Criterios de derivación a genética clínica desde Atención Primaria. Documento de consenso / Referral criteria to clinical genetics from primary care: Consensus document

Introducción: La Atención Primaria (AP) es el primer contacto entre el paciente y el médico, por lo que es fundamental tener claro los criterios de sospecha de una enfermedad genética y dónde se debe remitir para su estudio. Material y métodos: Cuatro sociedades científicas: la Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria (semFYC), la Asociación Española de Genética Humana (AEGH), la Asociación Española de Pediatría (AEP) y la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica (SEOM), han revisado los criterios de derivación a los servicios de genética clínica de las diferentes guías publicadas, con el objetivo de elaborar unas recomendaciones para AP. Conclusiones: Con este Documento de Consenso el médico de familia y el pediatra de AP conocerán cuándo, cómo y dónde derivar a sus pacientes con patología hereditaria y/o genética a los servicios de genética clínica.(AU)

Introduction: Primary care (PC) is the first contact between the patient and the doctor, so it is essential to be clear about the criteria for suspecting a genetic disease and where it should be referred for study. Material and methods: Four scientific societies: the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (semFYC), the Spanish Association of Human Genetics (AEGH), the Spanish Association of Pediatrics (AEP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), have reviewed the criteria for referral to the clinical genetics services of the different published guidelines with the purpose of define the recommendations for PC. Conclusions: With this consensus document, the PC doctor and pediatrician will know when, how and where to refer their patients with hereditary and/or genetic pathology to clinical genetics services.(AU)

[Referral criteria to clinical genetics from primary care: Consensus document]. / Criterios de derivación a genética clínica desde Atención Primaria. Documento de consenso.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care (PC) is the first contact between the patient and the doctor, so it is essential to be clear about the criteria for suspecting a genetic disease and where it should be referred for study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four scientific societies: the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (semFYC), the Spanish Association of Human Genetics (AEGH), the Spanish Association of Pediatrics (AEP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), have reviewed the criteria for referral to the clinical genetics services of the different published guidelines with the purpose of define the recommendations for PC. CONCLUSIONS: With this consensus document, the PC doctor and pediatrician will know when, how and where to refer their patients with hereditary and/or genetic pathology to clinical genetics services.

A comprehensive analysis of candidate genes in familial pancreatic cancer families reveals a high frequency of potentially pathogenic germline variants.

BACKGROUND: The 5-year survival rate of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is around 5% due to the fact that the majority of patients present with advanced disease that is treatment resistant. Familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) is a rare disorder that is defined as a family with at least two affected first degree relatives, with an estimated incidence of 4%-10%. The genetic basis is unknown in the majority of families although around 10%-13% of families carry germline mutations in known genes associated with hereditary cancer and pancreatitis syndromes. METHODS: Panel sequencing was performed of 35 genes associated with hereditary cancer in 43 PDAC cases from families with an apparent hereditary pancreatic cancer syndrome. FINDINGS: Pathogenic variants were identified in 19% (5/26) of PDAC cases from pure FPC families in the genes MLH1, CDKN2A, POLQ and FANCM. Low frequency potentially pathogenic VUS were also identified in 35% (9/26) of PDAC cases from FPC families in the genes FANCC, MLH1, PMS2, CFTR, APC and MUTYH. Furthermore, an important proportion of PDAC cases harboured more than one pathogenic, likely pathogenic or potentially pathogenic VUS, highlighting the multigene phenotype of FPC. INTERPRETATION: The genetic basis of familial or hereditary pancreatic cancer can be explained in 21% of families by previously described hereditary cancer genes. Low frequency variants in other DNA repair genes are also present in 35% of families which may contribute to the risk of pancreatic cancer development. FUNDING: This study was funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Plan Estatal de I + D + i 2013-2016): ISCIII (PI09/02221, PI12/01635, PI15/02101 and PI18/1034) and co-financed by the European Development Regional Fund ''A way to achieve Europe'' (ERDF), the Biomedical Research Network in Cancer: CIBERONC (CB16/12/00446), Red Temática de investigación cooperativa en cáncer: RTICC (RD12/0036/0073) and La Asociación Española contra el Cáncer: AECC (Grupos Coordinados Estables 2016).

Relationship of immunohistochemistry, copy number aberrations and epigenetic disorders with BRCAness pattern in hereditary and sporadic breast cancer.

