Publications by authors named "Johanna I Kiiski"

22 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

High miR-30 Expression Associates with Improved Breast Cancer Patient Survival and Treatment Outcome.

Cancers (Basel) 2021 Jun 10;13(12). Epub 2021 Jun 10.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, 00029 Helsinki, Finland.

Deregulated miRNA expression has been suggested in several stages of breast cancer pathogenesis. We have studied the miR-30 family, in particular miR-30d, in relation to breast cancer patient survival and treatment outcomes. With tumor specimens from 1238 breast cancer patients, we analyzed the association of miR-30d expression with tumor characteristics with the 5-year occurrence of breast cancer-specific death or distant metastasis (BDDM), and with 10-year breast cancer survival (BCS). We conducted a two-stage drug-screen to investigate the impact of miR-30 family members (miR-30a-30e) on sensitivity to doxorubicin and lapatinib in six breast cancer cell lines HCC1937, HCC1954, MDA-MB-361, MCF7, MDA-MB-436 and CAL-120, using drug sensitivity scores (DSS) to compare the miR-30 family mimics to their specific inhibitors. The study was complemented with Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) with the METABRIC data. We found that while high miR-30d expression is typical for aggressive tumors, it predicts better metastasis-free ( = 0.035, HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.4-0.9) and breast cancer-specific survival ( = 0.018, HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.4-0.9), especially in HER2-positive ( = 0.0009), ER-negative ( = 0.003), p53-positive ( = 0.011), and highly proliferating ( = 0.0004) subgroups, and after adjuvant chemotherapy ( = 0.035). MiR-30d predicted survival independently of standard prognostic markers ( = 0.0004). In the drug-screening test, the miR-30 family sensitized the HER2-positive HCC1954 cell line to lapatinib ( < 10) and HCC1937, MDA-MB-361, MDA-MB-436 and CAL120 to doxorubicin ( < 10) with an opposite impact on MCF7. According to the pathway analysis, the miR-30 family has a suppressive effect on cell motility and metastasis in breast cancer. Our results suggest prognostic and predictive potential for the miR-30 family, which warrants further investigation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13122907DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8230388PMC
June 2021

A case-only study to identify genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Nat Commun 2021 02 17;12(1):1078. Epub 2021 Feb 17.

Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.

Breast cancer (BC) risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers varies by genetic and familial factors. About 50 common variants have been shown to modify BC risk for mutation carriers. All but three, were identified in general population studies. Other mutation carrier-specific susceptibility variants may exist but studies of mutation carriers have so far been underpowered. We conduct a novel case-only genome-wide association study comparing genotype frequencies between 60,212 general population BC cases and 13,007 cases with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We identify robust novel associations for 2 variants with BC for BRCA1 and 3 for BRCA2 mutation carriers, P < 10, at 5 loci, which are not associated with risk in the general population. They include rs60882887 at 11p11.2 where MADD, SP11 and EIF1, genes previously implicated in BC biology, are predicted as potential targets. These findings will contribute towards customising BC polygenic risk scores for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20496-3DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7890067PMC
February 2021

Transcriptome-wide association study of breast cancer risk by estrogen-receptor status.

Genet Epidemiol 2020 07 1;44(5):442-468. Epub 2020 Mar 1.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.

Previous transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype-specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta-analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER-). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER- subtypes, using a case-only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER- breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS-significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast-cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS-significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER- breast cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gepi.22288DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987299PMC
July 2020

The Spectrum of Protein Truncating Variants in European Breast Cancer Cases.

Cancers (Basel) 2020 01 26;12(2). Epub 2020 Jan 26.

Institute of Biochemistry and Experimental Oncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague 12853, Czech Republic.

