Risks of breast and ovarian cancer for women harboring pathogenic missense variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 compared with those harboring protein truncating variants.

PURPOSE: Germline genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants has been a part of clinical practice for >2 decades. However, no studies have compared the cancer risks associated with missense pathogenic variants (PVs) with those associated with protein truncating (PTC) variants. METHODS: We collected 582 informative pedigrees segregating 1 of 28 missense PVs in BRCA1 and 153 pedigrees segregating 1 of 12 missense PVs in BRCA2. We analyzed 324 pedigrees with PTC variants in BRCA1 and 214 pedigrees with PTC variants in BRCA2. Cancer risks were estimated using modified segregation analysis. RESULTS: Estimated breast cancer risks were markedly lower for women aged >50 years carrying BRCA1 missense PVs than for the women carrying BRCA1 PTC variants (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.9 [2.4-6.2] for PVs vs 12.8 [5.7-28.7] for PTC variants; P = .01), particularly for missense PVs in the BRCA1 C-terminal domain (HR = 2.8 [1.4-5.6]; P = .005). In case of BRCA2, for women aged >50 years, the HR was 3.9 (2.0-7.2) for those heterozygous for missense PVs compared with 7.0 (3.3-14.7) for those harboring PTC variants. BRCA1 p.[Cys64Arg] and BRCA2 p.[Trp2626Cys] were associated with particularly low risks of breast cancer compared with other PVs. CONCLUSION: These results have important implications for the counseling of at-risk women who harbor missense PVs in the BRCA1/2 genes.

Genetic Testing and Clinical Management Practices for Variants in Non-BRCA1/2 Breast (and Breast/Ovarian) Cancer Susceptibility Genes: An International Survey by the Evidence-Based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) Clinical Working Group.

PURPOSE: To describe a snapshot of international genetic testing practices, specifically regarding the use of multigene panels, for hereditary breast/ovarian cancers. We conducted a survey through the Evidence-Based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) consortium, covering questions about 16 non-BRCA1/2 genes. METHODS: Data were collected via in-person and paper/electronic surveys. ENIGMA members from around the world were invited to participate. Additional information was collected via country networks in the United Kingdom and in Italy. RESULTS: Responses from 61 cancer genetics practices across 20 countries showed that 16 genes were tested by > 50% of the centers, but only six (PALB2, TP53, PTEN, CHEK2, ATM, and BRIP1) were tested regularly. US centers tested the genes most often, whereas United Kingdom and Italian centers with no direct ENIGMA affiliation at the time of the survey were the least likely to regularly test them. Most centers tested the 16 genes through multigene panels; some centers tested TP53, PTEN, and other cancer syndrome-associated genes individually. Most centers reported (likely) pathogenic variants to patients and would test family members for such variants. Gene-specific guidelines for breast and ovarian cancer risk management were limited and differed among countries, especially with regard to starting age and type of imaging and risk-reducing surgery recommendations. CONCLUSION: Currently, a small number of genes beyond BRCA1/2 are routinely analyzed worldwide, and management guidelines are limited and largely based on expert opinion. To attain clinical implementation of multigene panel testing through evidence-based management practices, it is paramount that clinicians (and patients) participate in international initiatives that share panel testing data, interpret sequence variants, and collect prospective data to underpin risk estimates and evaluate the outcome of risk intervention strategies.