The study aims to identify the relevance of immunohistochemistry (IHC), copy number aberrations (CNA) and epigenetic disorders in BRCAness breast cancers (BCs). We studied 95 paraffin included BCs, of which 41 carried BRCA1/BRCA2 germline mutations and 54 were non hereditary (BRCAX/Sporadic). Samples were assessed for BRCA1ness and CNAs by Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA); promoter methylation (PM) was assessed by methylation-specific-MLPA and the expression of miR-4417, miR-423-3p, miR-590-5p and miR-187-3p by quantitative RT-PCR. IHC markers Ki67, ER, PR, HER2, CK5/6, EGFR and CK18 were detected with specific primary antibodies (DAKO, Denmark). BRCAness association with covariates was performed using multivariate binary logistic regression (stepwise backwards Wald option). BRCA1/2 mutational status (p = 0.027), large tumor size (p = 0.041) and advanced histological grade (p = 0.017) among clinic-pathological variables; ER (p < 0.001) among IHC markers; MYC (p < 0.001) among CNA; APC (p = 0.065), ATM (p = 0.014) and RASSF1 (p = 0.044) among PM; and miR-590-5p (p = 0.001), miR-4417 (p = 0.019) and miR-423 (p = 0.013) among microRNA expression, were the selected parameters significantly related with the BRCAness status. The logistic regression performed with all these parameters selected ER+ as linked with the lack of BRCAness (p = 0.001) and MYC CNA, APC PM and miR-590-5p expression with BRCAness (p = 0.014, 0.045 and 0.007, respectively). In conclusion, the parameters ER expression, APC PM, MYC CNA and miR-590-5p expression, allowed detection of most BRCAness BCs. The identification of BRCAness can help establish a personalized medicine addressed to predict the response to specific treatments.

MicroRNA signatures in hereditary breast cancer.

This study aims to identify signatures of miR associated with hereditary, BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation positive breast cancer (BC), and non-hereditary BC, either sporadic (SBC) or non-informative (BRCAX). Moreover, we search for signatures associated with tumor stage, immunohistochemistry and tumor molecular profile. Twenty formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) BCs, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRCAX and SBC, five per group were studied. Affymetrix platform miRNA v.3.0 was used to perform miR expression analysis. ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 protein expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry. BRCA1, BRCA2 and RASSF1 methylation analysis, AURKA copy number variations, and BRCA1 and BRCA2 deletions, were studied by MLPA. We validated eight of the miR selected by the arrays in 77 BCs by qRT-PCR. The miR profiles associated with tumor features were studied applying the Sparse Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis. MiR discrimination capability to distinguish hereditary and non-hereditary BC was analyzed by the discriminant function. With 15 out of 1,733 hsa-miRs, it was possible to differentiate the four groups. BRCA1, BRCA2 and SBC were associated with clusters of hyper-expressed miRs, and BRCAX with hypo-expressed miRs. Hsa-miR-4417 and hsa-miR-423-3p expressions (included among the eight validated miRs) differentiated 70.1 % of hereditary and non-hereditary BCs. We found miR profiles associated with tumor features like node involvement, histological grade, ER, PR and HER2 expression. Regarding molecular parameters, we only found a weak association of miRs in BC harboring losses in AURKA. We conclude that array miR expression profiles can differentiate the four study groups using FFPE BC. However, miRs expression estimated by qRT-PCR differentiates only hereditary and non-inherited BCs. The miR expression array is a simple and rapid approach that could be useful to facilitate the identification of those SBC carrying genetic or epigenetic changes in BRCA genes responsible of BRCA-like phenotype. These patients could benefit from the treatment with PARP inhibitors.

Novel and recurrent BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in early onset and familial breast and ovarian cancer detected in the Program of Genetic Counseling in Cancer of Valencian Community (eastern Spain). Relationship of family phenotypes with mutation prevalence.

