Histopathological features of breast tumours in BRCA1, BRCA2 and mutation-negative breast cancer families

INTRODUCTION: Histopathological features of BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumours have previously been characterised and compared with unselected breast tumours; however, familial non-BRCA1/2 tumours are less well known. The aim of this study was to characterise familial non-BRCA1/2 tumours and to evaluate routine immunohistochemical and pathological markers that could help us to further distinguish families carrying BRCA1/2 mutations from other breast cancer families. METHODS: Breast cancer tissue specimens (n = 262) from 25 BRCA1, 20 BRCA2 and 74 non-BRCA1/2 families were studied on a tumour tissue microarray. Immunohistochemical staining of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and p53 as well as the histology and grade of these three groups were compared with each other and with the respective information on 862 unselected control patients from the archives of the Pathology Department of Helsinki University Central Hospital. Immunohistochemical staining of erbB2 was also performed among familial cases. RESULTS: BRCA1-associated cancers were diagnosed younger and were more ER-negative and PgR-negative, p53-positive and of higher grade than the other tumours. However, in multivariate analysis the independent factors compared with non-BRCA1/2 tumours were age, grade and PgR negativity. BRCA2 cases did not have such distinctive features compared with non-BRCA1/2 tumours or with unselected control tumours. Familial cases without BRCA1/2 mutations had tumours of lower grade than the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: BRCA1 families differed from mutation-negative families by age, grade and PgR status, whereas ER status was not an independent marker

Comprehensive analysis of NuMA variation in breast cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A recent genome wide case-control association study identified <it>NuMA </it>region on 11q13 as a candidate locus for breast cancer susceptibility. Specifically, the variant Ala794Gly was suggested to be associated with increased risk of breast cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In order to evaluate the <it>NuMa </it>gene for breast cancer susceptibility, we have here screened the entire coding region and exon-intron boundaries of <it>NuMa </it>in 92 familial breast cancer patients and constructed haplotypes of the identified variants. Five missense variants were further screened in 341 breast cancer cases with a positive family history and 368 controls. We examined the frequency of Ala794Gly in an extensive series of familial (n = 910) and unselected (n = 884) breast cancer cases and controls (n = 906), with a high power to detect the suggested breast cancer risk. We also tested if the variant is associated with histopathologic features of breast tumors.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Screening of <it>NuMA </it>resulted in identification of 11 exonic variants and 12 variants in introns or untranslated regions. Five missense variants that were further screened in breast cancer cases with a positive family history and controls, were each carried on a unique haplotype. None of the variants, or the haplotypes represented by them, was associated with breast cancer risk although due to low power in this analysis, very low risk alleles may go unrecognized. The <it>NuMA </it>Ala794Gly showed no difference in frequency in the unselected breast cancer case series or familial case series compared to control cases. Furthermore, Ala794Gly did not show any significant association with histopathologic characteristics of the tumors, though Ala794Gly was slightly more frequent among unselected cases with lymph node involvement.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results do not support the role of <it>NuMA </it>variants as breast cancer susceptibility alleles.</p

BACH1 Ser919Pro variant and breast cancer risk

BACKGROUND: BACH1 (BRCA1-associated C-terminal helicase 1; also known as BRCA1-interacting protein 1, BRIP1) is a helicase protein that interacts in vivo with BRCA1, the protein product of one of the major genes for hereditary predisposition to breast cancer. Previously, two BACH1 germ line missense mutations have been identified in early-onset breast cancer patients with and without family history of breast and ovarian cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether there are BACH1 genetic variants that contribute to breast cancer risk in Finland. METHODS: The BACH1 gene was screened for germ line alterations among probands from 43 Finnish BRCA1/2 negative breast cancer families. Recently, one of the observed common variants, Ser-allele of the Ser919Pro polymorphism, was suggested to associate with an increased breast cancer risk, and was here evaluated in an independent, large series of 888 unselected breast cancer patients and in 736 healthy controls. RESULTS: Six BACH1 germ line alterations were observed in the mutation analysis, but none of these were found to associate with the cancer phenotype. The Val193Ile variant that was seen in only one family was further screened in an independent series of 346 familial breast cancer cases and 183 healthy controls, but no additional carriers were observed. Individuals with the BACH1 Ser919-allele were not found to have an increased breast cancer risk when the Pro/Ser heterozygotes (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.70–1.16; p = 0.427) or Ser/Ser homozygotes (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.76–1.35; p = 0.91) were compared to Pro/Pro homozygotes, and there was no association of the variant with any breast tumor characteristics, age at cancer diagnosis, family history of cancer, or survival. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the BACH1 Ser919 is not a breast cancer predisposition allele in the Finnish study population. Together with previous studies, our results also indicate that although some rare germ line variants in BACH1 may contribute to breast cancer development, the contribution of BACH1 germline alterations to familial breast cancer seems marginal

