Trinidad Caldés

Common Breast Cancer-Predisposition Alleles Are Associated with Breast Cancer Risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 confer high risks of breast cancer. However, evidence suggests that these risks are modified by other genetic or environmental factors that cluster in families. A recent genome-wide association study has shown that common alleles at single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in FGFR2 (rs2981582), TNRC9 (rs3803662), and MAP3K1 (rs889312) are associated with increased breast cancer risks in the general population. To investigate whether these loci are also associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we genotyped these SNPs in a sample of 10,358 mutation carriers from 23 studies. The minor alleles of SNP rs2981582 and rs889312 were each associated with increased breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.20-1.45, p(trend) = 1.7 x 10(-8) and HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.24, p(trend) = 0.02) but not in BRCA1 carriers. rs3803662 was associated with increased breast cancer risk in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (per-allele HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20, p(trend) = 5 x 10(-5) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 combined). These loci appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. The differences in the effects of the FGFR2 and MAP3K1 SNPs between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers point to differences in the biology of BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer tumors and confirm the distinct nature of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Importance The clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers requires accurate, prospective cancer risk estimates. Objectives To estimate age-specific risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for mutation carriers and to evaluate risk modification by family cancer history and mutation location. Design, Setting, and Participants Prospective cohort study of 6036 BRCA1 and 3820 BRCA2 female carriers (5046 unaffected and 4810 with breast or ovarian cancer or both at baseline) recruited in 1997-2011 through the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study, the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, with ascertainment through family clinics (94%) and population-based studies (6%). The majority were from large national studies in the United Kingdom (EMBRACE), the Netherlands (HEBON), and France (GENEPSO). Follow-up ended December 2013; median follow-up was 5 years. Exposures BRCA1/2 mutations, family cancer history, and mutation location. Main Outcomes and Measures Annual incidences, standardized incidence ratios, and cumulative risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer. Results Among 3886 women (median age, 38 years; interquartile range [IQR], 30-46 years) eligible for the breast cancer analysis, 5066 women (median age, 38 years; IQR, 31-47 years) eligible for the ovarian cancer analysis, and 2213 women (median age, 47 years; IQR, 40-55 years) eligible for the contralateral breast cancer analysis, 426 were diagnosed with breast cancer, 109 with ovarian cancer, and 245 with contralateral breast cancer during follow-up. The cumulative breast cancer risk to age 80 years was 72% (95% CI, 65%-79%) for BRCA1 and 69% (95% CI, 61%-77%) for BRCA2 carriers. Breast cancer incidences increased rapidly in early adulthood until ages 30 to 40 years for BRCA1 and until ages 40 to 50 years for BRCA2 carriers, then remained at a similar, constant incidence (20-30 per 1000 person-years) until age 80 years. The cumulative ovarian cancer risk to age 80 years was 44% (95% CI, 36%-53%) for BRCA1 and 17% (95% CI, 11%-25%) for BRCA2 carriers. For contralateral breast cancer, the cumulative risk 20 years after breast cancer diagnosis was 40% (95% CI, 35%-45%) for BRCA1 and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) for BRCA2 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] for comparing BRCA2 vs BRCA1, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P=.001 for difference). Breast cancer risk increased with increasing number of first- and second-degree relatives diagnosed as having breast cancer for both BRCA1 (HR for ≥2 vs 0 affected relatives, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.41-2.82; P<.001 for trend) and BRCA2 carriers (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.08-3.37; P=.02 for trend). Breast cancer risk was higher if mutations were located outside vs within the regions bounded by positions c.2282-c.4071 in BRCA1 (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.11-1.93; P=.007) and c.2831-c.6401 in BRCA2 (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.36-2.74; P<.001). Conclusions and Relevance These findings provide estimates of cancer risk based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status using prospective data collection and demonstrate the potential importance of family history and mutation location in risk assessment.

