Development and evaluation of a novel educational program for providers on the use of polygenic risk scores.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to develop an online educational program for using polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast and ovarian cancer risk assessments and to evaluate the impact on the attitudes, confidence, knowledge, and preparedness of genetic health care providers (GHPs). METHODS: The educational program comprises an online module that covers the theoretical aspects of PRS and a facilitated virtual workshop with prerecorded role-plays and case discussions. Data were collected in pre- and posteducation surveys. Eligible participants were GHPs working in Australian familial cancer clinics registered to recruit patients for a breast and ovarian cancer PRS clinical trial (n = 12). RESULTS: A total of 124 GHPs completed the PRS education, of whom 80 (64%) and 67 (41%) completed the pre- and posteducation surveys, respectively. Before education, GHPs reported limited experience, confidence, and preparedness using PRS, but they recognized its potential benefits. After education, GHPs indicated improved attitudes (P ≤ .001), confidence (P ≤ .001), knowledge (P ≤ .001), and preparedness (P ≤ .001) to use PRS. Most GHPs thought that the program entirely met their learning needs (73%) and was completely relevant to their clinical practice (88%). GHPs identified PRS implementation barriers, including limited funding models, diversity issues, and need for clinical guidelines. CONCLUSION: Our education program improved GHP attitudes, confidence, knowledge, and preparedness for using PRS/personalized risk and provides a framework for the development of future programs.

Somatic inactivation of breast cancer predisposition genes in tumors associated with pathogenic germline variants.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancers (BCs) that arise in individuals heterozygous for a germline pathogenic variant in a susceptibility gene, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51C, have been shown to exhibit biallelic loss in the respective genes and be associated with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and distinctive somatic mutational signatures. Tumor sequencing thus presents an orthogonal approach to assess the role of candidate genes in BC development. METHODS: Exome sequencing was performed on paired normal-breast tumor DNA from 124 carriers of germline loss-of-function (LoF) or missense variant carriers in 15 known and candidate BC predisposition genes identified in the BEACCON case-control study. Biallelic inactivation and association with tumor genome features including mutational signatures and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score were investigated. RESULTS: BARD1-carrying TNBC (4 of 5) displayed biallelic loss and associated high HRD scores and mutational signature 3, as did a RAD51D-carrying TNBC and ovarian cancer. Biallelic loss was less frequent in BRIP1 BCs (4 of 13) and had low HRD scores. In contrast to other established BC genes, BCs from carriers of CHEK2 LoF (6 of 17) or missense (2 of 20) variant had low rates of biallelic loss. Exploratory analysis of BC from carriers of LoF variants in candidate genes such as BLM, FANCM, PARP2, and RAD50 found little evidence of biallelic inactivation. CONCLUSIONS: BARD1 and RAD51D behave as classic BRCA-like predisposition genes with biallelic inactivation, but this was not observed for any of the candidate genes. However, as demonstrated for CHEK2, the absence of biallelic inactivation does not provide definitive evidence against the gene's involvement in BC predisposition.

Contribution of large genomic rearrangements in PALB2 to familial breast cancer: implications for genetic testing.

BACKGROUND: PALB2 is the most important contributor to familial breast cancer after BRCA1 and BRCA2. Large genomic rearrangements (LGRs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are routinely assessed in clinical testing and are a significant contributor to the yield of actionable findings. In contrast, the contribution of LGRs in PALB2 has not been systematically studied. METHODS: We performed targeted sequencing and real-time qPCR validation to identify LGRs in PALB2 in 5770 unrelated patients with familial breast cancer and 5741 cancer-free control women from the same Australian population. RESULTS: Seven large deletions ranging in size from 0.96 kbp to 18.07 kbp involving PALB2 were identified in seven cases, while no LGRs were identified in any of the controls. Six LGRs were considered pathogenic as they included one or more exons of PALB2 and disrupted the WD40 domain at the C terminal end of the PALB2 protein while one LGR only involved a partial region of intron 10 and was considered a variant of unknown significance. Altogether, pathogenic LGRs identified in this study accounted for 10.3% (6 of 58) of the pathogenic PALB2 variants detected among the 5770 families with familial breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that a clinically important proportion of PALB2 pathogenic mutations in Australian patients with familial breast cancer are LGRs. Such observations have provided strong support for inclusion of PALB2 LGRs in routine clinical genetic testing.

