Publications by authors named "Carole Brewer"

58 Publications

Breast and Prostate Cancer Risks for Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers Using Polygenic Risk Scores.

J Natl Cancer Inst 2021 Jul 28. Epub 2021 Jul 28.

Department of Molecular Medicine, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.

Background: Recent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.

Methods: 483 BRCA1 and 1,318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were three versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen-receptor (ER) negative (PRSER-) or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk.

Results: PRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07-1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16-1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for both BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28-2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34-1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer ORs were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions.

Conclusions: Population-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and to inform clinical management.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djab147DOI Listing
July 2021

Delineating the Smith-Kingsmore syndrome phenotype: Investigation of 16 patients with the MTOR c.5395G > A p.(Glu1799Lys) missense variant.

Am J Med Genet A 2021 08 25;185(8):2445-2454. Epub 2021 May 25.

St George's University of London, London, UK.

Smith-Kingsmore Syndrome (SKS) is a rare genetic syndrome associated with megalencephaly, a variable intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, and MTOR gain of function variants. Only 30 patients with MTOR missense variants are published, including 14 (47%) with the MTOR c.5395G>A p.(Glu1799Lys) variant. Limited phenotypic data impacts the quality of information delivered to families and the robustness of interpretation of novel MTOR missense variation. This study aims to improve our understanding of the SKS phenotype through the investigation of 16 further patients with the MTOR c.5395G>A p.(Glu1799Lys) variant. Through the careful phenotypic evaluation of these 16 patients and integration with data from 14 previously reported patients, we have defined major (100% patients) and frequent (>15%) SKS clinical characteristics and, using these data, proposed guidance for evidence-based management. In addition, in the absence of functional studies, we suggest that the combination of the SKS major clinical features of megalencephaly (where the head circumference is at least 3SD) and an intellectual disability with a de novo MTOR missense variant (absent from population databases) should be considered diagnostic for SKS.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.62350DOI Listing
August 2021

Phenotypic expansion of the BPTF-related neurodevelopmental disorder with dysmorphic facies and distal limb anomalies.

Am J Med Genet A 2021 05 31;185(5):1366-1378. Epub 2021 Jan 31.

Division of Medical Genetics, Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, Delaware, USA.

Neurodevelopmental disorder with dysmorphic facies and distal limb anomalies (NEDDFL), defined primarily by developmental delay/intellectual disability, speech delay, postnatal microcephaly, and dysmorphic features, is a syndrome resulting from heterozygous variants in the dosage-sensitive bromodomain PHD finger chromatin remodeler transcription factor BPTF gene. To date, only 11 individuals with NEDDFL due to de novo BPTF variants have been described. To expand the NEDDFL phenotypic spectrum, we describe the clinical features in 25 novel individuals with 20 distinct, clinically relevant variants in BPTF, including four individuals with inherited changes in BPTF. In addition to the previously described features, individuals in this cohort exhibited mild brain abnormalities, seizures, scoliosis, and a variety of ophthalmologic complications. These results further support the broad and multi-faceted complications due to haploinsufficiency of BPTF.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.62102DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8048530PMC
May 2021

Variants in GNAI1 cause a syndrome associated with variable features including developmental delay, seizures, and hypotonia.

Genet Med 2021 05 20;23(5):881-887. Epub 2021 Jan 20.

Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, USA.

Purpose: Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) encompass a spectrum of genetically heterogeneous disorders with features that commonly include developmental delay, intellectual disability, and autism spectrum disorders. We sought to delineate the molecular and phenotypic spectrum of a novel neurodevelopmental disorder caused by variants in the GNAI1 gene.

Methods: Through large cohort trio-based exome sequencing and international data-sharing, we identified 24 unrelated individuals with NDD phenotypes and a variant in GNAI1, which encodes the inhibitory Gαi1 subunit of heterotrimeric G-proteins. We collected detailed genotype and phenotype information for each affected individual.

Results: We identified 16 unique variants in GNAI1 in 24 affected individuals; 23 occurred de novo and 1 was inherited from a mosaic parent. Most affected individuals have a severe neurodevelopmental disorder. Core features include global developmental delay, intellectual disability, hypotonia, and epilepsy.

Conclusion: This collaboration establishes GNAI1 variants as a cause of NDDs. GNAI1-related NDD is most often characterized by severe to profound delays, hypotonia, epilepsy that ranges from self-limiting to intractable, behavior problems, and variable mild dysmorphic features.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-01076-8DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8107131PMC
May 2021

Polygenic risk scores and breast and epithelial ovarian cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants.

Genet Med 2020 10 15;22(10):1653-1666. Epub 2020 Jul 15.

Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics, Exeter, UK.

Purpose: We assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.

Methods: Retrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort.

Results: The ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25-1.33], P = 3×10). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27-1.36], P = 7×10). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25-1.40], P = 3×10) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30-1.60], P = 4×10) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar.

Conclusion: Population-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-0862-xDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521995PMC
October 2020

Prostate Cancer Risk by BRCA2 Genomic Regions.

Eur Urol 2020 10 10;78(4):494-497. Epub 2020 Jun 10.

Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

A BRCA2 prostate cancer cluster region (PCCR) was recently proposed (c.7914 to 3') wherein pathogenic variants (PVs) are associated with higher prostate cancer (PCa) risk than PVs elsewhere in the BRCA2 gene. Using a prospective cohort study of 447 male BRCA2 PV carriers recruited in the UK and Ireland from 1998 to 2016, we estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) compared with population incidences and assessed variation in risk by PV location. Carriers of PVs in the PCCR had a PCa SIR of 8.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.46-15.6) and were at a higher risk of PCa than carriers of other BRCA2 PVs (SIR = 3.31, 95% CI 1.97-5.57; hazard ratio = 2.34, 95% CI 1.09-5.03). PCCR PV carriers had an estimated cumulative PCa risk of 44% (95% CI 23-72%) by the age of 75 yr and 78% (95% CI 54-94%) by the age of 85 yr. Our results corroborate the existence of a PCCR in BRCA2 in a prospective cohort. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we investigated whether the risk of prostate cancer for men with a harmful mutation in the BRCA2 gene differs based on where in the gene the mutation is located. We found that men with mutations in one region of BRCA2 had a higher risk of prostate cancer than men with mutations elsewhere in the gene.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.005DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532700PMC
October 2020

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Breast Cancer Res 2020 01 16;22(1). Epub 2020 Jan 16.

Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.

Background: The effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is uncertain. Retrospective analyses have suggested a protective effect but may be substantially biased. Prospective studies have had limited power, particularly for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further, previous studies have not considered the effect of RRSO in the context of natural menopause.

Methods: A multi-centre prospective cohort of 2272 BRCA1 and 1605 BRCA2 mutation carriers was followed for a mean of 5.4 and 4.9 years, respectively; 426 women developed incident breast cancer. RRSO was modelled as a time-dependent covariate in Cox regression, and its effect assessed in premenopausal and postmenopausal women.

Results: There was no association between RRSO and breast cancer for BRCA1 (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.94-1.61) or BRCA2 (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.62-1.24) mutation carriers. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, HRs were 0.68 (95% CI 0.40-1.15) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64) for RRSO carried out before or after age 45 years, respectively. The HR for BRCA2 mutation carriers decreased with increasing time since RRSO (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.26-0.99 for 5 years or longer after RRSO). Estimates for premenopausal women were similar.

Conclusion: We found no evidence that RRSO reduces breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. A potentially beneficial effect for BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed, particularly after 5 years following RRSO. These results may inform counselling and management of carriers with respect to RRSO.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-020-1247-4DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6966793PMC
January 2020

Alcohol Consumption, Cigarette Smoking, and Risk of Breast Cancer for and Mutation Carriers: Results from The BRCA1 and BRCA2 Cohort Consortium.

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020 02 2;29(2):368-378. Epub 2019 Dec 2.

Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Background: Tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption have been intensively studied in the general population to assess their effects on the risk of breast cancer, but very few studies have examined these effects in and mutation carriers. Given the high breast cancer risk for mutation carriers and the importance of and in DNA repair, better evidence on the associations of these lifestyle factors with breast cancer risk is essential.

Methods: Using a large international pooled cohort of and mutation carriers, we conducted retrospective (5,707 mutation carriers and 3,525 mutation carriers) and prospective (2,276 mutation carriers and 1,610 mutation carriers) analyses of alcohol and tobacco consumption using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results: For both and mutation carriers, none of the smoking-related variables was associated with breast cancer risk, except smoking for more than 5 years before a first full-term pregnancy (FFTP) when compared with parous women who never smoked. For mutation carriers, the HR from retrospective analysis (HR) was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.39] and the HR from prospective analysis (HR) was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.99-1.87). For mutation carriers, smoking for more than 5 years before an FFTP showed an association of a similar magnitude, but the confidence limits were wider (HR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55 and HR = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83-2.01). For both carrier groups, alcohol consumption was not associated with breast cancer risk.

Conclusions: The finding that smoking during the prereproductive years increases breast cancer risk for mutation carriers warrants further investigation.

Impact: This is the largest prospective study of mutation carriers to assess these important risk factors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0546DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7611162PMC
February 2020

Association of Genomic Domains in and with Prostate Cancer Risk and Aggressiveness.

Cancer Res 2020 02 13;80(3):624-638. Epub 2019 Nov 13.

Unité de Prévention et d'Epidémiologie Génétique, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France.

Pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in or () are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. We evaluated whether PSVs in were associated with risk of overall prostate cancer or high grade (Gleason 8+) prostate cancer using an international sample of 65 and 171 male PSV carriers with prostate cancer, and 3,388 and 2,880 male PSV carriers without prostate cancer. PSVs in the 3' region of (c.7914+) were significantly associated with elevated risk of prostate cancer compared with reference bin c.1001-c.7913 [HR = 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25-2.52; = 0.001], as well as elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.63-5.95; = 0.001). c.756-c.1000 was also associated with elevated prostate cancer risk (HR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.71-4.68; = 0.00004) and elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 4.95; 95% CI, 2.12-11.54; = 0.0002). No genotype-phenotype associations were detected for PSVs in . These results demonstrate that specific PSVs may be associated with elevated risk of developing aggressive prostate cancer. SIGNIFICANCE: Aggressive prostate cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers may vary according to the specific BRCA2 mutation inherited by the at-risk individual.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-1840DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553241PMC
February 2020

Interim Results from the IMPACT Study: Evidence for Prostate-specific Antigen Screening in BRCA2 Mutation Carriers.

Eur Urol 2019 12 16;76(6):831-842. Epub 2019 Sep 16.

International Hereditary Cancer Center, Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland.

Background: Mutations in BRCA2 cause a higher risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer (PrCa). The IMPACT study is evaluating targeted PrCa screening using prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) in men with germline BRCA1/2 mutations.

Objective: To report the utility of PSA screening, PrCa incidence, positive predictive value of PSA, biopsy, and tumour characteristics after 3 yr of screening, by BRCA status.

Design, Setting, And Participants: Men aged 40-69 yr with a germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation and male controls testing negative for a familial BRCA1/2 mutation were recruited. Participants underwent PSA screening for 3 yr, and if PSA > 3.0 ng/ml, men were offered prostate biopsy.

