Effect of a health education intervention on intestinal parasitic infections in Bolivian children

Abstract Backgrounds Intestinal parasitic infections (IPI) are a major health issue for children of low- and middle-income countries. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices are crucial for preventing IPI. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of a school-based health education intervention on handwashing behavior and IPI prevalence in children Methods This is a randomized intervention trial in 8 primary schools in rural communities over the course of 3 school years; preliminary results from the first two years of the trial are here presented. Schools were randomly selected and assigned in a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control (no intervention) groups. For each school year, the intervention included 14 school-based educational sessions and 2 skit events, involving children aged 8-12 years. Knowledge, attitude and practice questionnaire and handwashing at key events was assessed at the beginning and end of each school year. IPI prevalence was assessed with repeated cross-sectional parasitology surveys 12 months apart, involving a minimum of 50 children for each school Results At baseline, no significant differences between intervention and control schools were present in the proportion of children who washed their hands at key events (7.2% vs 9.3%, p = 0.28), in IPI (79.4% vs 75.3%, p = 0.3) and multiple parasitic infections (MPI) prevalences (47.6 vs. 38.6; p = 0.051). At the end of the second year, the percentage of children who washed their hands at key events was significantly higher in the intervention schools (75.4% vs 12.1%, p < 0.001), and the prevalence of IPI and MPI in the intervention schools were respectively about 25% and 15% lower than in the control schools (respectively, 42.9% vs 67.8%, p < 0.001; 16.1% vs 31.6%, p < 0.001) Conclusions A school-based health education intervention could achieve significant changes in hand-washing behaviors and reduction in the prevalence of IPI in children. The third year survey results are needed to confirm these findings Key messages An health education intervention on water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices can reduce the risk of IPI infection in children. An health education intervention on water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices could be configured as a sustainable long-term approach to intestinal parasitic infections control in children

Evaluation of a candidate breast cancer associated SNP in ERCC4 as a risk modifier in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/BRCA2 (CIMBA)

Background: In this study we aimed to evaluate the role of a SNP in intron 1 of the ERCC4 gene (rs744154), previously reported to be associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer in the general population, as a breast cancer risk modifier in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Methods: We have genotyped rs744154 in 9408 BRCA1 and 5632 BRCA2 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and assessed its association with breast cancer risk using a retrospective weighted cohort approach. Results: We found no evidence of association with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 (per-allele HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93–1.04, P=0.5) or BRCA2 (per-allele HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.89–1.06, P=0.5) mutation carriers. Conclusion: This SNP is not a significant modifier of breast cancer risk for mutation carriers, though weak associations cannot be ruled out. A Osorio1, R L Milne2, G Pita3, P Peterlongo4,5, T Heikkinen6, J Simard7, G Chenevix-Trench8, A B Spurdle8, J Beesley8, X Chen8, S Healey8, KConFab9, S L Neuhausen10, Y C Ding10, F J Couch11,12, X Wang11, N Lindor13, S Manoukian4, M Barile14, A Viel15, L Tizzoni5,16, C I Szabo17, L Foretova18, M Zikan19, K Claes20, M H Greene21, P Mai21, G Rennert22, F Lejbkowicz22, O Barnett-Griness22, I L Andrulis23,24, H Ozcelik24, N Weerasooriya23, OCGN23, A-M Gerdes25, M Thomassen25, D G Cruger26, M A Caligo27, E Friedman28,29, B Kaufman28,29, Y Laitman28, S Cohen28, T Kontorovich28, R Gershoni-Baruch30, E Dagan31,32, H Jernström33, M S Askmalm34, B Arver35, B Malmer36, SWE-BRCA37, S M Domchek38, K L Nathanson38, J Brunet39, T Ramón y Cajal40, D Yannoukakos41, U Hamann42, HEBON37, F B L Hogervorst43, S Verhoef43, EB Gómez García44,45, J T Wijnen46,47, A van den Ouweland48, EMBRACE37, D F Easton49, S Peock49, M Cook49, C T Oliver49, D Frost49, C Luccarini50, D G Evans51, F Lalloo51, R Eeles52, G Pichert53, J Cook54, S Hodgson55, P J Morrison56, F Douglas57, A K Godwin58, GEMO59,60,61, O M Sinilnikova59,60, L Barjhoux59,60, D Stoppa-Lyonnet61, V Moncoutier61, S Giraud59, C Cassini62,63, L Olivier-Faivre62,63, F Révillion64, J-P Peyrat64, D Muller65, J-P Fricker65, H T Lynch66, E M John67, S Buys68, M Daly69, J L Hopper70, M B Terry71, A Miron72, Y Yassin72, D Goldgar73, Breast Cancer Family Registry37, C F Singer74, D Gschwantler-Kaulich74, G Pfeiler74, A-C Spiess74, Thomas v O Hansen75, O T Johannsson76, T Kirchhoff77, K Offit77, K Kosarin77, M Piedmonte78, G C Rodriguez79, K Wakeley80, J F Boggess81, J Basil82, P E Schwartz83, S V Blank84, A E Toland85, M Montagna86, C Casella87, E N Imyanitov88, A Allavena89, R K Schmutzler90, B Versmold90, C Engel91, A Meindl92, N Ditsch93, N Arnold94, D Niederacher95, H Deißler96, B Fiebig97, R Varon-Mateeva98, D Schaefer99, U G Froster100, T Caldes101, M de la Hoya101, L McGuffog49, A C Antoniou49, H Nevanlinna6, P Radice4,5 and J Benítez1,3 on behalf of CIMB