Germline protein truncating variants (PTVs) in the gene have been associated with a 2-4-fold increased breast cancer risk in case-control studies conducted in different European populations. However, the distribution and the frequency of PTVs in Europe have never been investigated. In the present study, we collected the data of 114 European female breast cancer cases with PTVs ascertained in 20 centers from 13 European countries. We identified 27 different PTVs. The p.Gln1701* PTV is the most common PTV in Northern Europe with a maximum frequency in Finland and a lower relative frequency in Southern Europe. On the contrary, p.Arg1931* seems to be the most common PTV in Southern Europe. We also showed that p.Arg658*, the third most common PTV, is more frequent in Central Europe, and p.Gln498Thrfs*7 is probably a founder variant from Lithuania. Of the 23 rare or unique PTVs, 15 have not been previously reported. We provide here the initial spectrum of PTVs in European breast cancer cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers12020292DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7073216PMC
January 2020

Fine-mapping of 150 breast cancer risk regions identifies 191 likely target genes.

Nat Genet 2020 01 7;52(1):56-73. Epub 2020 Jan 7.

Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Genome-wide association studies have identified breast cancer risk variants in over 150 genomic regions, but the mechanisms underlying risk remain largely unknown. These regions were explored by combining association analysis with in silico genomic feature annotations. We defined 205 independent risk-associated signals with the set of credible causal variants in each one. In parallel, we used a Bayesian approach (PAINTOR) that combines genetic association, linkage disequilibrium and enriched genomic features to determine variants with high posterior probabilities of being causal. Potentially causal variants were significantly over-represented in active gene regulatory regions and transcription factor binding sites. We applied our INQUSIT pipeline for prioritizing genes as targets of those potentially causal variants, using gene expression (expression quantitative trait loci), chromatin interaction and functional annotations. Known cancer drivers, transcription factors and genes in the developmental, apoptosis, immune system and DNA integrity checkpoint gene ontology pathways were over-represented among the highest-confidence target genes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0537-1DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6974400PMC
January 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

The :p.Arg658* truncating variant is associated with risk of triple-negative breast cancer.

NPJ Breast Cancer 2019 1;5:38. Epub 2019 Nov 1.

25University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Houston, TX USA.

Breast cancer is a common disease partially caused by genetic risk factors. Germline pathogenic variants in DNA repair genes , , , , and are associated with breast cancer risk. , which encodes for a DNA translocase, has been proposed as a breast cancer predisposition gene, with greater effects for the ER-negative and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. We tested the three recurrent protein-truncating variants :p.Arg658*, p.Gln1701*, and p.Arg1931* for association with breast cancer risk in 67,112 cases, 53,766 controls, and 26,662 carriers of pathogenic variants of or . These three variants were also studied functionally by measuring survival and chromosome fragility in patient-derived immortalized fibroblasts treated with diepoxybutane or olaparib. We observed that :p.Arg658* was associated with increased risk of ER-negative disease and TNBC (OR = 2.44,  = 0.034 and OR = 3.79;  = 0.009, respectively). In a country-restricted analysis, we confirmed the associations detected for :p.Arg658* and found that also :p.Arg1931* was associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk (OR = 1.96;  = 0.006). The functional results indicated that all three variants were deleterious affecting cell survival and chromosome stability with :p.Arg658* causing more severe phenotypes. In conclusion, we confirmed that the two rare deleterious variants p.Arg658* and p.Arg1931* are risk factors for ER-negative and TNBC subtypes. Overall our data suggest that the effect of truncating variants on breast cancer risk may depend on their position in the gene. Cell sensitivity to olaparib exposure, identifies a possible therapeutic option to treat -associated tumors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41523-019-0127-5DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6825205PMC
November 2019

Genome-wide association and transcriptome studies identify target genes and risk loci for breast cancer.

Nat Commun 2019 04 15;10(1):1741. Epub 2019 Apr 15.

Molecular Oncology Laboratory, CIBERONC, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, IdISSC (Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos), 28040, Madrid, Spain.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 170 breast cancer susceptibility loci. Here we hypothesize that some risk-associated variants might act in non-breast tissues, specifically adipose tissue and immune cells from blood and spleen. Using expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) reported in these tissues, we identify 26 previously unreported, likely target genes of overall breast cancer risk variants, and 17 for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, several with a known immune function. We determine the directional effect of gene expression on disease risk measured based on single and multiple eQTL. In addition, using a gene-based test of association that considers eQTL from multiple tissues, we identify seven (and four) regions with variants associated with overall (and ER-negative) breast cancer risk, which were not reported in previous GWAS. Further investigation of the function of the implicated genes in breast and immune cells may provide insights into the etiology of breast cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-08053-5DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6465407PMC
April 2019

Recurrent moderate-risk mutations in Finnish breast and ovarian cancer patients.