Reproductive and hormonal factors, and ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: Results from the International BRCA1/2 carrier cohort study

Background: Several reproductive and hormonal factors are known to be associated with ovarian cancer risk in the general population, including parity and oral contraceptive (OC) use. However, their effect on ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers has only been investigated in a small number of studies. Methods: We used data on 2,281 BRCA1 carriers and 1,038 BRCA2 carriers from the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study to evaluate the effect of reproductive and hormonal factors on ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers. Data were analyzed within a weighted Cox proportional hazards framework. Results: There were no significant differences in the risk of ovarian cancer between parous and nulliparous carriers. For parous BRCA1 mutation carriers, the risk of ovarian cancer was reduced with each additional full-term pregnancy (P trend = 0.002). BRCA1 carriers who had ever used OC were at a significantly reduced risk of developing ovarian cancer (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence intervals, 0.37-0.73; P = 0.0002) and increasing duration of OC use was associated with a reduced ovarian cancer risk (P trend = 0.0004). The protective effect of OC use for BRCA1 mutation carriers seemed to be greater among more recent users. Tubal ligation was associated with a reduced risk of ovarian cancer for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence intervals, 0.22-0.80; P = 0.008). The number of ovarian cancer cases in BRCA2 mutation carriers was too small to draw definitive conclusions. Conclusions: The results provide further confirmation that OC use, number of full-term pregnancies, and tubal ligation are associated with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers to a similar relative extent as in the general population. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(2):601–10)

Oral Contraceptives and Breast Cancer Risk in the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study: A Report From EMBRACE, GENEPSO, GEO-HEBON, and the IBCCS Collaborating Group

PURPOSE Earlier studies have shown that endogenous gonadal hormones play an important role in the etiology of breast cancer among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. So far, little is known about the safety of exogenous hormonal use in mutation carriers. In this study, we examined the association between oral contraceptive use and risk of breast cancer among BRCA1/2 carriers. PATIENTS AND METHODS In the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort study (IBCCS), a retrospective cohort of 1,593 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers was analyzed with a weighted Cox regression analysis. Results We found an increased risk of breast cancer for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who ever used oral contraceptives (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.87). HRs did not vary according to time since stopping use, age at start, or calendar year at start. However, a longer duration of use, especially before first full-term pregnancy, was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (4 or more years of use before first full-term pregnancy: HR = 1.49 [95% CI, 1.05 to 2.11] for BRCA1 carriers and HR = 2.58 [95% CI, 1.21 to 5.49] for BRCA2 carriers). CONCLUSION No evidence was found among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers that current use of oral contraceptives is associated with risk of breast cancer more strongly than is past use, as is found in the general population. However, duration of use, especially before first full-term pregnancy, may be associated with an increasing risk of breast cancer among both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Loss of heterozygosity analysis at the BRCA loci in tumor samples from patients with familial breast cancer

The BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are responsible for a high proportion of familial breast cancer; germline mutations in these genes confer a lifetime risk of about 70% for developing breast cancer. Most of the described deleterious mutations are small deletions or insertions that originate a truncated protein; however, in many cases, they are amino acid changes whose significance is unknown. In these cases, there are some tests that can analyze the meaning of these variants, but most remain unclassified. The BRCA genes are tumor supressors and it is beleived that complete loss of the wild‐type allele is a common mechanism of inactivation in tumors from patients carrying a germline deleterious mutation in these genes; if this is true, loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analysis in the tumor sample could help to distinguish if a rare variant is either a deleterious mutation or a common polymorphism. In the present study, we performed LOH analysis at the BRCA loci in 47 tumors from patients who belonged to high‐risk breast cancer families and were carriers of any type of alteration in these genes. Our results suggest that (i) loss of the wild‐type allele is the most common mechanism of inactivation in tumors from patients who carry a deleterious mutation in any of the genes, (ii) this loss is not common when we analyze familial tumors not associated with mutations in BRCA and (iii) LOH can be used to clarify variants of unknown significance in the BRCA genes.

Tamoxifen and Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

PURPOSE To determine whether adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer (BC) is associated with reduced contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers. METHODS Analysis of pooled observational cohort data, self-reported at enrollment and at follow-up from the International BRCA1, and BRCA2 Carrier Cohort Study, Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, and Breast Cancer Family Registry. Eligible women were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers diagnosed with unilateral BC since 1970 and no other invasive cancer or tamoxifen use before first BC. Hazard ratios (HRs) for CBC associated with tamoxifen use were estimated using Cox regression, adjusting for year and age of diagnosis, country, and bilateral oophorectomy and censoring at contralateral mastectomy, death, or loss to follow-up. RESULTS Of 1,583 BRCA1 and 881 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 383 (24%) and 454 (52%), respectively, took tamoxifen after first BC diagnosis. There were 520 CBCs over 20,104 person-years of observation. The adjusted HR estimates were 0.38 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.55) and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.50) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. After left truncating at recruitment to the cohort, adjusted HR estimates were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.13) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.22 to 1.05) based on 657 BRCA1 and 426 BRCA2 mutation carriers with 100 CBCs over 4,392 person-years of prospective follow-up. HRs did not differ by estrogen receptor status of the first BC (missing for 56% of cases). CONCLUSION This study provides evidence that tamoxifen use is associated with a reduction in CBC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further follow-up of these cohorts will provide increased statistical power for future prospective analyses.