Integration of tumour sequencing and case-control data to assess pathogenicity of RAD51C missense variants in familial breast cancer.

While protein-truncating variants in RAD51C have been shown to predispose to triple-negative (TN) breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer, little is known about the pathogenicity of missense (MS) variants. The frequency of rare RAD51C MS variants was assessed in the BEACCON study of 5734 familial BC cases and 14,382 population controls, and findings were integrated with tumour sequencing data from 21 cases carrying a candidate variant. Collectively, a significant enrichment of rare MS variants was detected in cases (MAF < 0.001, OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.00-2.44, p = 0.05), particularly for variants with a REVEL score >0.5 (OR 3.95, 95% CI 1.40-12.01, p = 0.006). Sequencing of 21 tumours from 20 heterozygous and 1 homozygous carriers of nine candidate MS variants identified four cases with biallelic inactivation through loss of the wild-type allele, while six lost the variant allele and ten that remained heterozygous. Biallelic loss of the wild-type alleles corresponded strongly with ER- and TN breast tumours, high homologous recombination deficiency scores and mutational signature 3. Using this approach, the p.Gly264Ser variant, which was previously suspected to be pathogenic based on small case-control analyses and loss of activity in in vitro functional assays, was shown to be benign with similar prevalence in cases and controls and seven out of eight tumours showing no biallelic inactivation or characteristic mutational signature. Conversely, evaluation of case-control findings and tumour sequencing data identified p.Ile144Thr, p.Arg212His, p.Gln143Arg and p.Gly114Arg as variants warranting further investigation.

Polygenic risk in familial breast cancer: Changing the dynamics of communicating genetic risk.

Hereditary breast cancer is associated with known genetic changes: either variants that affect function in a few rare genes or an ever-increasing number of common genomic risk variants, which combine to produce a cumulative effect, known as a polygenic risk (PR) score. While the clinical validity and utility of PR scores are still being determined, the communication of PR is a new challenge for genetic health professionals. This study investigated how PR scores are discussed in the familial cancer clinic compared with a previous study assessing the communication of monogenic risk (MR) for breast cancer. Sixty-five PR consultations between genetic health professionals and women at familial risk of breast cancer were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded using a methodology adapted from the MR study. Analysis of consultations shows that while there were similarities in communicating MR and PR, the complexity and novelty of the polygenic information influenced the style of counseling used by genetic health professionals toward a teaching model of genetic counseling, rather than a patient-centered approach. In particular, compared to MR consultations, in PR consultations significantly fewer counselees (a) were asked about their reasons for attending genetic counseling; or (b) had their information preferences, decision-making style, medical knowledge, understanding, or concerns checked. In conclusion, it is anticipated that PR scores will become part of standard clinical practice. Thus, it will be important for all genetic health professionals to be appropriately educated so that they can tailor their communication to meet patient needs.

Breast cancer polygenic risk scores: a 12-month prospective study of patient reported outcomes and risk management behavior.

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess patient reported outcomes and risk management behavior of women choosing to receive (receivers) or decline (decliners) their breast cancer polygenic risk score (PRS). METHODS: Women either unaffected or affected by breast cancer and from families with no identified pathogenic variant in a breast cancer risk gene were invited to receive their PRS. All participants completed a questionnaire at study enrollment. Receivers completed questionnaires at two weeks and 12 months after receiving their PRS, and decliners a second questionnaire at 12 months post study enrollment. RESULTS: Of the 208 participants, 165 (79%) received their PRS. Among receivers, there were no changes in anxiety or distress following testing. However, compared to women with a low PRS, those with a high PRS reported greater genetic testing-specific distress, perceived risk, decisional regret, and less genetic testing-positive response. At 12 months, breast screening and uptake of risk-reducing strategies were consistent with current Australian guidelines of breast cancer risk management. Reasons for declining PRS included being unable to attend the appointment in person and concerns over potential emotional response. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of the study provide insight into women's responses to receiving PRS and highlight the issues that need to be addressed in the associated model of genetic counseling.

Investigation of monogenic causes of familial breast cancer: data from the BEACCON case-control study.