During the first 6 years of the Program of Genetic Counselling in Cancer of Valencia (eastern Spain), 310 mutations (155 in BRCA1 and 155 in BRCA2) in 1,763 hereditary breast (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) families were identified. Of the mutations found 105 were distinct (53 in BRCA1 and 52 in BRCA2), eight new and 37 recurrent. Two of the novel mutations were frame-shift placed in exons 2 and 11 of BRCA1 and the remaining six were placed in BRCA2; four frame-shift (three in exon 11 and one in exon 23), one deletion of the entire exon 19 and one in the intervening sequence of exon 22. The BRCA1 mutations with higher recurrence were c.66_68delAG, c.5123C > A, c.1961delA, c.3770_3771delAG and c.5152+5G > A that covered 45.2% of mutations of this gene. The age of onset of BCs of c.68_69delAG mutation carriers occurs later than for the other recurrent mutations of this gene (45 vs. 37 years; p = 0.008). The BRCA2 mutations with higher recurrence were c.9026_9030delATCAT, c.3264insT and c.8978_8991del14 which represented 43.2% of all mutations in this gene, being the most recurrent mutation by far c.9026_9030delATCAT that represents 21.3% of BRCA2 mutations and 10.6% of all mutations. Probands with family histories of BC and OC, or OC and/or BC in at least two first degree relatives, were the more likely to have BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations (35.2% of the total mutations). And that most BRCA1mutations (73.19% mutations) occurred in probands with early-onset BC or with family history of OC.

Low penetrance alleles as risk modifiers in familial and sporadic breast cancer.

The aim of the study is to investigate the relevance of rs1056663 and rs2708861 HUS1 polymorphisms, and rs104548, rs2981582 and rs2910164 polymorphisms of CASP8, FGFR2 and micro RNA 146A genes, respectively, as risk modifiers in hereditary breast or ovarian cancer (BC/OC) and risk factors in sporadic BC. We performed a case-control study in 189 healthy controls (CG) and 538 BC/OC cases, 340 with familial history of BC/OC (130 carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations and 210 non-carriers) and 198 sporadic BC/OC. The polymorphisms were assessed by real-time PCR using primers and fluorescent-labelled hybridization probes. We found statistically significant differences between familial BC/OC and CG for rs1056663 and rs2708861 HSU1 polymorphisms and rs2981582 FGFR2 polymorphism, particularly in non-carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. In this group we found statistical differences for rs1056663 HSU1 and rs2981582 FGFR2 polymorphisms (p-trend < 0.006). The logistic regression confirmed that rs2981582 FGFR2 polymorphism (OR = 2.09; 95 % CI 1.35, 3.20) and the interaction between rs1056663 and rs2708861 HUS1 polymorphisms increased the risk of cancer (OR = 1.87; 95 % CI 1.19, 2.92). Furthermore, we found that the presence of rs1056663 and rs2708861 HUS1 polymorphisms is associated with early age of presentation of BC (p = 0.015) in the group of non-carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. In addition, no association of the polymorphisms studied in sporadic BC was observed. In conclusion, the HUS1 and FGFR2 polymorphisms act as risk BC modifiers in familial BC/OC, particularly in the group of non-carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations.

Relationship of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with cancer burden in the family and tumor incidence.

The aim of the present study is to analyze the relationship of the incidence of mutations in the two major genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 conferring risk of breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) with the cancer burden in families and with the presence and age of onset of BC/OC. We included 704 index patients (IP) and 668 family members of the IP who tested positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 who were studied in the Program of Genetic Counselling in Cancer of the Valencia Community (Spain). We found 129 IPs with deleterious mutations (18.3%), 59 in BRCA1 and 70 in BRCA2, detecting 396 mutations in this kindred. The incidence of mutations and their distribution between BRCA1 and BRCA2 showed a significantly uneven incidence among the family groups (P < 0.001). We found 179 tumors in the 396 mutation carriers (45%) and detected only 11 cancers among the 272 non-mutation carriers (P < 0.001). No differences in the tumor prevalence or the age of onset of cancer between the genes among the mutation carriers were found. The mutation carriers showed a 50% probability of having BC/OC at a median age of 49 years (95% CI 46-52 years) and 78% at the age of 70 years (95% CI: 71-85%). In conclusion the family burden of BC and OC is strongly associated with the incidence of BRCAs mutations and could foretell which of the two BRCAs genes is more likely to have mutations. Mutation carriers have a 50% risk of having BC/OC by the age of 50 years.

CASP8 D302H polymorphism delays the age of onset of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers.

