal three probable damaging variants. CONCLUSION: Overall, our study identified three weakly linked loci on 18q and three probable damaging variants of interest in the 13 families with breast cancer.

The use of telephone in genetic counseling versus in-person counseling: a randomized study on counselees' outcome.

Increased demand for genetic counseling services necessitates exploring alternatives to in-person counseling. Telephone counseling is a less time-consuming and more cost-effective alternative. So far there is insufficient evidence to support a pre-counseling telephone model. This randomized questionnaire study aims to evaluate the oncogenetic counseling process and to compare the impact of the initial part of the oncogenetic counseling, when conducted via telephone versus in-person. The aspects of evaluations were: patients' expectations, satisfaction and experiences of genetic counseling, worry for developing hereditary cancer and health related quality of life. A total of 215 participants representing several cancer syndromes were randomized to counseling via telephone or in-person. The questionnaires were completed before and after oncogenetic nurse counseling, and 1 year after the entire counseling process. Overall, a high satisfaction rate with the oncogenetic counseling process was found among the participants regardless of whether the oncogenetic nurse counseling was conducted by telephone or in-person. The results show that a considerable number of participants experienced difficulties with the process of creating a pedigree and dissatisfaction with information on surveillance and prevention. Affected participants reported lower levels in most SF-36 domains compared to non-affected and both groups reported lower levels as compared to a Swedish reference group. The results indicate that telephone pre-counseling works as well as in-person counseling. Emotional support during genetic counseling and information on recommended cancer prevention and surveillance should be improved.

Risk perception after genetic counseling in patients with increased risk of cancer.

BACKGROUND: Counselees are more aware of genetics and seek information, reassurance, screening and genetic testing. Risk counseling is a key component of genetic counseling process helping patients to achieve a realistic view for their own personal risk and therefore adapt to the medical, psychological and familial implications of disease and to encourage the patient to make informed choices 12.The aim of this study was to conceptualize risk perception and anxiety about cancer in individuals attending to genetic counseling. METHODS: The questionnaire study measured risk perception and anxiety about cancer at three time points: before and one week after initial genetic counseling and one year after completed genetic investigations. Eligibility criteria were designed to include only index patients without a previous genetic consultation in the family. A total of 215 individuals were included. Data was collected during three years period. RESULTS: Before genetic counseling all of the unaffected participants subjectively estimated their risk as higher than their objective risk. Participants with a similar risk as the population overestimated their risk most. All risk groups estimated the risk for children's/siblings to be lower than their own. The benefits of preventive surveillance program were well understood among unaffected participants.The difference in subjective risk perception before and directly after genetic counseling was statistically significantly lower in all risk groups. Difference in risk perception for children as well as for population was also statistically significant. Experienced anxiety about developing cancer in the unaffected subjects was lower after genetic counseling compared to baseline in all groups. Anxiety about cancer had clear correlation to perceived risk of cancer before and one year after genetic investigations.The affected participants overestimated their children's risk as well as risk for anyone in population. Difference in risk perception for children/siblings as for the general population was significant between the first and second measurement time points. Anxiety about developing cancer again among affected participants continued to be high throughout this investigation. CONCLUSION: The participant's accuracy in risk perception was poor, especially in low risk individuals before genetic counseling. There was a general trend towards more accurate estimation in all risk groups after genetic counseling. The importance of preventive programs was well understood. Cancer anxiety was prevalent and associated with risk perception, but decreased after genetic counseling.1 National Society of Genetic Counselors (2005), Genetic Counseling as a Profession. Available at http://www.nsgc.org/about/definition.cfm (accessed November 25th 2007)2 Julian-Reynier C., Welkenhuysen M-, Hagoel L., Decruyenaere M., Hopwood P. (2003) Risk communication strategies: state of the art and effectiveness in the context of cancer genetic services. Eur J of Human Genetics 11, 725736.

Common variants on chromosome 5p12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

We carried out a genome-wide association study of breast cancer predisposition with replication and refinement studies involving 6,145 cases and 33,016 controls and identified two SNPs (rs4415084 and rs10941679) on 5p12 that confer risk, preferentially for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors (OR = 1.27, P = 2.5 x 10(-12) for rs10941679). The nearest gene, MRPS30, was previously implicated in apoptosis, ER-positive tumors and favorable prognosis. A recently reported signal in FGFR2 was also found to associate specifically with ER-positive breast cancer.