Int J Cancer 2019 11 25;145(10):2692-2700. Epub 2019 Apr 25.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes predispose to breast and ovarian cancer (BC/OC) with a high lifetime risk, whereas mutations in PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, FANCM, RAD51C and RAD51D genes cause a moderately elevated risk. In the Finnish population, recurrent mutations have been identified in all of these genes, the latest being CHEK2 c.319+2T>A and c.444+1G>A. By genotyping 3,156 cases and 2,089 controls, we estimated the frequencies of CHEK2 c.319+2T>A and c.444+1G>A in Finnish BC patients. CHEK2 c.319+2T>A was detected in 0.7% of the patients, and it was associated with a high risk of BC in the unselected patient group (OR = 5.40 [95% CI 1.58-18.45], p = 0.007) and similarly in the familial patient group. CHEK2 c.444+1G>A was identified in 0.1% of all patients. Additionally, we evaluated the combined prevalence of recurrent moderate-risk gene mutations in 2,487 BC patients, 556 OC patients and 261 BRCA1/2 carriers from 109 families. The overall frequency of the mutations was 13.3% in 1,141 BRCA1/2-negative familial BC patients, 7.5% in 1,727 unselected BC patients and 7.2% in 556 unselected OC patients. At least one moderate-risk gene mutation was found in 12.5% of BRCA1 families and 7.1% of BRCA1 index patients, as well as in 17.0% of BRCA2 families and 11.3% of BRCA2 index patients, and the mutations were associated with an additional risk in the BRCA1/2 index patients (OR = 2.63 [1.15-5.48], p = 0.011). These results support gene panel testing of even multiple members of BC families where several mutations may segregate in different individuals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.32309DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6767104PMC
November 2019

Genome-wide association study of germline variants and breast cancer-specific mortality.

Br J Cancer 2019 03 21;120(6):647-657. Epub 2019 Feb 21.

Lund University, Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund, Sweden.

Background: We examined the associations between germline variants and breast cancer mortality using a large meta-analysis of women of European ancestry.

Methods: Meta-analyses included summary estimates based on Cox models of twelve datasets using ~10.4 million variants for 96,661 women with breast cancer and 7697 events (breast cancer-specific deaths). Oestrogen receptor (ER)-specific analyses were based on 64,171 ER-positive (4116) and 16,172 ER-negative (2125) patients. We evaluated the probability of a signal to be a true positive using the Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP).

Results: We did not find any variant associated with breast cancer-specific mortality at P < 5 × 10. For ER-positive disease, the most significantly associated variant was chr7:rs4717568 (BFDP = 7%, P = 1.28 × 10, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.84-0.92); the closest gene is AUTS2. For ER-negative disease, the most significant variant was chr7:rs67918676 (BFDP = 11%, P = 1.38 × 10, HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.16-1.39); located within a long intergenic non-coding RNA gene (AC004009.3), close to the HOXA gene cluster.

Conclusions: We uncovered germline variants on chromosome 7 at BFDP < 15% close to genes for which there is biological evidence related to breast cancer outcome. However, the paucity of variants associated with mortality at genome-wide significance underpins the challenge in providing genetic-based individualised prognostic information for breast cancer patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-019-0393-xDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461853PMC
March 2019

Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes.

Am J Hum Genet 2019 01 13;104(1):21-34. Epub 2018 Dec 13.

Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00290, Finland; Department of Oncology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro 70185, Sweden.