Breast cancer (BC) has a significant heritable component but the genetic contribution remains unresolved in the majority of high-risk BC families. This study aims to investigate the monogenic causes underlying the familial aggregation of BC beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2, including the identification of new predisposing genes. A total of 11,511 non-BRCA familial BC cases and population-matched cancer-free female controls in the BEACCON study were investigated in two sequencing phases: 1303 candidate genes in up to 3892 cases and controls, followed by validation of 145 shortlisted genes in an additional 7619 subjects. The coding regions and exon-intron boundaries of all candidate genes and 14 previously proposed BC genes were sequenced using custom designed sequencing panels. Pedigree and pathology data were analysed to identify genotype-specific associations. The contribution of ATM, PALB2 and CHEK2 to BC predisposition was confirmed, but not RAD50 and NBN. An overall excess of loss-of-function (LoF) (OR 1.27, p = 9.05 × 10-9) and missense (OR 1.27, p = 3.96 × 10-73) variants was observed in the cases for the 145 candidate genes. Leading candidates harbored LoF variants with observed ORs of 2-4 and individually accounted for no more than 0.79% of the cases. New genes proposed by this study include NTHL1, WRN, PARP2, CTH and CDK9. The new candidate BC predisposition genes identified in BEACCON indicate that much of the remaining genetic causes of high-risk BC families are due to genes in which pathogenic variants are both very rare and convey only low to moderate risk.

Evaluation of the association of heterozygous germline variants in NTHL1 with breast cancer predisposition: an international multi-center study of 47,180 subjects.

Bi-allelic loss-of-function (LoF) variants in the base excision repair (BER) gene NTHL1 cause a high-risk hereditary multi-tumor syndrome that includes breast cancer, but the contribution of heterozygous variants to hereditary breast cancer is unknown. An analysis of 4985 women with breast cancer, enriched for familial features, and 4786 cancer-free women revealed significant enrichment for NTHL1 LoF variants. Immunohistochemistry confirmed reduced NTHL1 expression in tumors from heterozygous carriers but the NTHL1 bi-allelic loss characteristic mutational signature (SBS 30) was not present. The analysis was extended to 27,421 breast cancer cases and 19,759 controls from 10 international studies revealing 138 cases and 93 controls with a heterozygous LoF variant (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.82-1.39) and 316 cases and 179 controls with a missense variant (OR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.09-1.57). Missense variants selected for deleterious features by a number of in silico bioinformatic prediction tools or located within the endonuclease III functional domain showed a stronger association with breast cancer. Somatic sequencing of breast cancers from carriers indicated that the risk associated with NTHL1 appears to operate through haploinsufficiency, consistent with other described low-penetrance breast cancer genes. Data from this very large international multicenter study suggests that heterozygous pathogenic germline coding variants in NTHL1 may be associated with low- to moderate- increased risk of breast cancer.

Communicating polygenic risk scores in the familial breast cancer clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the communication of polygenic risk scores (PRS) in the familial breast cancer setting. METHODS: Consultations between genetic healthcare providers (GHP) and female patients who received their PRS for breast cancer risk were recorded (n = 65). GHPs included genetic counselors (n = 8) and medical practitioners (n = 5) (i.e. clinical geneticists and oncologists). A content analysis was conducted and logistic regression was used to assess differences in communication behaviors between genetic counselors (n = 8) and medical practitioners (n = 5). RESULTS: Of the 65 patients, 31 (47.7 %) had a personal history of breast cancer, 18 of whom received an increased PRS (relative risk >1.2). 25/34 unaffected patients received an increased PRS. Consultations were primarily clinician-driven and focused on biomedical information. There was little difference between the biomedical information provided by genetic counselors and medical practitioners. However, genetic counselors were significantly more likely to utilize strategies to build patient rapport and counseling techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide one of the earliest reports on how breast cancer PRSs are communicated to women. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Key messages for communicating PRSs were identified, namely: discussing differences between polygenic and monogenic testing, the multifactorial nature of breast cancer risk, polygenic inheritance and current limitation of PRSs.

Exome sequencing of familial high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma reveals heterogeneity for rare candidate susceptibility genes.

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) has a significant hereditary component, approximately half of which cannot be explained by known genes. To discover genes, we analyse germline exome sequencing data from 516 BRCA1/2-negative women with HGSOC, focusing on genes enriched with rare, protein-coding loss-of-function (LoF) variants. Overall, there is a significant enrichment of rare protein-coding LoF variants in the cases (p < 0.0001, chi-squared test). Only thirty-four (6.6%) have a pathogenic variant in a known or proposed predisposition gene. Few genes have LoF mutations in more than four individuals and the majority are detected in one individual only. Forty-three highly-ranked genes are identified with three or more LoF variants that are enriched by three-fold or more compared to GnomAD. These genes represent diverse functional pathways with relatively few involved in DNA repair, suggesting that much of the remaining heritability is explained by previously under-explored genes and pathways.