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: PSA levels, PrCa incidence, and tumour characteristics were evaluated. Statistical analyses included Poisson regression offset by person-year follow-up, chi-square tests for proportion t tests for means, and Kruskal-Wallis for medians.

Results And Limitations: A total of 3027 patients (2932 unique individuals) were recruited (919 BRCA1 carriers, 709 BRCA1 noncarriers, 902 BRCA2 carriers, and 497 BRCA2 noncarriers). After 3 yr of screening, 527 men had PSA > 3.0 ng/ml, 357 biopsies were performed, and 112 PrCa cases were diagnosed (31 BRCA1 carriers, 19 BRCA1 noncarriers, 47 BRCA2 carriers, and 15 BRCA2 noncarriers). Higher compliance with biopsy was observed in BRCA2 carriers compared with noncarriers (73% vs 60%). Cancer incidence rate per 1000 person years was higher in BRCA2 carriers than in noncarriers (19.4 vs 12.0; p =  0.03); BRCA2 carriers were diagnosed at a younger age (61 vs 64 yr; p =  0.04) and were more likely to have clinically significant disease than BRCA2 noncarriers (77% vs 40%; p =  0.01). No differences in age or tumour characteristics were detected between BRCA1 carriers and BRCA1 noncarriers. The 4 kallikrein marker model discriminated better (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.73) for clinically significant cancer at biopsy than PSA alone (AUC = 0.65).

Conclusions: After 3 yr of screening, compared with noncarriers, BRCA2 mutation carriers were associated with a higher incidence of PrCa, younger age of diagnosis, and clinically significant tumours. Therefore, systematic PSA screening is indicated for men with a BRCA2 mutation. Further follow-up is required to assess the role of screening in BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Patient Summary: We demonstrate that after 3 yr of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, we detect more serious prostate cancers in men with BRCA2 mutations than in those without these mutations. We recommend that male BRCA2 carriers are offered systematic PSA screening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.019DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6880781PMC
December 2019

Prostate Cancer Risks for Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Eur Urol 2020 01 6;77(1):24-35. Epub 2019 Sep 6.

Oncogenetics Team, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have been associated with prostate cancer (PCa) risk but a wide range of risk estimates have been reported that are based on retrospective studies.

Objective: To estimate relative and absolute PCa risks associated with BRCA1/2 mutations and to assess risk modification by age, family history, and mutation location.

Design, Setting, And Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of male BRCA1 (n = 376) and BRCA2 carriers (n = 447) identified in clinical genetics centres in the UK and Ireland (median follow-up 5.9 and 5.3 yr, respectively).

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: Standardised incidence/mortality ratios (SIRs/SMRs) relative to population incidences or mortality rates, absolute risks, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using cohort and survival analysis methods.

Results And Limitations: Sixteen BRCA1 and 26 BRCA2 carriers were diagnosed with PCa during follow-up. BRCA2 carriers had an SIR of 4.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.99-6.61) and absolute PCa risk of 27% (95% CI 17-41%) and 60% (95% CI 43-78%) by ages 75 and 85 yr, respectively. For BRCA1 carriers, the overall SIR was 2.35 (95% CI 1.43-3.88); the corresponding SIR at age <65 yr was 3.57 (95% CI 1.68-7.58). However, the BRCA1 SIR varied between 0.74 and 2.83 in sensitivity analyses to assess potential screening effects. PCa risk for BRCA2 carriers increased with family history (HR per affected relative 1.68, 95% CI 0.99-2.85). BRCA2 mutations in the region bounded by positions c.2831 and c.6401 were associated with an SIR of 2.46 (95% CI 1.07-5.64) compared to population incidences, corresponding to lower PCa risk (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.96) than for mutations outside the region. BRCA2 carriers had a stronger association with Gleason score ≥7 (SIR 5.07, 95% CI 3.20-8.02) than Gleason score ≤6 PCa (SIR 3.03, 95% CI 1.24-7.44), and a higher risk of death from PCa (SMR 3.85, 95% CI 1.44-10.3). Limitations include potential screening effects for these known mutation carriers; however, the BRCA2 results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions: The results substantiate PCa risk patterns indicated by retrospective analyses for BRCA2 carriers, including further evidence of association with aggressive PCa, and give some support for a weaker association in BRCA1 carriers.

Patient Summary: In this study we followed unaffected men known to carry mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to investigate whether they are at higher risk of developing prostate cancer compared to the general population. We found that carriers of BRCA2 mutations have a high risk of developing prostate cancer, particularly more aggressive prostate cancer, and that this risk varies by family history of prostate cancer and the location of the mutation within the gene.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.025DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6926480PMC
January 2020

The Influence of Number and Timing of Pregnancies on Breast Cancer Risk for Women With or Mutations.

JNCI Cancer Spectr 2018 Dec 8;2(4):pky078. Epub 2019 Mar 8.

Background: Full-term pregnancy (FTP) is associated with a reduced breast cancer (BC) risk over time, but women are at increased BC risk in the immediate years following an FTP. No large prospective studies, however, have examined whether the number and timing of pregnancies are associated with BC risk for and mutation carriers.

Methods: Using weighted and time-varying Cox proportional hazards models, we investigated whether reproductive events are associated with BC risk for mutation carriers using a retrospective cohort (5707 and 3525 mutation carriers) and a prospective cohort (2276 and 1610 mutation carriers), separately for each cohort and the combined prospective and retrospective cohort.