The polymorphic genetic differences among individuals may modify the high risk for breast cancer (BC) and/or ovarian cancer (OC) susceptibility conferred by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. In the present study we investigate the relevance of RAD51 -135C > G, TP53 R72P, NQO1*2 and CASP8 D302H polymorphisms as potential modifiers of BC and/or OC susceptibility conferred by these mutations. The study group encompasses 390 BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers (182 affected with BC and/or OC and 208 unaffected) of 131 unrelated families studied in the Program of Genetic Counselling on Cancer of Valencia Community. The polymorphisms were detected in genomic DNA by ASRA method or real time PCR using fluorescently labeled probes. We found similar incidence of RAD51 -135C > G, TP53 R72P and NQO1*2 polymorphisms among affected and unaffected individuals considering BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations together and separately. However, the CASP8 D302H polymorphism was strongly associated with the absence of BC [OR = 3.41 (95% CI 1.33-8.78, P = 0.01)]. In fact, in the females with CASP8 D302H polymorphism the BC appeared at a median age of 58 in opposition to the 47 years observed for the wild type subjects (P = 0.03). Furthermore, the CASP8 D302H positive females showed a 50% probability of being free of BC by the age of 78 versus the 2% of the CASP8 negative ones. Our results support that the presence of the CASP8 D302H polymorphism diminishes the high risk of BC conferred by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, making possible that some of the carriers could escape from suffering BC along their life span.

[BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in families studied in the program of genetic counselling in cancer of the Valencian community (Spain)]. / Mutaciones de BRCA1 y BRCA2 en familias estudiadas en el Programa de Consejo Genético en el Cáncer de la Comunidad Valenciana.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to investigate the mutational spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in the Valencian Community, comparing this spectrum with that reported in Spain. We also analyze the association of the mutations with the family history of the selected families. PATIENTS AND METHOD: We analyzed the mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 in 147 families with history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. The detection was based on the amplification of in frame and flanking regions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes by polymerase chain reaction, detection of the heteroduplex formed by conformation-sensitive gel electrophoresis and their characterization by sequencing. RESULTS: We identified 24 different pathogenic mutations in 50 out of the 147 families (34.0%; 23 in BRCA1 and 27 in BRCA2). The higher incidence of pathogenic mutations was observed in families with breast and ovarian cancer or with more than 3 cases of breast cancer. The most frequent mutations in BRCA1 were the c.187_188delAG, c.2080delA and the c.3889_3890delAG, whereas for BRCA2 the mutations with higher prevalence was observed for c.9254_9258delATCAT and the c.9204delCATCAGATTTATAT. We detected 5 pathogenic mutations (p.Y1429X in BRCA1 and c.1835insT, c.5025delT, c.6722delT and p.Q3156X in BRCA2) not reported in the Breast Cancer Information Core Database. Among them, the BRCA2 mutations c.1835insT and c.5025delT were recurrent and seemed to be characteristic of the population the Valencian Community. CONCLUSIONS: We detected pathogenic mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in 34.0% of the families studied. The mutations c.1835insT and c.5025delT were 2 new recurrent pathogenic mutations in BRCA2 that seemed to be characteristic of the population of the Valencian Community. The study reports 5 new pathogenic mutations to the world spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and other 5 mutations to the Spanish spectrum.

Mutaciones de BRCA1 y BRCA2 en familias estudiadas en el Programa de Consejo Genético en el Cáncer de la Comunidad Valenciana / BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in families studied in the Program of Genetic Counselling in Cancer of the Valencian Community (Spain)

Fundamento y objetivo: El objetivo del estudio ha sido conocer las peculiaridades del espectro mutacional de los genes BRCA1 y BRCA2 de la Comunidad Valenciana en relación con el resto de España y relacionar las mutaciones con las características de las familias seleccionadas. Pacientes y método: Se han estudiado las mutaciones en BRCA1 y BRCA2 en 147 familias con historia de cáncer de mama y/o de ovario. Su detección se realizó amplificando las zonas codificantes y las zonas vecinas que flanquean BRCA1 y BRCA2 mediante reacción en cadena de la polimerasa, detección de la formación de heterodúplex mediante electroforesis en geles sensibles a los cambios de conformación y caracterización de los mismos mediante secuenciación. Resultados: Se identificaron 24 mutaciones patogénicas diferentes en 50 de las 147 familias (34,0%; 23 en BRCA1 y 27 en BRCA2). La mayor incidencia se registró en familias con cáncer de mama y ovario, y con más de 3 de casos de cáncer de mama. Las mutaciones más frecuentes en BRCA1 fueron c.187_188delAG, c.2080delA y c.3889_3890delAG, y en BRCA2, c.9254_9258delATCAT y c.9204delCATCAGATTTATAT. Se describieron 5 mutaciones patogénicas (p.Y1429X en BRCA1 y c.1835insT, c.5025delT, c.6722delT y p.Q3156X en BRCA2) que no constan en otros estudios españoles ni en el Breast Cancer Information Core Database. Entre ellas, c.1835insT y c.5025delT son recurrentes y pudieran ser mutaciones propias de la población de la Comunidad Valenciana. Conclusiones: Se han detectado mutaciones patogénicas en BRCA1 o BRCA2 en el 34,0% de las familias. Las mutaciones c.1835insT y c.5025delT, de nueva descripción, son recurrentes y propias de la Comunidad Valenciana. El estudio aporta 5 nuevas mutaciones patológicas al espectro mundial y otras 5 al espectro de mutaciones español de BRCA1 y BRCA2