Stratification of women according to their risk of breast cancer based on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could improve screening and prevention strategies. Our aim was to develop PRSs, optimized for prediction of estrogen receptor (ER)-specific disease, from the largest available genome-wide association dataset and to empirically validate the PRSs in prospective studies. The development dataset comprised 94,075 case subjects and 75,017 control subjects of European ancestry from 69 studies, divided into training and validation sets. Samples were genotyped using genome-wide arrays, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected by stepwise regression or lasso penalized regression. The best performing PRSs were validated in an independent test set comprising 11,428 case subjects and 18,323 control subjects from 10 prospective studies and 190,040 women from UK Biobank (3,215 incident breast cancers). For the best PRSs (313 SNPs), the odds ratio for overall disease per 1 standard deviation in ten prospective studies was 1.61 (95%CI: 1.57-1.65) with area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) = 0.630 (95%CI: 0.628-0.651). The lifetime risk of overall breast cancer in the top centile of the PRSs was 32.6%. Compared with women in the middle quintile, those in the highest 1% of risk had 4.37- and 2.78-fold risks, and those in the lowest 1% of risk had 0.16- and 0.27-fold risks, of developing ER-positive and ER-negative disease, respectively. Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that this PRS was well calibrated and predicts disease risk accurately in the tails of the distribution. This PRS is a powerful and reliable predictor of breast cancer risk that may improve breast cancer prevention programs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.002DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6323553PMC
January 2019

Association analysis identifies 65 new breast cancer risk loci.

Nature 2017 11 23;551(7678):92-94. Epub 2017 Oct 23.

Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Breast cancer risk is influenced by rare coding variants in susceptibility genes, such as BRCA1, and many common, mostly non-coding variants. However, much of the genetic contribution to breast cancer risk remains unknown. Here we report the results of a genome-wide association study of breast cancer in 122,977 cases and 105,974 controls of European ancestry and 14,068 cases and 13,104 controls of East Asian ancestry. We identified 65 new loci that are associated with overall breast cancer risk at P < 5 × 10. The majority of credible risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms in these loci fall in distal regulatory elements, and by integrating in silico data to predict target genes in breast cells at each locus, we demonstrate a strong overlap between candidate target genes and somatic driver genes in breast tumours. We also find that heritability of breast cancer due to all single-nucleotide polymorphisms in regulatory features was 2-5-fold enriched relative to the genome-wide average, with strong enrichment for particular transcription factor binding sites. These results provide further insight into genetic susceptibility to breast cancer and will improve the use of genetic risk scores for individualized screening and prevention.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature24284DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5798588PMC
November 2017

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

FANCM mutation c.5791C>T is a risk factor for triple-negative breast cancer in the Finnish population.

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017 Nov 12;166(1):217-226. Epub 2017 Jul 12.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Central Hospital (HUS), PO Box 700, 00029, Helsinki, Finland.

Purpose: The FANCM c.5101C>T nonsense mutation was previously found to associate with breast cancer in the Finnish population, especially among triple-negative cases. Here, we studied the prevalence of three other FANCM variants: c.5791C>T, which has been reported to predispose to familial breast cancer, and the c.4025_4026delCT and c.5293dupA variants recently identified in Finnish cancer patients.

Methods: We genotyped the FANCM c.5791C>T mutation in 4806 invasive breast cancer patients, including BRCA1/2 mutation negative familial cases and unselected cases, and in 2734 healthy population controls from four different geographical areas of Finland. The association of the mutation with breast cancer risk among patient subgroups was statistically evaluated. We further analyzed the combined risk associated with c.5101C>T and c.5791C>T mutations. We also genotyped 526 unselected ovarian cancer patients for the c.5791C>T mutation and 862 familial breast cancer patients for the c.4025_4026delCT and c.5293dupA variants.

Results: The frequency of the FANCM c.5791C>T mutation was higher among breast cancer cases than in controls (OR 1.94, 95% CI 0.87-4.32, P = 0.11), with a statistically significant association with triple-negative breast cancer (OR 5.14, 95% CI 1.65-16.0, P = 0.005). The combined analysis for c.5101C>T and c.5791C>T carriers confirmed a strong association with breast cancer (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.32-2.49, P = 0.0002), especially among the triple-negative patients (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.77-5.35, P = 0.00007). For the other variants, only one additional c.4025_4026delCT carrier and no c.5293dupA carriers were observed.

Conclusions: These results support the role of FANCM as a breast cancer susceptibility gene, particularly for triple-negative breast cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4388-0DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5645429PMC
November 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

FANCM c.5101C>T mutation associates with breast cancer survival and treatment outcome.