Uptake of polygenic risk information among women at increased risk of breast cancer.

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are increasingly being implemented to assess breast cancer risk. This study aimed to assess and determine factors associated with uptake of PRS among women at increased risk of breast cancer for whom genetic testing to date had been uninformative. Participants were recruited from the Variants in Practice study from which breast cancer PRS had been calculated. Four hundred women were notified by letter of the availability of their PRS and invited to complete a self-administered survey comprising several validated scales. Considering non-participants, uptake of PRS was between 61.8% and 42.1%. Multivariate logistic regression identified that women were more likely to receive their PRS if they reported greater benefits (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, P = .011) and fewer barriers to receiving their PRS (OR = 0.80, P = .007), had completed higher level education (OR = 3.32, P = .004), and did not have daughters (0.29, P = .006). Uptake of breast cancer PRS varied according to several testing- and patient-related factors. Knowledge of these factors will facilitate the implementation of polygenic testing in clinical practice and support informed decision making by patients.

Combined Tumor Sequencing and Case-Control Analyses of RAD51C in Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Loss-of-function variants in RAD51C are associated with familial ovarian cancer, but its role in hereditary breast cancer remains unclear. The aim of this study was to couple breast tumor sequencing with case-control data to clarify the contribution of RAD51C to hereditary breast cancer. METHODS: RAD51C was sequenced in 3080 breast cancer index cases that were negative in BRCA1/2 clinical tests and 4840 population-matched cancer-free controls. Pedigree and pathology data were analyzed. Nine breast cancers and one ovarian cancer from RAD51C variant carriers were sequenced to identify biallelic inactivation of RAD51C, copy number variation, mutational signatures, and the spectrum of somatic mutations in breast cancer driver genes. The promoter of RAD51C was analyzed for DNA methylation. RESULTS: A statistically significant excess of loss-of-function variants was identified in 3080 cases (0.4%) compared with 2 among 4840 controls (0.04%; odds ratio = 8.67, 95% confidence interval = 1.89 to 80.52, P< .001), with more than half of the carriers having no personal or family history of ovarian cancer. In addition, the association was highly statistically significant among cases with estrogen-negative (P <. 001) or triple-negative cancer (P < .001), but not in estrogen-positive cases. Tumor sequencing from carriers confirmed bi-allelic inactivation in all the triple-negative cases and was associated with high homologous recombination deficiency scores and mutational signature 3 indicating homologous recombination repair deficiency. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that germline loss-of-function variants of RAD51C are associated with hereditary breast cancer, particularly triple-negative type. RAD51C-null breast cancers possess similar genomic and clinical features to BRCA1-null cancers and may also be vulnerable to DNA double-strand break inducing chemotherapies and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors.

Molecular analysis of PALB2-associated breast cancers.

PALB2 is established as the most clinically important moderate to high penetrance breast cancer predisposition gene after BRCA1 and BRCA2. Mutations in classical familial cancer predisposition genes are presumed to be recessive at the cellular level and therefore a second inactivating somatic mutation is required in the tumour tissue. However, from the limited data that exist, PALB2 may be an example of a cancer predisposition gene that does not conform to Knudson's 'two hit' paradigm. We conducted genome-wide copy number analysis and targeted sequencing of PALB2 and other breast cancer driver genes in 15 invasive breast cancers from individuals carrying pathogenic germline mutations in PALB2. The majority of cancers showed clear evidence of bi-allelic inactivation of PALB2 (10/15) either as loss of heterozygosity involving the wild-type allele (six tumours) or as somatic point mutations (four tumours). All PALB2-null cancers had high homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) scores consistent with a homologous recombination repair deficiency. Interestingly, all but one of the PALB2 heterozygous cancers also had high HRD scores, suggesting that alternative mechanisms of PALB2 functional loss might be operating in these cancers. Our findings demonstrate that PALB2 does undergo bi-allelic inactivation in the majority of breast cancers from PALB2 germline mutation carriers. This feature has implications for the discovery of new moderate to high penetrance breast cancer predisposition genes as it supports using the existence of a 'second hit' and mutation signatures as important search criteria. Copyright © 2018 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluating the breast cancer predisposition role of rare variants in genes associated with low-penetrance breast cancer risk SNPs.

BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified numerous single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with small increases in breast cancer risk. Studies to date suggest that some SNPs alter the expression of the associated genes, which potentially mediates risk modification. On this basis, we hypothesised that some of these genes may be enriched for rare coding variants associated with a higher breast cancer risk. METHODS: The coding regions and exon-intron boundaries of 56 genes that have either been proposed by GWASs to be the regulatory targets of the SNPs and/or located < 500 kb from the risk SNPs were sequenced in index cases from 1043 familial breast cancer families that previously had negative test results for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and 944 population-matched cancer-free control participants from an Australian population. Rare (minor allele frequency ≤ 0.001 in the Exome Aggregation Consortium and Exome Variant Server databases) loss-of-function (LoF) and missense variants were studied. RESULTS: LoF variants were rare in both the cases and control participants across all the candidate genes, with only 38 different LoF variants observed in a total of 39 carriers. For the majority of genes (n = 36), no LoF variants were detected in either the case or control cohorts. No individual gene showed a significant excess of LoF or missense variants in the cases compared with control participants. Among all candidate genes as a group, the total number of carriers with LoF variants was higher in the cases than in the control participants (26 cases and 13 control participants), as was the total number of carriers with missense variants (406 versus 353), but neither reached statistical significance (p = 0.077 and p = 0.512, respectively). The genes contributing most of the excess of LoF variants in the cases included TET2, NRIP1, RAD51B and SNX32 (12 cases versus 2 control participants), whereas ZNF283 and CASP8 contributed largely to the excess of missense variants (25 cases versus 8 control participants). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that rare LoF and missense variants in genes associated with low-penetrance breast cancer risk SNPs may contribute some additional risk, but as a group these genes are unlikely to be major contributors to breast cancer heritability.

Reevaluation of RINT1 as a breast cancer predisposition gene.

Rad50 interactor 1 (RINT1) has recently been reported as an intermediate-penetrance (odds ratio 3.24) breast cancer susceptibility gene, as well as a risk factor for Lynch syndrome. The coding regions and exon-intron boundaries of RINT1 were sequenced in 2024 familial breast cancer cases previously tested negative for BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 mutations and 1886 population-matched cancer-free controls using HaloPlex Targeted Enrichment Assays. Only one RINT1 protein-truncating variant was detected in a control. No excess was observed in the total number of rare variants (truncating and missense) (28, 1.38 %, vs. 27, 1.43 %. P > 0.999) or in the number of variants predicted to be pathogenic by various in silico tools (Condel, Polyphen2, SIFT, and CADD) in the cases compared to the controls. In addition, there was no difference in the incidence of classic Lynch syndrome cancers in RINT1 rare variant-carrying families compared to RINT1 wild-type families. This study had 90 % power to detect an odds ratio of at least 2.06, and the results do not provide any support for RINT1 being a moderate-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility gene, although larger studies will be required to exclude more modest effects. This study emphasizes the need for caution before designating a cancer predisposition role for any gene based on very rare truncating variants and in silico-predicted missense variants.

rAAV-compatible MiniPromoters for restricted expression in the brain and eye.

BACKGROUND: Small promoters that recapitulate endogenous gene expression patterns are important for basic, preclinical, and now clinical research. Recently, there has been a promising revival of gene therapy for diseases with unmet therapeutic needs. To date, most gene therapies have used viral-based ubiquitous promoters-however, promoters that restrict expression to target cells will minimize off-target side effects, broaden the palette of deliverable therapeutics, and thereby improve safety and efficacy. Here, we take steps towards filling the need for such promoters by developing a high-throughput pipeline that goes from genome-based bioinformatic design to rapid testing in vivo. METHODS: For much of this work, therapeutically interesting Pleiades MiniPromoters (MiniPs; ~4 kb human DNA regulatory elements), previously tested in knock-in mice, were "cut down" to ~2.5 kb and tested in recombinant adeno-associated virus (rAAV), the virus of choice for gene therapy of the central nervous system. To evaluate our methods, we generated 29 experimental rAAV2/9 viruses carrying 19 different MiniPs, which were injected intravenously into neonatal mice to allow broad unbiased distribution, and characterized in neural tissues by X-gal immunohistochemistry for icre, or immunofluorescent detection of GFP. RESULTS: The data showed that 16 of the 19 (84 %) MiniPs recapitulated the expression pattern of their design source. This included expression of: Ple67 in brain raphe nuclei; Ple155 in Purkinje cells of the cerebellum, and retinal bipolar ON cells; Ple261 in endothelial cells of brain blood vessels; and Ple264 in retinal Müller glia. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the methodology and MiniPs presented here represent important advances for basic and preclinical research, and may enable a paradigm shift in gene therapy.