Results: For mutation carriers, there was no overall association with parity compared with nulliparity (combined hazard ratio [HR] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 1.18). Relative to being uniparous, an increased number of FTPs was associated with decreased BC risk (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.91; HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.82; HR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.63, for 2, 3, and ≥4 FTPs, respectively, < .0001) and increasing duration of breastfeeding was associated with decreased BC risk (combined cohort  = .0003). Relative to being nulliparous, uniparous mutation carriers were at increased BC risk in the prospective analysis (prospective hazard ration [HR] = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.09 to 2.62). For mutation carriers, being parous was associated with a 30% increase in BC risk (HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.69), and there was no apparent decrease in risk associated with multiparity except for having at least 4 FTPs vs. 1 FTP (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.98).

Conclusions: These findings suggest differential associations with parity between and mutation carriers with higher risk for uniparous carriers and parous carriers.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pky078DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6405439PMC
December 2018

Comprehensive Cancer-Predisposition Gene Testing in an Adult Multiple Primary Tumor Series Shows a Broad Range of Deleterious Variants and Atypical Tumor Phenotypes.

Am J Hum Genet 2018 07 14;103(1):3-18. Epub 2018 Jun 14.

North East Thames Regional Genetics Service, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London WC1N 3JH, UK.

Multiple primary tumors (MPTs) affect a substantial proportion of cancer survivors and can result from various causes, including inherited predisposition. Currently, germline genetic testing of MPT-affected individuals for variants in cancer-predisposition genes (CPGs) is mostly targeted by tumor type. We ascertained pre-assessed MPT individuals (with at least two primary tumors by age 60 years or at least three by 70 years) from genetics centers and performed whole-genome sequencing (WGS) on 460 individuals from 440 families. Despite previous negative genetic assessment and molecular investigations, pathogenic variants in moderate- and high-risk CPGs were detected in 67/440 (15.2%) probands. WGS detected variants that would not be (or were not) detected by targeted resequencing strategies, including low-frequency structural variants (6/440 [1.4%] probands). In most individuals with a germline variant assessed as pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP), at least one of their tumor types was characteristic of variants in the relevant CPG. However, in 29 probands (42.2% of those with a P/LP variant), the tumor phenotype appeared discordant. The frequency of individuals with truncating or splice-site CPG variants and at least one discordant tumor type was significantly higher than in a control population (χ = 43.642; p ≤ 0.0001). 2/67 (3%) probands with P/LP variants had evidence of multiple inherited neoplasia allele syndrome (MINAS) with deleterious variants in two CPGs. Together with variant detection rates from a previous series of similarly ascertained MPT-affected individuals, the present results suggest that first-line comprehensive CPG analysis in an MPT cohort referred to clinical genetics services would detect a deleterious variant in about a third of individuals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.04.013DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6037202PMC
July 2018

Psychosocial impact of undergoing prostate cancer screening for men with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

BJU Int 2019 02 22;123(2):284-292. Epub 2018 Jun 22.

Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Objectives: To report the baseline results of a longitudinal psychosocial study that forms part of the IMPACT study, a multi-national investigation of targeted prostate cancer (PCa) screening among men with a known pathogenic germline mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes.

Particpants And Methods: Men enrolled in the IMPACT study were invited to complete a questionnaire at collaborating sites prior to each annual screening visit. The questionnaire included sociodemographic characteristics and the following measures: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Impact of Event Scale (IES), 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer, Cancer Worry Scale-Revised, risk perception and knowledge. The results of the baseline questionnaire are presented.

Results: A total of 432 men completed questionnaires: 98 and 160 had mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, respectively, and 174 were controls (familial mutation negative). Participants' perception of PCa risk was influenced by genetic status. Knowledge levels were high and unrelated to genetic status. Mean scores for the HADS and SF-36 were within reported general population norms and mean IES scores were within normal range. IES mean intrusion and avoidance scores were significantly higher in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers than in controls and were higher in men with increased PCa risk perception. At the multivariate level, risk perception contributed more significantly to variance in IES scores than genetic status.

Conclusion: This is the first study to report the psychosocial profile of men with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations undergoing PCa screening. No clinically concerning levels of general or cancer-specific distress or poor quality of life were detected in the cohort as a whole. A small subset of participants reported higher levels of distress, suggesting the need for healthcare professionals offering PCa screening to identify these risk factors and offer additional information and support to men seeking PCa screening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.14412DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6378691PMC
February 2019

Germline pathogenic variants in PALB2 and other cancer-predisposing genes in families with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer without CDH1 mutation: a whole-exome sequencing study.

Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018 07 27;3(7):489-498. Epub 2018 Apr 27.

Academic Laboratory of Medical Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address:

Background: Germline pathogenic variants in the E-cadherin gene (CDH1) are strongly associated with the development of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. There is a paucity of data to guide risk assessment and management of families with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer that do not carry a CDH1 pathogenic variant, making it difficult to make informed decisions about surveillance and risk-reducing surgery. We aimed to identify new candidate genes associated with predisposition to hereditary diffuse gastric cancer in affected families without pathogenic CDH1 variants.

Methods: We did whole-exome sequencing on DNA extracted from the blood of 39 individuals (28 individuals diagnosed with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer and 11 unaffected first-degree relatives) in 22 families without pathogenic CDH1 variants. Genes with loss-of-function variants were prioritised using gene-interaction analysis to identify clusters of genes that could be involved in predisposition to hereditary diffuse gastric cancer.

Findings: Protein-affecting germline variants were identified in probands from six families with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer; variants were found in genes known to predispose to cancer and in lesser-studied DNA repair genes. A frameshift deletion in PALB2 was found in one member of a family with a history of gastric and breast cancer. Two different MSH2 variants were identified in two unrelated affected individuals, including one frameshift insertion and one previously described start-codon loss. One family had a unique combination of variants in the DNA repair genes ATR and NBN. Two variants in the DNA repair gene RECQL5 were identified in two unrelated families: one missense variant and a splice-acceptor variant.

