319 research outputs found

    Incorporating tumour pathology information into breast cancer risk prediction algorithms.

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 confer high risks of breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The risk prediction algorithm BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) may be used to compute the probabilities of carrying mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and help to target mutation screening. Tumours from BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers display distinctive pathological features that could be used to better discriminate between BRCA1 mutation carriers, BRCA2 mutation carriers and noncarriers. In particular, oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative status, triple-negative (TN) status, and expression of basal markers are predictive of BRCA1 mutation carrier status. METHODS: We extended BOADICEA by treating breast cancer subtypes as distinct disease end points. Age-specific expression of phenotypic markers in a series of tumours from 182 BRCA1 mutation carriers, 62 BRCA2 mutation carriers and 109 controls from the Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium, and over 300,000 tumours from the general population obtained from the Surveillance Epidemiology, and End Results database, were used to calculate age-specific and genotype-specific incidences of each disease end point. The probability that an individual carries a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation given their family history and tumour marker status of family members was computed in sample pedigrees. RESULTS: The cumulative risk of ER-negative breast cancer by age 70 for BRCA1 mutation carriers was estimated to be 55% and the risk of ER-positive disease was 18%. The corresponding risks for BRCA2 mutation carriers were 21% and 44% for ER-negative and ER-positive disease, respectively. The predicted BRCA1 carrier probabilities among ER-positive breast cancer cases were less than 1% at all ages. For women diagnosed with breast cancer below age 50 years, these probabilities rose to more than 5% in ER-negative breast cancer, 7% in TN disease and 24% in TN breast cancer expressing both CK5/6 and CK14 cytokeratins. Large differences in mutation probabilities were observed by combining ER status and other informative markers with family history. CONCLUSIONS: This approach combines both full pedigree and tumour subtype data to predict BRCA1/2 carrier probabilities. Prediction of BRCA1/2 carrier status, and hence selection of women for mutation screening, may be substantially improved by combining tumour pathology with family history of cancer.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

    Are the so-called low penetrance breast cancer genes, ATM, BRIP1, PALB2 and CHEK2, high risk for women with strong family histories?

    Get PDF
    A woman typically presents for genetic counselling because she has a strong family history and is interested in knowing the probability she will develop disease in the future; that is, her absolute risk. Relative risk for a given factor refers to risk compared with either population average risk (sense a), or risk when not having the factor, with all other factors held constant (sense b). Not understanding that these are three distinct concepts can result in failure to correctly appreciate the consequences of studies on clinical genetic testing. Several studies found that the frequencies of mutations in ATM, BRIP1, PALB2 and CHEK2 were many times greater for cases with a strong family history than for controls. To account for the selected case sampling (ascertainment), a statistical model that assumes that the effect of any measured variant multiplies the effect of unmeasured variants was applied. This multiplicative polygenic model in effect estimated the relative risk in the sense b, not sense a, and found it was in the range of 1.7 to 2.4. The authors concluded that the variants are "low penetrance". They failed to note that their model fits predicted that, for some women, absolute risk may be as high as for BRCA2 mutation carriers. This is because the relative risk multiplies polygenic risk, and the latter is predicted by family history. Therefore, mutation testing of these genes for women with a strong family history, especially if it is of early onset, may be as clinically relevant as it is for BRCA1 and BRCA2

    The prevalence of BRCA1 mutations among young women with triple-negative breast cancer

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Molecular screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is now an established component of risk evaluation and management of familial breast cancer. Features of hereditary breast cancer include an early age-of-onset and over-representation of the 'triple-negative' phenotype (negative for estrogen-receptor, progesterone-receptor and HER2). The decision to offer genetic testing to a breast cancer patient is usually based on her family history, but in the absence of a family history of cancer, some women may qualify for testing based on the age-of-onset and/or the pathologic features of the breast cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We studied 54 women who were diagnosed with high-grade, triple-negative invasive breast cancer at or before age 40. These women were selected for study because they had little or no family history of breast or ovarian cancer and they did not qualify for genetic testing using conventional family history criteria. BRCA1 screening was performed using a combination of fluorescent multiplexed-PCR analysis, BRCA1 exon-13 6 kb duplication screening, the protein truncation test (PTT) and fluorescent multiplexed denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). All coding exons of BRCA1 were screened. The two large exons of BRCA2 were also screened using PTT. All mutations were confirmed with direct sequencing.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Five deleterious BRCA1 mutations and one deleterious BRCA2 mutation were identified in the 54 patients with early-onset, triple-negative breast cancer (11%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Women with early-onset triple-negative breast cancer are candidates for genetic testing for BRCA1, even in the absence of a family history of breast or ovarian cancer.</p