Background and objective: The objective of the present study was to investigate the mutational spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in the Valencian Community, comparing this spectrum with that reported in Spain. We also analyze the association of the mutations with the family history of the selected families. Patients and method: We analyzed the mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 in 147 families with history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. The detection was based on the amplification of in frame and flanking regions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes by polymerase chain reaction, detection of the heteroduplex formed by conformation-sensitive gel electrophoresis and their characterization by sequencing. Results: We identified 24 different pathogenic mutations in 50 out of the 147 families (34.0%; 23 in BRCA1 and 27 in BRCA2). The higher incidence of pathogenic mutations was observed in families with breast and ovarian cancer or with more than 3 cases of breast cancer. The most frequent mutations in BRCA1 were the c.187_188delAG, c.2080delA and the c.3889_3890delAG, whereas for BRCA2 the mutations with higher prevalence was observed for c.9254_9258delATCAT and the c.9204delCATCAGATTTATAT. We detected 5 pathogenic mutations (p.Y1429X in BRCA1 and c.1835insT, c.5025delT, c.6722delT and p.Q3156X in BRCA2) not reported in the Breast Cancer Information Core Database. Among them, the BRCA2 mutations c.1835insT and c.5025delT were recurrent and seemed to be characteristic of the population the Valencian Community. Conclusions: We detected pathogenic mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in 34.0% of the families studied. The mutations c.1835insT and c.5025delT were 2 new recurrent pathogenic mutations in BRCA2 that seemed to be characteristic of the population of the Valencian Community. The study reports 5 new pathogenic mutations to the world spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and other 5 mutations to the Spanish spectrum

Identification of a novel BRCA1 large genomic rearrangement in a Spanish breast/ovarian cancer family.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in BRCA1 gene are responsible for the majority of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancers. However, the frequency of detected germline mutations is lower than expected by linkage analysis. Standard PCR-based screening methods are mainly used for detecting mutations, but the large genomic rearrangements are commonly overlooked. The purpose of this study was to confirm and characterize a novel deletion identified in BRCA1 gene which has not yet been reported to date. METHODS: Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification was used to analyze BRCA1 rearrangements in 255 unrelated index patients with familial breast and/or ovarian cancer negative for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations studied in Program of Genetic Counselling on Cancer of Valencia Community (Spain). The breakpoints of detected novel rearrangement were characterized by sequencing. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Five different rearrangements in the BRCA1 gene were identified in five unrelated index patients out of the 225 (2%). We found four large genomic rearrangements already described consisting in a 1A/1B and 2 deletion; deletion of exons 5-7; deletion of exons 8-13; exon 20 deletion. Additionally, we found the novel g.8097_22733del14637 deletion that encompasses exons 3-5. This deletion affects the RING domain of the BRCA1 protein and it is suggestive of having a negative impact on its function. CONCLUSION: The new mutation here reported broadens the mutational spectrum of large rearrangements. Furthermore, the five large rearrangements found in patients non-carriers of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations reinforce the need of studying BRCA1 large genomic rearrangements in genetic counselling programs.

Twenty-three novel BRCA1 and BRCA2 sequence alterations in breast and/or ovarian cancer families of Eastern Spain.

It is well established that mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes significantly increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. We here report 23 novel genetic variants of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes found in 349 cancer-prone unrelated families from Eastern Spain detected during the first 2 years of performance of the Program of Genetic Counseling of Valencia Community. Mutational screening was performed by pre-screening the heteroduplex formed in the PCR products obtained amplifying BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes by conformation sensitive electrophoresis. We detected 10 deletereous mutations, four in BRCA1 (three frame-shift (FS) and one nonsense mutation (NS)) and six in BRCA2 (four FS and one NS mutation). Moreover, we detected 13 unclassified variants, four in BRCA1 (one missense (MS), two synonymous (SYN) and one intronic (I) variant) and nine in BRCA2 (six MS, one SYN and two I). The relevance of the novel mutations is discussed. Our contribution broadens the BRCA1/2 world mutational spectra.