Int J Cancer 2016 Dec 19;139(12):2760-2770. Epub 2016 Sep 19.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

Breast cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease, and different tumor characteristics and genetic variation may affect the clinical outcome. The FANCM c.5101C > T nonsense mutation in the Finnish population associates with increased risk of breast cancer, especially for triple-negative breast cancer patients. To investigate the association of the mutation with disease prognosis, we studied tumor phenotype, treatment outcome, and patient survival in 3,933 invasive breast cancer patients, including 101 FANCM c.5101C > T mutation carriers and 3,832 non-carriers. We also examined association of the mutation with nuclear immunohistochemical staining of DNA repair markers in 1,240 breast tumors. The FANCM c.5101C > T mutation associated with poor 10-year breast cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio (HR)=1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-2.52, p = 0.018), with a more pronounced survival effect among familial cases (HR = 2.93, 95% CI 1.5-5.76, p = 1.80 × 10 ). Poor disease outcome of the carriers was also found among the estrogen receptor (ER) positive subgroup of patients (HR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.09-2.98, p = 0.021). Reduced survival was seen especially among patients who had not received radiotherapy (HR = 3.43, 95% CI 1.6-7.34, p = 1.50 × 10 ) but not among radiotherapy treated patients (HR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.82-2.23, p = 0.237). Significant interaction was found between the mutation and radiotherapy (p = 0.040). Immunohistochemical analyses show that c.5101C > T carriers have reduced PAR-activity. Our results suggest that FANCM c.5101C > T nonsense mutation carriers have a reduced breast cancer survival but postoperative radiotherapy may diminish this survival disadvantage.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30394DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5095781PMC
December 2016

RAD51B in Familial Breast Cancer.

PLoS One 2016 5;11(5):e0153788. Epub 2016 May 5.

Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Common variation on 14q24.1, close to RAD51B, has been associated with breast cancer: rs999737 and rs2588809 with the risk of female breast cancer and rs1314913 with the risk of male breast cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of RAD51B variants in breast cancer predisposition, particularly in the context of familial breast cancer in Finland. We sequenced the coding region of RAD51B in 168 Finnish breast cancer patients from the Helsinki region for identification of possible recurrent founder mutations. In addition, we studied the known rs999737, rs2588809, and rs1314913 SNPs and RAD51B haplotypes in 44,791 breast cancer cases and 43,583 controls from 40 studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) that were genotyped on a custom chip (iCOGS). We identified one putatively pathogenic missense mutation c.541C>T among the Finnish cancer patients and subsequently genotyped the mutation in additional breast cancer cases (n = 5259) and population controls (n = 3586) from Finland and Belarus. No significant association with breast cancer risk was seen in the meta-analysis of the Finnish datasets or in the large BCAC dataset. The association with previously identified risk variants rs999737, rs2588809, and rs1314913 was replicated among all breast cancer cases and also among familial cases in the BCAC dataset. The most significant association was observed for the haplotype carrying the risk-alleles of all the three SNPs both among all cases (odds ratio (OR): 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.19, P = 8.88 x 10-16) and among familial cases (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.16-1.32, P = 6.19 x 10-11), compared to the haplotype with the respective protective alleles. Our results suggest that loss-of-function mutations in RAD51B are rare, but common variation at the RAD51B region is significantly associated with familial breast cancer risk.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153788PLOS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4858276PMC
July 2017

Screening of HELQ in breast and ovarian cancer families.

Fam Cancer 2016 Jan;15(1):19-23

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Biomedicum Helsinki, P.O. Box 700, 00029, Helsinki, Finland.