Interpretation: The results of this study suggest a role for the known cancer predisposition gene PALB2 in families with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer and no detected pathogenic CDH1 variants. We also identified new candidate genes associated with disease risk in these families.

Funding: UK Medical Research Council (Sackler programme), European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (2007-13), National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres, and Cancer Research UK.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30079-7DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992580PMC
July 2018

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

Genet Med 2018 12 22;20(12):1575-1582. Epub 2018 Mar 22.

Oncogenetics Team, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

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.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2018.44DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6033314PMC
December 2018

Mutational spectrum in a worldwide study of 29,700 families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

Hum Mutat 2018 05 12;39(5):593-620. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

The prevalence and spectrum of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in single populations, with the majority of reports focused on White in Europe and North America. The Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) has assembled data on 18,435 families with BRCA1 mutations and 11,351 families with BRCA2 mutations ascertained from 69 centers in 49 countries on six continents. This study comprehensively describes the characteristics of the 1,650 unique BRCA1 and 1,731 unique BRCA2 deleterious (disease-associated) mutations identified in the CIMBA database. We observed substantial variation in mutation type and frequency by geographical region and race/ethnicity. In addition to known founder mutations, mutations of relatively high frequency were identified in specific racial/ethnic or geographic groups that may reflect founder mutations and which could be used in targeted (panel) first pass genotyping for specific populations. Knowledge of the population-specific mutational spectrum in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could inform efficient strategies for genetic testing and may justify a more broad-based oncogenetic testing in some populations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/humu.23406DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5903938PMC
May 2018

Tumour risks and genotype-phenotype correlations associated with germline variants in succinate dehydrogenase subunit genes , and .

J Med Genet 2018 06 31;55(6):384-394. Epub 2018 Jan 31.

West Midlands Regional Genetics service, Birmingham Women's Hospital, Birmingham, UK.

Background: Germline pathogenic variants in / are the most frequent causes of inherited phaeochromocytomas/paragangliomas. Insufficient information regarding penetrance and phenotypic variability hinders optimum management of mutation carriers. We estimate penetrance for symptomatic tumours and elucidate genotype-phenotype correlations in a large cohort of / mutation carriers.

Methods: A retrospective survey of 1832 individuals referred for genetic testing due to a personal or family history of phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma. 876 patients (401 previously reported) had a germline mutation in / (n=673/43/160). Tumour risks were correlated with in silico structural prediction analyses.

Results: Tumour risks analysis provided novel penetrance estimates and genotype-phenotype correlations. In addition to tumour type susceptibility differences for individual genes, we confirmed that the p.Pro81Leu mutation has a distinct phenotype and identified increased age-related tumour risks with highly destabilising missense mutations. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, the penetrance (cumulative risk of clinically apparent tumours) in and (paternally inherited) mutation-positive non-probands (n=371/67 with detailed clinical information) by age 60 years was 21.8% (95% CI 15.2% to 27.9%) and 43.2% (95% CI 25.4% to 56.7%), respectively. Risk of malignant disease at age 60 years in non-proband mutation carriers was 4.2%(95% CI 1.1% to 7.2%). With retrospective cohort analysis to adjust for ascertainment, cumulative tumour risks for mutation carriers at ages 60 years and 80 years were 23.9% (95% CI 20.9% to 27.4%) and 30.6% (95% CI 26.8% to 34.7%).

Conclusions: Overall risks of clinically apparent tumours for mutation carriers are substantially lower than initially estimated and will improve counselling of affected families. Specific genotype-tumour risk associations provides a basis for novel investigative strategies into succinate dehydrogenase-related mechanisms of tumourigenesis and the development of personalised management for / mutation carriers.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2017-105127DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992372PMC
June 2018

Prostate-specific antigen velocity in a prospective prostate cancer screening study of men with genetic predisposition.

Br J Cancer 2018 01 4;118(2):266-276. Epub 2018 Jan 4.

Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam 3015 CE, The Netherlands.

Background: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA-velocity (PSAV) have been used to identify men at risk of prostate cancer (PrCa). The IMPACT study is evaluating PSA screening in men with a known genetic predisposition to PrCa due to BRCA1/2 mutations. This analysis evaluates the utility of PSA and PSAV for identifying PrCa and high-grade disease in this cohort.

Methods: PSAV was calculated using logistic regression to determine if PSA or PSAV predicted the result of prostate biopsy (PB) in men with elevated PSA values. Cox regression was used to determine whether PSA or PSAV predicted PSA elevation in men with low PSAs. Interaction terms were included in the models to determine whether BRCA status influenced the predictiveness of PSA or PSAV.

Results: 1634 participants had ⩾3 PSA readings of whom 174 underwent PB and 45 PrCas diagnosed. In men with PSA >3.0 ng ml, PSAV was not significantly associated with presence of cancer or high-grade disease. PSAV did not add to PSA for predicting time to an elevated PSA. When comparing BRCA1/2 carriers to non-carriers, we found a significant interaction between BRCA status and last PSA before biopsy (P=0.031) and BRCA2 status and PSAV (P=0.024). However, PSAV was not predictive of biopsy outcome in BRCA2 carriers.

Conclusions: PSA is more strongly predictive of PrCa in BRCA carriers than non-carriers. We did not find evidence that PSAV aids decision-making for BRCA carriers over absolute PSA value alone.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2017.429DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5785754PMC
January 2018

Identification of ten variants associated with risk of estrogen-receptor-negative breast cancer.

Nat Genet 2017 Dec 23;49(12):1767-1778. Epub 2017 Oct 23.

Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.