Panel Testing for Familial Breast Cancer: Calibrating the Tension Between Research and Clinical Care.

PURPOSE: Gene panel sequencing is revolutionizing germline risk assessment for hereditary breast cancer. Despite scant evidence supporting the role of many of these genes in breast cancer predisposition, results are often reported to families as the definitive explanation for their family history. We assessed the frequency of mutations in 18 genes included in hereditary breast cancer panels among index cases from families with breast cancer and matched population controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cases (n = 2,000) were predominantly breast cancer-affected women referred to specialized Familial Cancer Centers on the basis of a strong family history of breast cancer and BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type. Controls (n = 1,997) were cancer-free women from the LifePool study. Sequencing data were filtered for known pathogenic or novel loss-of-function mutations. RESULTS: Excluding 19 mutations identified in BRCA1 and BRCA2 among the cases and controls, a total of 78 cases (3.9%) and 33 controls (1.6%) were found to carry potentially actionable mutations. A significant excess of mutations was only observed for PALB2 (26 cases, four controls) and TP53 (five cases, zero controls), whereas no mutations were identified in STK11. Among the remaining genes, loss-of-function mutations were rare, with similar frequency between cases and controls. CONCLUSION: The frequency of mutations in most breast cancer panel genes among individuals selected for possible hereditary breast cancer is low and, in many cases, similar or even lower than that observed among cancer-free population controls. Although multigene panels can significantly aid in cancer risk management and expedite clinical translation of new genes, they equally have the potential to provide clinical misinformation and harm at the individual level if the data are not interpreted cautiously.

Reevaluation of the BRCA2 truncating allele c.9976A > T (p.Lys3326Ter) in a familial breast cancer context.

The breast cancer predisposition gene, BRCA2, has a large number of genetic variants of unknown effect. The variant rs11571833, an A > T transversion in the final exon of the gene that leads to the creation of a stop codon 93 amino acids early (K3326*), is reported as a neutral polymorphism but there is some evidence to suggest an association with an increased risk of breast cancer. We assessed whether this variant was enriched in a cohort of breast cancer cases ascertained through familial cancer clinics compared to population-based non-cancer controls using a targeted sequencing approach. We identified the variant in 66/2634 (2.5%) cases and 33/1996 (1.65%) controls, indicating an enrichment in the breast cancer cases (p = 0.047, OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.00-2.34). This data is consistent with recent iCOGs data suggesting that this variant is not neutral with respect to breast cancer risk. rs11571833 may need to be included in SNP panels for evaluating breast cancer risk.

Prevalence of PALB2 mutations in Australian familial breast cancer cases and controls.

INTRODUCTION: PALB2 is emerging as a high-penetrance breast cancer predisposition gene in the order of BRCA1 and BRCA2. However, large studies that have evaluated the full gene rather than just the most common variants in both cases and controls are required before all truncating variants can be included in familial breast cancer variant testing. METHODS: In this study we analyse almost 2000 breast cancer cases sourced from individuals referred to familial cancer clinics, thus representing typical cases presenting in clinical practice. These cases were compared to a similar number of population-based cancer-free controls. RESULTS: We identified a significant excess of truncating variants in cases (1.3 %) versus controls (0.2 %), including six novel variants (p = 0.0001; odds ratio (OR) 6.58, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.3-18.9). Three of the four control individuals carrying truncating variants had at least one relative with breast cancer. There was no excess of missense variants in cases overall, but the common c.1676A > G variant (rs152451) was significantly enriched in cases and may represent a low-penetrance polymorphism (p = 0.002; OR 1.24 (95 % CI 1.09-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support truncating variants in PALB2 as high-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles, and suggest that a common missense variant may also lead to a low level of increased breast cancer risk.