    A PALB2 mutation associated with high risk of breast cancer

    Get PDF
    Introduction: As a group, women who carry germline mutations in partner and localizer of breast cancer 2 susceptibility protein (PALB2) are at increased risk of breast cancer. Little is known about by how much or whether risk differs by mutation or family history, owing to the paucity of studies of cases unselected for family history.Methods: We screened 1,403 case probands for PALB2 mutations in a population-based study of Australian women with invasive breast cancer stratified by age at onset. The age-specific risk of breast cancer was estimated from the cancer histories of first- and second-degree relatives of mutation-carrying probands using a modified segregation analysis that included a polygenic modifier and was conditioned on the carrier case proband. Further screening for PALB2 c.3113G > A (W1038X) was conducted for 779 families with multiple cases of breast cancer ascertained through family cancer clinics in Australia and New Zealand and 764 population-based controls.Results: We found five independent case probands in the population-based sample with the protein-truncating mutation PALB2 c.3113G > A (W1038X); 2 of 695 were diagnosed before age 40 years and 3 of 708 were diagnosed when between ages 40 and 59 years. Both of the two early-onset carrier case probands had very strong family histories of breast cancer. Further testing found that the mutation segregated with breast cancer in these families. No c.3113G > A (W1038X) carriers were found in 764 population-based unaffected controls. The hazard ratio was estimated to be 30.1 (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5 to 120; P A mutation appears to be associated with substantial risks of breast cancer that are of clinical relevance. © 2010 Southey et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

    Chromosomal radiosensitivity in head and neck cancer patients: evidence for genetic predisposition?

    Get PDF
    The association between chromosomal radiosensitivity and genetic predisposition to head and neck cancer was investigated in this study. In all, 101 head and neck cancer patients and 75 healthy control individuals were included in the study. The G2 assay was used to measure chromosomal radiosensitivity. The results demonstrated that head and neck cancer patients had a statistically higher number of radiation-induced chromatid breaks than controls, with mean values of 1.23 and 1.10 breaks per cell, respectively (P<0.001). Using the 90th percentile of the G2 scores of the healthy individuals as a cutoff value for chromosomal radiosensitivity, 26% of the cancer patients were radiosensitive compared with 9% of the healthy controls (P=0.008). The mean number of radiation-induced chromatid breaks and the proportion of radiosensitive individuals were highest for oral cavity cancer patients (1.26 breaks per cell, 38%) and pharynx cancer patients (1.27 breaks per cell, 35%). The difference between patients and controls was most pronounced in the lower age group (⩽50 years, 1.32 breaks per cell, 38%) and in the non- and light smoking patient group (⩽10 pack-years, 1.28 breaks per cell, 46%). In conclusion, enhanced chromosomal radiosensitivity is a marker of genetic predisposition to head and neck cancer, and the genetic contribution is highest for oral cavity and pharynx cancer patients and for early onset and non- and light smoking patients

    The development of a network for community-based obesity prevention: the CO-OPS Collaboration

    Get PDF
    Background: Community-based interventions are a promising approach and an important component of a comprehensive response to obesity. In this paper we describe the Collaboration of COmmunity-based Obesity Prevention Sites (CO-OPS Collaboration) in Australia as an example of a collaborative network to enhance the quality and quantity of obesity prevention action at the community level. The core aims of the CO-OPS Collaboration are to: identify and analyse the lessons learned from a range of community-based initiatives aimed at tackling obesity, and; to identify the elements that make community-based obesity prevention initiatives successful and share the knowledge gained with other communities.Methods: Key activities of the collaboration to date have included the development of a set of Best Practice Principles and knowledge translation and exchange activities to promote the application (or use) of evidence, evaluation and analysis in practice.Results: The establishment of the CO-OPS Collaboration is a significant step toward strengthening action in this area, by bringing together research, practice and policy expertise to promote best practice, high quality evaluation and knowledge translation and exchange. Future development of the network should include facilitation of furtherevidence generation and translation drawing from process, impact and outcome evaluation of existing communitybased interventions.Conclusions: The lessons presented in this paper may help other networks like CO-OPS as they emerge around the globe. It is important that networks integrate with each other and share the experience of creating these networks.<br /

    Tracking of fatness during childhood, adolescence and young adulthood: a 7-year follow-up study in Madeira Island, Portugal

    Get PDF
    Aims: Investigating tracking of fatness from childhood to adolescence, early adolescence to young adulthood and late adolescence to young adulthood. Subjects and methods: Participants from the Madeira Growth Study were followed during an average period of 7.2 years. Height, body mass, skin-folds and circumferences were measured, nine health- and performance-related tests were administered and the Baecke questionnaire was used to assess physical activity. Skeletal maturity was estimated using the TW3 method. Results: The prevalence of overweight plus obesity ranged from 8.2–20.0% at baseline and from 20.4–40.0% at followup, in boys. Corresponding percentages for girls were 10.6– 12.0% and 13.2–18.0%. Inter-age correlations for fatness indicators ranged from 0.43–0.77. BMI, waist circumference and sum of skin-folds at 8, 12 and 16-years old were the main predictors of these variables at 15, 19 and 23-years old, respectively. Strength, muscular endurance and aerobic fitness were negatively related to body fatness. Physical activity and maturation were independently associated with adolescent (15 years) and young adult (19 years) fatness. Conclusions: Over 7.2 years, tracking was moderate-to-high for fatness. Variance was explained by fatness indicators and to a small extent by physical fitness, physical activity and maturation
    corecore