Most common breast cancer susceptibility variants have been identified through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of predominantly estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease. We conducted a GWAS using 21,468 ER-negative cases and 100,594 controls combined with 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer), all of European origin. We identified independent associations at P < 5 × 10 with ten variants at nine new loci. At P < 0.05, we replicated associations with 10 of 11 variants previously reported in ER-negative disease or BRCA1 mutation carrier GWAS and observed consistent associations with ER-negative disease for 105 susceptibility variants identified by other studies. These 125 variants explain approximately 16% of the familial risk of this breast cancer subtype. There was high genetic correlation (0.72) between risk of ER-negative breast cancer and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. These findings may lead to improved risk prediction and inform further fine-mapping and functional work to better understand the biological basis of ER-negative breast cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3785DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5808456PMC
December 2017

Prediction of Breast and Prostate Cancer Risks in Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers Using Polygenic Risk Scores.

J Clin Oncol 2017 Jul 27;35(20):2240-2250. Epub 2017 Apr 27.

Julie Lecarpentier, Karoline B. Kuchenbaecker, Daniel Barrowdale, Joe Dennis, Lesley McGuffog, Goska Leslie, Andrew Lee, Ali Amin Al Olama, Jonathan P. Tyrer, Debra Frost, Steve Ellis, Douglas F. Easton, and Antonis C. Antoniou, University of Cambridge; Karoline B. Kuchenbaecker, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton; Marc Tischkowitz, Addenbrooke's Treatment Centre, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge; D. Gareth Evans, Manchester University, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester; Alex Henderson, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne; Carole Brewer, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter; Diana Eccles, Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton; Jackie Cook, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Sheffield; Kai-ren Ong, Birmingham Women's Hospital Healthcare NHS Trust, Edgbaston, Birmingham; Lisa Walker, Churchill Hospital, Oxford; Lucy E. Side, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust; Shirley Hodgson, St George's, University of London; Louise Izatt, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust; Ros Eeles, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; Nick Orr, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Mary E. Porteous, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh; Rosemarie Davidson, South Glasgow University Hospitals, Glasgow; Julian Adlard, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, United Kingdom; Valentina Silvestri, Piera Rizzolo, Anna Sara Navazio, Virginia Valentini, Veronica Zelli, and Laura Ottini, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome; Angela Toss, Veronica Medici, and Laura Cortesi, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena; Ines Zanna and Domenico Palli, Cancer Research and Prevention Institute, Florence; Paolo Radice, Siranoush Manoukian, Bernard Peissel, and Jacopo Azzollini, Fondazione Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Istituto Nazionale Tumori (INT); Paolo Peterlongo, Italian Foundation for Cancer Research Institute of Molecular Oncology (IFOM), Milan; Alessandra Viel and Giulia Cini, CRO Aviano, National Cancer Institute, Aviano; Giuseppe Damante, University of Udine, Udine; Stefania Tommasi, Istituto Nazionale Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", Bari; Elisa Alducci, Silvia Tognazzo, and Marco Montagna, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV - IRCCS, Padua; Maria A. Caligo, University and University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; Penny Soucy and Jacques Simard, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec Research Center and Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec; Anna Marie Mulligan and Irene L. Andrulis, University of Toronto; Gord Glendon and Irene L. Andrulis, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Melissa Southey, Ian Campbell, Paul James, and Gillian Mitchell, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria; Amanda B. Spurdle, Helene Holland, and Georgia Chenevix-Trench, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland; Ian Campbell, Paul James, and Gillian Mitchell, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, New South Wales, Australia; Esther M. John, Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont; Linda Steele, Yuan Chun Ding, Susan L. Neuhausen, and Jeffrey N. Weitzel, City of Hope, Duarte, CA; Thomas A. Conner and Saundra S. Buys, Huntsman Cancer Institute; David E. Goldgar, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT; Andrew K. Godwin, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City; Priyanka Sharma, University of Kansas Medical Center, Westwood, KS; Timothy R. Rebbeck, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Joseph Vijai, Mark Robson, Anne Lincoln, Jacob Musinsky, Pragna Gaddam, and Kenneth Offit, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Jennifer T. Loud and Mark H. Greene, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Amanda Ewart Toland and Leigha Senter, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; Dezheng Huo, Sarah M. Nielsen, and Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Katherine L. Nathanson and Susan M. Domchek, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Christa Lorenchick and Rachel C. Jankowitz, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Fergus J. Couch, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Ramunas Janavicius, State Research Institute Innovative Medicine Center, Vilnius, Lithuania; Thomas V.O. Hansen, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen; Anders Bojesen and Henriette Roed Nielsen, Vejle Hospital, Vejle; Anne-Bine Skytte, Lone Sunde, and Uffe Birk Jensen, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus; Inge Sokilde Pedersen, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg; Lotte Krogh, Torben A. Kruse, and Mads Thomassen, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; Ana Osorio, National Cancer Research Centre and Spanish Network on Rare Diseases; Miguel de la Hoya, Vanesa Garcia-Barberan, Trinidad Caldes, and Pedro Perez Segura, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, El Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid; Judith Balmaña, University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron; Sara Gutiérrez-Enríquez and Orland Diez, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology; Orland Diez, University Hospital Vall d'Hebron; Alex Teulé, Jesús Del Valle, Lidia Feliubadalo, Miquel Angel Pujana, and Conxi Lazaro, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona; Angel Izquierdo, Esther Darder, and Joan Brunet, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Girona, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Girona, Spain; Florentia Fostira, National Centre for Scientific Research "Demokritos," Athens, Greece; Ute Hamann, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ); Christian Sutter, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg; Alfons Meindl, Klinikumrechts der Isar, Technical University Munich; Nina Ditsch, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich; Andrea Gehrig, University Würzburg, Würzburg; Bernd Dworniczak, University of Münster, Münster; Christoph Engel, University of Leipzig; Dorothea Wand, University Hospital, Leipzig; Dieter Niederacher, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf; Doris Steinemann, Hannover Medical School, Hannover; Eric Hahnen, Jan Hauke, Kerstin Rhiem, Barbara Wappenschmidt, and Rita K. Schmutzler, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne; Karin Kast, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden; Norbert Arnold, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Christian-Albrechts University Kiel, Kiel; Shan Wang-Gohrke, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Christine Lasset, Francesca Damiola, and Laure Barjhoux, Centre Léon Bérard; Sylvie Mazoyer, University of Lyon, Lyon; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet and Muriel Belotti, Institut Curie, Paris, France; Mattias Van Heetvelde, Bruce Poppe, Kim De Leeneer, and Kathleen B.M. Claes, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium; Johanna I. Kiiski, Sofia Khan, and Heli Nevanlinna, University of Helsinki; Johanna I. Kiiski, Kristiina Aittomäki, Sofia Khan, and Heli Nevanlinna, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; Christi J. van Asperen, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Tibor Vaszko, Miklos Kasler, and Edith Olah, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Adalgeir Arason, Bjarni A. Agnarsson, Oskar Th. Johannsson, and Rosa B. Barkardottir, Landspitali University Hospital and Biomedical Centre, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland; Manuel R. Teixeira and Pedro Pinto, Portuguese Oncology Institute; Manuel R. Teixeira, Porto University, Porto, Portugal; Jong Won Lee, Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center; Min Hyuk Lee and Jihyoun Lee, Soonchunhyang University and Hospital; Sung-Won Kim and Eunyoung Kang, Daerim St Mary's Hospital; Sue Kyung Park, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul; Zisun Kim, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital, Bucheon, Korea; Yen Y. Tan, Andreas Berger, and Christian F. Singer, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Sook-Yee Yoon and Soo-Hwang Teo, Sime Darby Medical Centre, Subang Jaya, Malaysia; and Anna von Wachenfeldt, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

