Risks of breast or ovarian cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 predictive test negatives: findings from the EMBRACE study.

PURPOSE: BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives are proven noncarriers of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation that is carried by their relatives. The risk of developing breast cancer (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in these women is uncertain. The study aimed to estimate risks of invasive BC and EOC in a large cohort of BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives. METHODS: We used cohort analysis to estimate incidences, cumulative risks, and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). RESULTS: A total of 1,895 unaffected women were eligible for inclusion in the BC risk analysis and 1,736 in the EOC risk analysis. There were 23 incident invasive BCs and 2 EOCs. The cumulative risk of invasive BC was 9.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-15%) by age 85 years and the corresponding risk of EOC was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.6%). The SIR for invasive BC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.62-1.40) in the overall cohort, 0.85 (95% CI 0.48-1.50) in noncarriers from BRCA1 families, and 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.87) in noncarriers from BRCA2 families. The SIR for EOC was 0.79 (95% CI 0.20-3.17) in the overall cohort. CONCLUSION: Our results did not provide evidence for elevated risks of invasive BC or EOC in BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives.

Oral Contraceptive Use and Breast Cancer Risk: Retrospective and Prospective Analyses From a BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carrier Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: For BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, the association between oral contraceptive preparation (OCP) use and breast cancer (BC) risk is still unclear. METHODS: Breast camcer risk associations were estimated from OCP data on 6030 BRCA1 and 3809 BRCA2 mutation carriers using age-dependent Cox regression, stratified by study and birth cohort. Prospective, left-truncated retrospective and full-cohort retrospective analyses were performed. RESULTS: For BRCA1 mutation carriers, OCP use was not associated with BC risk in prospective analyses (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75 to 1.56), but in the left-truncated and full-cohort retrospective analyses, risks were increased by 26% (95% CI = 6% to 51%) and 39% (95% CI = 23% to 58%), respectively. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, OCP use was associated with BC risk in prospective analyses (HR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.97), but retrospective analyses were inconsistent (left-truncated: HR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.33; full cohort: HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.81). There was evidence of increasing risk with duration of use, especially before the first full-term pregnancy (BRCA1: both retrospective analyses, P < .001 and P = .001, respectively; BRCA2: full retrospective analysis, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective analyses did not show that past use of OCP is associated with an increased BC risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers in young middle-aged women (40-50 years). For BRCA2 mutation carriers, a causal association is also not likely at those ages. Findings between retrospective and prospective analyses were inconsistent and could be due to survival bias or a true association for younger women who were underrepresented in the prospective cohort. Given the uncertain safety of long-term OCP use for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, indications other than contraception should be avoided and nonhormonal contraceptive methods should be discussed.

Lymphocyte telomere length is long in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers regardless of cancer-affected status.

BACKGROUND: Telomere length has been linked to risk of common diseases, including cancer, and has previously been proposed as a biomarker for cancer risk. Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations predispose to breast, ovarian, and other cancer types. METHODS: We investigated telomere length in BRCA mutation carriers and their non-carrier relatives and further examined whether telomere length is a modifier of cancer risk in mutation carriers. We measured mean telomere length in DNA extracted from whole blood using high-throughput quantitative PCR. Participants were from the EMBRACE study in United Kingdom and Eire (n = 4,822) and comprised BRCA1 (n = 1,628) and BRCA2 (n = 1,506) mutation carriers and their non-carrier relatives (n = 1,688). RESULTS: We find no significant evidence that mean telomere length is associated with breast or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers. However, we find mutation carriers to have longer mean telomere length than their non-carrier relatives (all carriers vs. non-carriers, Ptrend = 0.0018), particularly in families with BRCA2 mutations (BRCA2 mutation carriers vs. all non-carriers, Ptrend = 0.0016). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings lend little support to the hypothesis that short mean telomere length predisposes to cancer. Conversely, our main and unexpected finding is that BRCA mutation carriers (regardless of cancer status) have longer telomeres than their non-mutation carrier, non-cancer-affected relatives. The longer telomere length in BRCA2 mutation carriers is consistent with its role in DNA damage response. Overall, it seems that increased telomere length may be a consequence of these mutations, but is not itself directly related to the increased cancer risk in carriers. IMPACT: The finding that mutation carriers have longer mean telomere lengths than their non-carrier relatives is unexpected but biologically plausible and could open up new lines of research into the functions of the BRCA proteins. To our knowledge, this is the largest study of telomere length in BRCA mutation carriers and their relatives. The null cancer-risk association supports recent large prospective studies of breast and ovarian cancer and indicates that mean telomere length would not be a useful biomarker in these cancers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(6); 1018-24. ©2014 AACR.

Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE.

BACKGROUND: Reliable estimates of cancer risk are critical for guiding management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. The aims of this study were to derive penetrance estimates for breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and contralateral breast cancer in a prospective series of mutation carriers and to assess how these risks are modified by common breast cancer susceptibility alleles. METHODS: Prospective cancer risks were estimated using a cohort of 978 BRCA1 and 909 BRCA2 carriers from the United Kingdom. Nine hundred eighty-eight women had no breast or ovarian cancer diagnosis at baseline, 1509 women were unaffected by ovarian cancer, and 651 had been diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer. Cumulative risks were obtained using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Associations between cancer risk and covariables of interest were evaluated using Cox regression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The average cumulative risks by age 70 years for BRCA1 carriers were estimated to be 60% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 44% to 75%) for breast cancer, 59% (95% CI = 43% to 76%) for ovarian cancer, and 83% (95% CI = 69% to 94%) for contralateral breast cancer. For BRCA2 carriers, the corresponding risks were 55% (95% CI = 41% to 70%) for breast cancer, 16.5% (95% CI = 7.5% to 34%) for ovarian cancer, and 62% (95% CI = 44% to 79.5%) for contralateral breast cancer. BRCA2 carriers in the highest tertile of risk, defined by the joint genotype distribution of seven single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with breast cancer risk, were at statistically significantly higher risk of developing breast cancer than those in the lowest tertile (hazard ratio = 4.1, 95% CI = 1.2 to 14.5; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective risk estimates confirm that BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers are at high risk of developing breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer. Our results confirm findings from retrospective studies that common breast cancer susceptibility alleles in combination are predictive of breast cancer risk for BRCA2 carriers.

Germline BRCA mutations are associated with higher risk of nodal involvement, distant metastasis, and poor survival outcomes in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To analyze the baseline clinicopathologic characteristics of prostate tumors with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations and the prognostic value of those mutations on prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study analyzed the tumor features and outcomes of 2,019 patients with PCa (18 BRCA1 carriers, 61 BRCA2 carriers, and 1,940 noncarriers). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the associations between BRCA1/2 status and other PCa prognostic factors with overall survival (OS), cause-specific OS (CSS), CSS in localized PCa (CSS_M0), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and CSS from metastasis (CSS_M1). RESULTS: PCa with germline BRCA1/2 mutations were more frequently associated with Gleason ≥ 8 (P = .00003), T3/T4 stage (P = .003), nodal involvement (P = .00005), and metastases at diagnosis (P = .005) than PCa in noncarriers. CSS was significantly longer in noncarriers than in carriers (15.7 v 8.6 years, multivariable analyses [MVA] P = .015; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.8). For localized PCa, 5-year CSS and MFS were significantly higher in noncarriers (96% v 82%; MVA P = .01; HR = 2.6%; and 93% v 77%; MVA P = .009; HR = 2.7, respectively). Subgroup analyses confirmed the poor outcomes in BRCA2 patients, whereas the role of BRCA1 was not well defined due to the limited size and follow-up in this subgroup. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that BRCA1/2 mutations confer a more aggressive PCa phenotype with a higher probability of nodal involvement and distant metastasis. BRCA mutations are associated with poor survival outcomes and this should be considered for tailoring clinical management of these patients.

Pathology of breast and ovarian cancers among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA).