About 1% of the breast and ovarian Spanish families testing negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2 are carriers of RAD51D pathogenic variants

RAD51D mutations have been recently identified in breast (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) families. Although an etiological role in OC appears to be present, the association of RAD51D mutations and BC risk is more unclear. We aimed to determine the prevalence of germline RAD51D mutations in Spanish BC/OC families negative for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. We analyzed 842 index patients: 491 from BC/OC families, 171 BC families, 51 OC families and 129 patients without family history but with early-onset BC or OC or metachronous BC and OC. Mutation detection was performed with high-resolution melting, denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography or Sanger sequencing. Three mutations were found in four families with BC and OC cases (0.82%). Two were novel: c.1A>T (p.Met1?) and c.667+2_667+23del, leading to the exon 7 skipping and one previously described: c.674C>T (p.Arg232*). All were present in BC/OC families with only one OC. The c.667+2_667+23del cosegregated in the family with one early-onset BC and two bilateral BC cases. We also identified the c.629C>T (p.Ala210Val) variant, which was predicted in silico to be potentially pathogenic. About 1% of the BC and OC Spanish families negative for BRCA1/BRCA2 are carriers of RAD51D mutations. The presence of several BC mutation carriers, albeit in the context of familial OC, suggests an increased risk for BC, which should be taken into account in the follow-up and early detection measures. RAD51D testing should be considered in clinical setting for families with BC and OC, irrespective of the number of OC cases in the family

Whole Exome Sequencing Suggests Much of Non-BRCA1/BRCA2 Familial Breast Cancer Is Due to Moderate and Low Penetrance Susceptibility Alleles

The identification of the two most prevalent susceptibility genes in breast cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, was the beginning of a sustained effort to uncover new genes explaining the missing heritability in this disease. Today, additional high, moderate and low penetrance genes have been identified in breast cancer, such as P53, PTEN, STK11, PALB2 or ATM, globally accounting for around 35 percent of the familial cases. In the present study we used massively parallel sequencing to analyze 7 BRCA1/BRCA2 negative families, each having at least 6 affected women with breast cancer (between 6 and 10) diagnosed under the age of 60 across generations. After extensive filtering, Sanger sequencing validation and co-segregation studies, variants were prioritized through either control-population studies, including up to 750 healthy individuals, or case-control assays comprising approximately 5300 samples. As a result, a known moderate susceptibility indel variant (CHEK2 1100delC) and a catalogue of 11 rare variants presenting signs of association with breast cancer were identified. All the affected genes are involved in important cellular mechanisms like DNA repair, cell proliferation and survival or cell cycle regulation. This study highlights the need to investigate the role of rare variants in familial cancer development by means of novel high throughput analysis strategies optimized for genetically heterogeneous scenarios. Even considering the intrinsic limitations of exome resequencing studies, our findings support the hypothesis that the majority of non-BRCA1/BRCA2 breast cancer families might be explained by the action of moderate and/or low penetrance susceptibility alleles

Identification of a Danish breast/ovarian cancer family double heterozygote for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations

Mutations in the two breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are associated with increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Patients with mutations in both genes are rarely reported and often involve Ashkenazi founder mutations. Here we report the first identification of a Danish breast and ovarian cancer family heterozygote for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. The BRCA1 nucleotide 5215G > A/c.5096G > A mutation results in the missense mutation Arg1699Gln, while the BRCA2 nucleotide 859 + 4A > G/c.631 + 4A > G is novel. Exon trapping experiments and reverse transcriptase (RT)–PCR analysis revealed that the BRCA2 mutation results in skipping of exon 7, thereby introducing a frameshift and a premature stop codon. We therefore classify the mutation as disease causing. Since the BRCA1 Arg1699Gln mutation is also suggested to be disease-causing, we consider this family double heterozygote for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations

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

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 < 10−8, 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

Inheritance of deleterious mutations at both BRCA1 and BRCA2 in an international sample of 32,295 women

Background: Most $\textit{BRCA1}$ or $\textit{BRCA2}$ mutation carriers have inherited a single (heterozygous) mutation. Transheterozygotes (TH) who have inherited deleterious mutations in both $\textit{BRCA1}$ and $\textit{BRCA2}$ are rare, and the consequences of transheterozygosity are poorly understood. Methods: From 32,295 female $\textit{BRCA1/2}$ mutation carriers, we identified 93 TH (0.3 %). "Cases" were defined as TH, and "controls" were single mutations at $\textit{BRCA1}$ (SH1) or $\textit{BRCA2}$ (SH2). Matched SH1 "controls" carried a BRCA1 mutation found in the TH "case". Matched SH2 "controls" carried a BRCA2 mutation found in the TH "case". After matching the TH carriers with SH1 or SH2, 91 TH were matched to 9316 SH1, and 89 TH were matched to 3370 SH2. Results: The majority of TH (45.2 %) involved the three common Jewish mutations. TH were more likely than SH1 and SH2 women to have been ever diagnosed with breast cancer (BC; $p$ = 0.002). TH were more likely to be diagnosed with ovarian cancer (OC) than SH2 ($p$ = 0.017), but not SH1. Age at BC diagnosis was the same in TH vs. SH1 ($p$ = 0.231), but was on average 4.5 years younger in TH than in SH2 ($p$ < 0.001). BC in TH was more likely to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive ($p$ = 0.010) or progesterone receptor (PR) positive ($p$ = 0.013) than in SH1, but less likely to be ER positive ($p$ < 0.001) or PR positive ($p$ = 0.012) than SH2. Among 15 tumors from TH patients, there was no clear pattern of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) for $\textit{BRCA1}$ or $\textit{BRCA2}$ in either BC or OC. Conclusions: Our observations suggest that clinical TH phenotypes resemble SH1. However, TH breast tumor marker characteristics are phenotypically intermediate to SH1 and SH2.ACA and the CIMBA data management are funded by Cancer Research UK (C12292/A20861 and C12292/A11174). TRR was supported by R01-CA083855, R01-CA102776, and P50-CA083638. KLN, TMF, and SMD are supported by the Basser Research Center at the University of Pennsylvania. BP is supported by R01-CA112520. Cancer Research UK provided financial support for this work. ACA is a Senior Cancer Research UK Cancer Research Fellow. DFE is Cancer Research UK Principal Research Fellow. Tumor analysis was funded by STOP CANCER (to SJR). Study-specific acknowledgements are as provided in the manuscript

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

Breast cancer is a common disease partially caused by genetic risk factors. Germline pathogenic variants in DNA repair genes BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, and CHEK2 are associated with breast cancer risk. FANCM, 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 FANCM: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 BRCA1 or BRCA2. These three variants were also studied functionally by measuring survival and chromosome fragility in FANCM−/− patient-derived immortalized fibroblasts treated with diepoxybutane or olaparib. We observed that FANCM:p.Arg658* was associated with increased risk of ER-negative disease and TNBC (OR = 2.44, P = 0.034 and OR = 3.79; P = 0.009, respectively). In a country-restricted analysis, we confirmed the associations detected for FANCM:p.Arg658* and found that also FANCM:p.Arg1931* was associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk (OR = 1.96; P = 0.006). The functional results indicated that all three variants were deleterious affecting cell survival and chromosome stability with FANCM:p.Arg658* causing more severe phenotypes. In conclusion, we confirmed that the two rare FANCM 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 FANCM-associated tumors

Association of Type and Location of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations With Risk of Breast and Ovarian Cancer (vol 313, pg 1347, 2015)

Heli Nevanlinna ja Kristiina Aittomäki ovat CIMBA Consortium -työryhmän jäseniä.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% Cl, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 x 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RH R = 1.34; 95% Cl, 1.01-1.78; P =.04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% Cl, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 x 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% Cl, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 x 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% Cl, 1.06-2.78; P =.03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCRI; RHR = 1.63; 95% Cl, 1.10-2.40; P =.01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% Cl, 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% Cl, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 x 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% Cl, 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.Peer reviewe