Purpose BRCA1/2 mutations increase the risk of breast and prostate cancer in men. Common genetic variants modify cancer risks for female carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. We investigated-for the first time to our knowledge-associations of common genetic variants with breast and prostate cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/ 2 mutations and implications for cancer risk prediction. Materials and Methods We genotyped 1,802 male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 by using the custom Illumina OncoArray. We investigated the combined effects of established breast and prostate cancer susceptibility variants on cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations by constructing weighted polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using published effect estimates as weights. Results In male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, PRS that was based on 88 female breast cancer susceptibility variants was associated with breast cancer risk (odds ratio per standard deviation of PRS, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.56; P = 8.6 × 10). Similarly, PRS that was based on 103 prostate cancer susceptibility variants was associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio per SD of PRS, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81; P = 3.2 × 10). Large differences in absolute cancer risks were observed at the extremes of the PRS distribution. For example, prostate cancer risk by age 80 years at the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS varies from 7% to 26% for carriers of BRCA1 mutations and from 19% to 61% for carriers of BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Conclusion PRSs may provide informative cancer risk stratification for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations that might enable these men and their physicians to make informed decisions on the type and timing of breast and prostate cancer risk management.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.69.4935DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5501359PMC
July 2017

Identification of 12 new susceptibility loci for different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Nat Genet 2017 May 27;49(5):680-691. Epub 2017 Mar 27.

N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Centre of Belarus, Minsk, Belarus.

To identify common alleles associated with different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), we pooled data from multiple genome-wide genotyping projects totaling 25,509 EOC cases and 40,941 controls. We identified nine new susceptibility loci for different EOC histotypes: six for serous EOC histotypes (3q28, 4q32.3, 8q21.11, 10q24.33, 18q11.2 and 22q12.1), two for mucinous EOC (3q22.3 and 9q31.1) and one for endometrioid EOC (5q12.3). We then performed meta-analysis on the results for high-grade serous ovarian cancer with the results from analysis of 31,448 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 3,887 mutation carriers with EOC. This identified three additional susceptibility loci at 2q13, 8q24.1 and 12q24.31. Integrated analyses of genes and regulatory biofeatures at each locus predicted candidate susceptibility genes, including OBFC1, a new candidate susceptibility gene for low-grade and borderline serous EOC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3826DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5612337PMC
May 2017

Association of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with genetic variants showing differential allelic expression: identification of a modifier of breast cancer risk at locus 11q22.3.

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017 01 28;161(1):117-134. Epub 2016 Oct 28.

Center for Medical Genetics, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.

Purpose: Cis-acting regulatory SNPs resulting in differential allelic expression (DAE) may, in part, explain the underlying phenotypic variation associated with many complex diseases. To investigate whether common variants associated with DAE were involved in breast cancer susceptibility among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, a list of 175 genes was developed based of their involvement in cancer-related pathways.

Methods: Using data from a genome-wide map of SNPs associated with allelic expression, we assessed the association of ~320 SNPs located in the vicinity of these genes with breast and ovarian cancer risks in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained from 54 studies participating in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2.

Results: We identified a region on 11q22.3 that is significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (most significant SNP rs228595 p = 7 × 10). This association was absent in BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.57). The 11q22.3 region notably encompasses genes such as ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. Expression quantitative trait loci associations were observed in both normal breast and tumors across this region, namely for ACAT1, ATM, and other genes. In silico analysis revealed some overlap between top risk-associated SNPs and relevant biological features in mammary cell data, which suggests potential functional significance.

Conclusion: We identified 11q22.3 as a new modifier locus in BRCA1 carriers. Replication in larger studies using estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-4018-2DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5222911PMC
January 2017

Combined genetic and splicing analysis of BRCA1 c.[594-2A>C; 641A>G] highlights the relevance of naturally occurring in-frame transcripts for developing disease gene variant classification algorithms.