BACKGROUND: Previously, small studies have found that BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast tumors differ in their pathology. Analysis of larger datasets of mutation carriers should allow further tumor characterization. METHODS: We used data from 4,325 BRCA1 and 2,568 BRCA2 mutation carriers to analyze the pathology of invasive breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancers. RESULTS: There was strong evidence that the proportion of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast tumors decreased with age at diagnosis among BRCA1 (P-trend = 1.2 × 10(-5)), but increased with age at diagnosis among BRCA2, carriers (P-trend = 6.8 × 10(-6)). The proportion of triple-negative tumors decreased with age at diagnosis in BRCA1 carriers but increased with age at diagnosis of BRCA2 carriers. In both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, ER-negative tumors were of higher histologic grade than ER-positive tumors (grade 3 vs. grade 1; P = 1.2 × 10(-13) for BRCA1 and P = 0.001 for BRCA2). ER and progesterone receptor (PR) expression were independently associated with mutation carrier status [ER-positive odds ratio (OR) for BRCA2 = 9.4, 95% CI: 7.0-12.6 and PR-positive OR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3-2.3, under joint analysis]. Lobular tumors were more likely to be BRCA2-related (OR for BRCA2 = 3.3, 95% CI: 2.4-4.4; P = 4.4 × 10(-14)), and medullary tumors BRCA1-related (OR for BRCA2 = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.18-0.35; P = 2.3 × 10(-15)). ER-status of the first breast cancer was predictive of ER-status of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (P = 0.0004 for BRCA1; P = 0.002 for BRCA2). There were no significant differences in ovarian cancer morphology between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (serous: 67%; mucinous: 1%; endometrioid: 12%; clear-cell: 2%). CONCLUSIONS/IMPACT: Pathologic characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumors may be useful for improving risk-prediction algorithms and informing clinical strategies for screening and prophylaxis.

No association of TGFB1 L10P genotypes and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a multi-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The transforming growth factor beta-1 gene (TGFB1) is a plausible candidate for breast cancer susceptibility. The L10P variant of TGFB1 is associated with higher circulating levels and secretion of TGF-beta, and recent large-scale studies suggest strongly that this variant is associated with breast cancer risk in the general population. METHODS: To evaluate whether TGFB1 L10P also modifies the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, we undertook a multi-center study of 3,442 BRCA1 and 2,095 BRCA2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: We found no evidence of association between TGFB1 L10P and breast cancer risk in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. The per-allele HR for the L10P variant was 1.01 (95%CI: 0.92-1.11) in BRCA1 carriers and 0.92 (95%CI: 0.81-1.04) in BRCA2 mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support the hypothesis that TGFB1 L10P genotypes modify the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers.

RAS, FLT3, and TP53 mutations in therapy-related myeloid malignancies with abnormalities of chromosomes 5 and 7.

Oncogenic mutations in the KRAS2, NRAS, or FLT3 gene are detected in more than 50% of patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML). RAS mutations are also prevalent in de novo myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), especially chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia. However, few studies have examined these genetic lesions in therapy-related myeloid malignancies. Monosomy 7/del(7q) and monosomy 5/del(5q) represent the most common cytogenetic abnormalities in therapy-related MDS and AML (t-MDS/t-AML) and are strongly associated with prior exposure to alkylating agents. Mutational analysis of bone marrow specimens from a well-characterized cohort of 26 t-MDS/t-AML patients with abnormalities of chromosomes 5 and/or 7 revealed 3 with RAS mutations. Further analyses of 23 of these cases uncovered one FLT3 internal tandem duplication and five TP53 mutations. The four patients with RAS or FLT3 mutations had monosomy 7, including one with abnormalities of chromosomes 5 and 7. One specimen demonstrated mutations in both KRAS2 and TP53. RAS and FLT3 mutations, which are thought to stimulate the proliferation of leukemia cells, appear to be less common in t-MDS/t-AML than in de novo AML, whereas TP53 mutations are more frequent.