Several high and moderate risk alleles have been identified for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition and most of them encode proteins that function in DNA repair. A prospective candidate for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility is the HELQ helicase that has a role in the resolution of DNA interstrand cross-links. HELQ interacts with the RAD51 paralog complex BCDX2. Two components of the complex, RAD51C and RAD51D, increase the risk of ovarian cancer especially, and the other two, RAD51B and XRCC2 have been associated with breast cancer risk. To investigate the role of HELQ in cancer predisposition, we screened the gene for germline variation in 185 Finnish breast or ovarian cancer families and performed haplotype analyses for 1517 breast cancer cases, 308 ovarian cancer cases, and 1234 population controls using five common polymorphisms at the HELQ gene locus. No truncating mutations were identified among the families. One putatively pathogenic missense mutation c.1309A>G was identified but no additional carriers were observed in the subsequent genotyping of 332 familial breast or ovarian cancer patients. Furthermore, the haplotype distribution did not differ between breast or ovarian cancer cases and population controls. Our results indicate that HELQ is not a major breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene in the Finnish population. However, we cannot rule out rare risk-variants in the Finnish or other populations and larger datasets are needed to further assess the role of HELQ especially in ovarian cancer predisposition.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10689-015-9838-4DOI Listing
January 2016

RAD51, XRCC3, and XRCC2 mutation screening in Finnish breast cancer families.

Springerplus 2015 24;4:92. Epub 2015 Feb 24.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Biomedicum Helsinki, P.O. Box 700, FIN-00029 Helsinki, Finland.

Majority of the known breast cancer susceptibility genes have a role in DNA repair and the most important high-risk genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are specifically involved in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) of DNA double-strand breaks. A central player in HRR is RAD51 that binds DNA at the damage site. The RAD51 paralogs RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, XRCC2, and XRCC3 facilitate the binding of RAD51 to DNA. While germline mutations in RAD51C and RAD51D are associated with high ovarian cancer risk and RAD51B polymorphisms with breast cancer, the contribution of RAD51, XRCC3, and XRCC2 is more unclear. To investigate the role of RAD51, XRCC3, and XRCC2 in breast cancer predisposition and to identify putative recurrent founder mutations in the Finnish population where such mutations have been observed in most of the currently known susceptibility genes, we screened 182 familial Finnish breast or ovarian cancer patients for germline variation in the RAD51and XRCC3 genes and 342 patients for variation in XRCC2, with a subset of the patients selected on the basis of decreased RAD51 protein expression on tumors. We also performed haplotype analyses for 1516 breast cancer cases and 1234 controls to assess the common variation in these genes. No pathogenic mutations were detected in any of the genes and the distribution of haplotypes was similar between cases and controls. Our results suggest that RAD51, XRCC3, and XRCC2 do not substantially contribute to breast cancer predisposition in the Finnish population.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0880-3DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4404470PMC
April 2015

Exome sequencing identifies FANCM as a susceptibility gene for triple-negative breast cancer.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 Oct 6;111(42):15172-7. Epub 2014 Oct 6.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Biomedicum Helsinki, FIN-00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland;

Inherited predisposition to breast cancer is known to be caused by loss-of-function mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, and other genes involved in DNA repair. However, most families severely affected by breast cancer do not harbor mutations in any of these genes. In Finland, founder mutations have been observed in each of these genes, suggesting that the Finnish population may be an excellent resource for the identification of other such genes. To this end, we carried out exome sequencing of constitutional genomic DNA from 24 breast cancer patients from 11 Finnish breast cancer families. From all rare damaging variants, 22 variants in 21 DNA repair genes were genotyped in 3,166 breast cancer patients, 569 ovarian cancer patients, and 2,090 controls, all from the Helsinki or Tampere regions of Finland. In Fanconi anemia complementation gene M (FANCM), nonsense mutation c.5101C>T (p.Q1701X) was significantly more frequent among breast cancer patients than among controls [odds ratio (OR) = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.26-2.75; P = 0.0018], with particular enrichment among patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC; OR = 3.56, 95% CI = 1.81-6.98, P = 0.0002). In the Helsinki and Tampere regions, respectively, carrier frequencies of FANCM p.Q1701X were 2.9% and 4.0% of breast cancer patients, 5.6% and 6.6% of TNBC patients, 2.2% of ovarian cancer patients (from Helsinki), and 1.4% and 2.5% of controls. These findings identify FANCM as a breast cancer susceptibility gene, mutations in which confer a particularly strong predisposition for TNBC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407909111DOI Listing
October 2014
-->