Hum Mol Genet 2016 06 23;25(11):2256-2268. Epub 2016 Mar 23.

Ambry Genetics, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656, USA.

A recent analysis using family history weighting and co-observation classification modeling indicated that BRCA1 c.594-2A > C (IVS9-2A > C), previously described to cause exon 10 skipping (a truncating alteration), displays characteristics inconsistent with those of a high risk pathogenic BRCA1 variant. We used large-scale genetic and clinical resources from the ENIGMA, CIMBA and BCAC consortia to assess pathogenicity of c.594-2A > C. The combined odds for causality considering case-control, segregation and breast tumor pathology information was 3.23 × 10 Our data indicate that c.594-2A > C is always in cis with c.641A > G. The spliceogenic effect of c.[594-2A > C;641A > G] was characterized using RNA analysis of human samples and splicing minigenes. As expected, c.[594-2A > C; 641A > G] caused exon 10 skipping, albeit not due to c.594-2A > C impairing the acceptor site but rather by c.641A > G modifying exon 10 splicing regulatory element(s). Multiple blood-based RNA assays indicated that the variant allele did not produce detectable levels of full-length transcripts, with a per allele BRCA1 expression profile composed of ≈70-80% truncating transcripts, and ≈20-30% of in-frame Δ9,10 transcripts predicted to encode a BRCA1 protein with tumor suppression function.We confirm that BRCA1c.[594-2A > C;641A > G] should not be considered a high-risk pathogenic variant. Importantly, results from our detailed mRNA analysis suggest that BRCA-associated cancer risk is likely not markedly increased for individuals who carry a truncating variant in BRCA1 exons 9 or 10, or any other BRCA1 allele that permits 20-30% of tumor suppressor function. More generally, our findings highlight the importance of assessing naturally occurring alternative splicing for clinical evaluation of variants in disease-causing genes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddw094DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5081057PMC
June 2016

Fine-Scale Mapping at 9p22.2 Identifies Candidate Causal Variants That Modify Ovarian Cancer Risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers.

PLoS One 2016 27;11(7):e0158801. Epub 2016 Jul 27.

Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Polabska 4, Szczecin, Poland.

Population-based genome wide association studies have identified a locus at 9p22.2 associated with ovarian cancer risk, which also modifies ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We conducted fine-scale mapping at 9p22.2 to identify potential causal variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Genotype data were available for 15,252 (2,462 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA1 and 8,211 (631 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following genotype imputation, ovarian cancer associations were assessed for 4,873 and 5,020 SNPs in BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers respectively, within a retrospective cohort analytical framework. In BRCA1 mutation carriers one set of eight correlated candidate causal variants for ovarian cancer risk modification was identified (top SNP rs10124837, HR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.68 to 0.79, p-value 2× 10-16). These variants were located up to 20 kb upstream of BNC2. In BRCA2 mutation carriers one region, up to 45 kb upstream of BNC2, and containing 100 correlated SNPs was identified as candidate causal (top SNP rs62543585, HR: 0.69, 95%CI: 0.59 to 0.80, p-value 1.0 × 10-6). The candidate causal in BRCA1 mutation carriers did not include the strongest associated variant at this locus in the general population. In sum, we identified a set of candidate causal variants in a region that encompasses the BNC2 transcription start site. The ovarian cancer association at 9p22.2 may be mediated by different variants in BRCA1 mutation carriers and in the general population. Thus, potentially different mechanisms may underlie ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers and the general population.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0158801PLOS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4963094PMC
July 2017

Hartsfield syndrome associated with a novel heterozygous missense mutation in FGFR1 and incorporating tumoral calcinosis.

Am J Med Genet A 2016 Aug 12;170(8):2222-5. Epub 2016 May 12.

Department of Paediatric Endocrinology, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.37731DOI Listing
August 2016

An original phylogenetic approach identified mitochondrial haplogroup T1a1 as inversely associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Breast Cancer Res 2015 Apr 25;17:61. Epub 2015 Apr 25.

Holy Cross Hospital, Michael and Dianne Bienes Comprehensive Cancer Center, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.

Introduction: Individuals carrying pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in DNA double-strand break repair, DNA alterations that can be caused by exposure to reactive oxygen species, a main source of which are mitochondria. Mitochondrial genome variations affect electron transport chain efficiency and reactive oxygen species production. Individuals with different mitochondrial haplogroups differ in their metabolism and sensitivity to oxidative stress. Variability in mitochondrial genetic background can alter reactive oxygen species production, leading to cancer risk. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that mitochondrial haplogroups modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Methods: We genotyped 22,214 (11,421 affected, 10,793 unaffected) mutation carriers belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 for 129 mitochondrial polymorphisms using the iCOGS array. Haplogroup inference and association detection were performed using a phylogenetic approach. ALTree was applied to explore the reference mitochondrial evolutionary tree and detect subclades enriched in affected or unaffected individuals.

Results: We discovered that subclade T1a1 was depleted in affected BRCA2 mutation carriers compared with the rest of clade T (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.88; P = 0.01). Compared with the most frequent haplogroup in the general population (that is, H and T clades), the T1a1 haplogroup has a HR of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P = 0.03). We also identified three potential susceptibility loci, including G13708A/rs28359178, which has demonstrated an inverse association with familial breast cancer risk.

Conclusions: This study illustrates how original approaches such as the phylogeny-based method we used can empower classical molecular epidemiological studies aimed at identifying association or risk modification effects.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-015-0567-2DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4478717PMC
April 2015

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

JAMA 2015 Apr;313(13):1347-61

Department of Medicine and Genetics, University of California, San Francisco.

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.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.5985DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4537700PMC
April 2015
-->