ATM variants and cancer risk in breast cancer patients from Southern Finland

BACKGROUND: Individuals heterozygous for germline ATM mutations have been reported to have an increased risk for breast cancer but the role for ATM genetic variants for breast cancer risk has remained unclear. Recently, a common ATM variant, ATMivs38 -8T>C in cis with the ATMex39 5557G>A (D1853N) variant, was suggested to associate with bilateral breast cancer among familial breast cancer patients from Northern Finland. We have here evaluated the 5557G>A and ivs38-8T>C variants in an extensive case-control association analysis. We also aimed to investigate whether there are other ATM mutations or variants contributing to breast cancer risk in our population. METHODS: Two common ATM variants, 5557G>A and ivs38-8T>C, previously suggested to associate with bilateral breast cancer, were genotyped in an extensive set of 786 familial and 884 unselected breast cancer cases as well as 708 healthy controls. We also screened the entire coding region and exon-intron boundaries of the ATM gene in 47 familial breast cancer patients and constructed haplotypes of the patients. The identified variants were also evaluated for increased breast cancer risk among additional breast cancer cases and controls. RESULTS: Neither of the two common variants, 5557G>A and ivs38-8T>C, nor any haplotype containing them, was significantly associated with breast cancer risk, bilateral breast cancer or multiple primary cancers in any of the patient groups or subgoups. Three rare missense alterations and one intronic change were each found in only one patient of over 250 familial patients studied and not among controls. The fourth missense alteration studied further was found with closely similar frequencies in over 600 familial cases and controls. CONCLUSION: Altogether, our results suggest very minor effect, if any, of ATM genetic variants on familial breast cancer in Southern Finland. Our results do not support association of the 5557G>A or ivs38-8T>C variant with increased breast cancer risk or with bilateral breast cancer

A CHEK2 Genetic Variant Contributing to a Substantial Fraction of Familial Breast Cancer

CHEK2 (previously known as “CHK2”) is a cell-cycle–checkpoint kinase that phosphorylates p53 and BRCA1 in response to DNA damage. A protein-truncating mutation, 1100delC in exon 10, which abolishes the kinase function of CHEK2, has been found in families with Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) and in those with a cancer phenotype that is suggestive of LFS, including breast cancer. In the present study, we found that the frequency of 1100delC was 2.0% among an unselected population-based cohort of 1,035 patients with breast cancer. This was slightly, but not significantly (P=.182), higher than the 1.4% frequency found among 1,885 population control subjects. However, a significantly elevated frequency was found among those 358 patients with a positive family history (11/358 [3.1%]; odds ratio [OR] 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–4.63; P=.021, compared with population controls). Furthermore, patients with bilateral breast cancer were sixfold more likely to be 1100delC carriers than were patients with unilateral cancer (95% CI 1.87–20.32; P=.007). Analysis of the 1100delC variant in an independent set of 507 patients with familial breast cancer with no BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations confirmed a significantly elevated frequency of 1100delC (28/507 [5.5%]; OR 4.2; 95% CI 2.4–7.2; P=.0002), compared with controls, with a high frequency also seen in patients with only a single affected first-degree relative (18/291 [6.2%]). Finally, tissue microarray analysis indicated that breast tumors from patients with 1100delC mutations show reduced CHEK2 immunostaining. The results suggest that CHEK2 acts as a low-penetrance tumor-suppressor gene in breast cancer and that it makes a significant contribution to familial clustering of breast cancer—including families with only two affected relatives, which are more common than families that include larger numbers of affected women

Evaluation of RAD50 in familial breast cancer predisposition

The genes predisposing to familial breast cancer are largely unknown, but 5 of the 6 known genes are involved in DNA damage repair. RAD50 is part of a highly conserved complex important in recognising, signalling and repairing DNA double-strand breaks. Recently, a truncating mutation in the RAD50 gene, 687delT, was identified in 2 Finnish breast cancer families. To evaluate the contribution of RAD50 to familial breast cancer, we screened the whole coding region for mutations in 435 UK and 46 Finnish familial breast cancer cases. We identified one truncating mutation, Q350X, in one UK family. We screened a further 544 Finnish familial breast cancer cases and 560 controls for the 687delT mutation, which was present in 3 cases (0.5%) and 1 control (0.2%). Neither Q350X nor 687delT segregated with cancer in the families in which they were identified. Functional analyses suggested that RAD50 687delT is a null allele as there was no detectable expression of the mutant protein. However, the wild-type allele was retained and expressed in breast tumors from mutation carriers. The abundance of the full-length RAD50 protein was reduced in carrier lymphoblastoid cells, suggesting a possible haploinsufficiency mechanism. These data indicate that RAD50 mutations are rare in familial breast cancer and either carry no, or a very small, increased risk of cancer. Altogether, these results suggest RAD50 can only be making a very minor contribution to familial breast cancer predisposition in UK and Finland