The breast cancer low‐penetrance allele 1100delC in the CHEK2 gene is not present in Spanish familial breast cancer population

Searching for low‐penetrance genes involved in breast cancer susceptibility has been a field of interest in the last few years. Recently, the CHEK 2 gene, involved in DNA damage and replication checkpoints, has been pointed out as a good candidate; moreover, a specific variant in this gene,1100delC, has been found to increase breast cancer susceptibility among familial breast cancer cases not attributable to mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. In our present study, we evaluated the role of the 1100delC variant as a susceptibility allele in breast cancer in the Spanish population. However, our results suggest that this variant is absent or very infrequent in our population, making its screening irrelevant from the practical point of view.

Analysis of FANCB and FANCN/PALB2 Fanconi Anemia genes in BRCA1/2 -negative Spanish breast cancer families

Recent reports have shown that mutations in the FANCJ/BRIP1 and FANCN/PALB2 Fanconi Anemia (FA) genes confer a moderate breast cancer risk. Discussion has been raised on the phenotypic characteristics of the PALB2-associated families and tumors. The role of FANCB in breast cancer susceptibility has not been tested to date. Likewise PALB2 mutation frequency has not been studied in Spanish population. We analyzed the complete coding sequence and splicing sites of FANCB and PALB2 in 95 index cases of BRCA1/2-negative Spanish breast cancer families. We also performed an exhaustive screening of three previously described rare but recurrent PALB2 mutations in 725 additional probands. Pathogenic changes were not detected in FANCB. We found a novel PALB2 truncating mutation c.1056_1057delGA (p.K353IfsX7) in one of the 95 screened patients, accounting for a mutation frequency of 1% in our series. Further comprehensive screening of the novel mutation and of previously reported rare but recurrent PALB2 mutations did not reveal any carrier patient. We report the first example of LOH occurring in a PALB2-associated tumor. Our results rule out a major contribution of FANCB to hereditary breast cancer. Our data are consistent with the notion of individually rare PALB2 mutations, lack of mutational hot-spots in the gene and existence of between-population disease-allele heterogeneity. We show evidence that PALB2 loss of function might also conform to the inactivation model of a classic tumor-suppressor gene and present data that adds to the clinically relevant discussion about the existence of a PALB2-breast cancer phenotype.

TGFBR1*6A and Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 12 Case-Control Studies

REFERENCES 1. Fisch MJ, Loehrer PJ, Kristeller J, et al: Fluoxetine versus placebo in advanced cancer outpatients: A double-blinded trial of the Hoosier Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 21:1937-1943, 2003 2. Williams JW Jr, Noel PH, Cordes JA, et al: Is this patient clinically depressed? JAMA 287:1160-1170, 2002 3. Altman DG, Schultz KF, Moher D, et al: The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: Explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 134:663-694, 2001 4. Moher D, Schultz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 285:1987-1991, 2001 5. Stahl SM: Essential psychopharmacology: Neuroscientific basis and practical application. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp 236-239

Classification of BRCA1 missense variants of unknown clinical significance

Background:BRCA1 is a tumour suppressor with pleiotropic actions. Germline mutations in BRCA1 are responsible for a large proportion of breast–ovarian cancer families. Several missense variants have been identified throughout the gene but because of lack of information about their impact on the function of BRCA1, predictive testing is not always informative. Classification of missense variants into deleterious/high risk or neutral/low clinical significance is essential to identify individuals at risk. Objective: To investigate a panel of missense variants. Methods and results: The panel was investigated in a comprehensive framework that included (1) a functional assay based on transcription activation; (2) segregation analysis and a method of using incomplete pedigree data to calculate the odds of causality; (3) a method based on interspecific sequence variation. It was shown that the transcriptional activation assay could be used as a test to characterise mutations in the carboxy-terminus region of BRCA1 encompassing residues 1396–1863. Thirteen missense variants (H1402Y, L1407P, H1421Y, S1512I, M1628T, M1628V, T1685I, G1706A, T1720A, A1752P, G1788V, V1809F, and W1837R) were specifically investigated. Conclusions: While individual classification schemes for BRCA1 alleles still present limitations, a combination of several methods provides a more powerful way of identifying variants that are causally linked to a high risk of breast and ovarian cancer. The framework presented here brings these variants nearer to clinical applicability.