ESHRE guideline: management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency

study question: What is the optimal management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) based on the best available evidence in the literature? summary answer: The guideline development group (GDG) formulated 99 recommendations answering 31 key questions on the diagnosis and treatment of women with POI. what is known already: NA. study design, size, duration: This guideline was produced by a multidisciplinary group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to September 2014 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. The GDG included a patient representative to ensure input from women with POI. After finalization of the draft, the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) members and professional organizations were asked to review the guideline. participants/materials, setting, methods: NA. main results and the role of chance: The guideline provides 17 recommendations on diagnosis and assessment of POI and 46 recommendations on the different sequelae of POI and their consequences for monitoring and treatment. Furthermore, 24 recommendations were formulated on hormone replacement therapy in women with POI, and two on alternative and complementary treatment. A chapter on puberty induction resulted in five recommendations. limitations, reasons for caution: The main limitation of the guideline is that, due to the lack of data, many of the recommendations are based on expert opinion or indirect evidence from studies on post-menopausal women or women with Turner Syndrome. wider implications of the findings: Despite the limitations, the guideline group is confident that this document will be able to guide health care professionals in providing the best practice for managing women with POI given current evidence. Furthermore, the guideline grouphas formulated research recommendations on the gaps in knowledge identified in the literature searches, in an attempt to stimulate research on the key issues in POI

ESHRE guideline: management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency

study question: What is the optimal management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) based on the best available evidence in the literature? summary answer: The guideline development group (GDG) formulated 99 recommendations answering 31 key questions on the diagnosis and treatment of women with POI. what is known already: NA. study design, size, duration: This guideline was produced by a multidisciplinary group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to September 2014 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. The GDG included a patient representative to ensure input from women with POI. After finalization of the draft, the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) members and professional organizations were asked to review the guideline. participants/materials, setting, methods: NA. main results and the role of chance: The guideline provides 17 recommendations on diagnosis and assessment of POI and 46 recommendations on the different sequelae of POI and their consequences for monitoring and treatment. Furthermore, 24 recommendations were formulated on hormone replacement therapy in women with POI, and two on alternative and complementary treatment. A chapter on puberty induction resulted in five recommendations. limitations, reasons for caution: The main limitation of the guideline is that, due to the lack of data, many of the recommendations are based on expert opinion or indirect evidence from studies on post-menopausal women or women with Turner Syndrome. wider implications of the findings: Despite the limitations, the guideline group is confident that this document will be able to guide health care professionals in providing the best practice for managing women with POI given current evidence. Furthermore, the guideline grouphas formulated research recommendations on the gaps in knowledge identified in the literature searches, in an attempt to stimulate research on the key issues in POI

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

Characteristics of small breast and/or ovarian cancer families with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2

For families with a small number of cases of breast and/or ovarian cancer, limited data are available to predict the likelihood of genetic predisposition due to mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. In 104 families with three or more affected individuals (average 3.8) seeking counselling at family cancer clinics, mutation analysis was performed in the open reading frame of BRCA1 and BRCA2 by the protein truncation test and mutation-specific assays. In 31 of the 104 families tested, mutations were detected (30%). The majority of these mutations (25) occurred in BRCA1. Mutations were detected in 15 out of 25 families (60%) with both breast and ovarian cancer and in 16 out of 79 families (20%) with exclusively cases of breast cancer. Thus, an ovarian cancer case strongly predicted finding a mutation (P < 0.001). Within the group of small breast-cancer-only families, a bilateral breast cancer case or a unilateral breast cancer case diagnosed before age 40 independently predicted finding a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (P = 0.005 and P = 0.02, respectively). Therefore, even small breast/ovarian cancer families with at least one case of ovarian cancer, bilateral breast cancer, or a case of breast cancer diagnosed before age 40, should be referred for mutation screening. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaig

Theory and applications of atomic and ionic polarizabilities

Atomic polarization phenomena impinge upon a number of areas and processes in physics. The dielectric constant and refractive index of any gas are examples of macroscopic properties that are largely determined by the dipole polarizability. When it comes to microscopic phenomena, the existence of alkaline-earth anions and the recently discovered ability of positrons to bind to many atoms are predominantly due to the polarization interaction. An imperfect knowledge of atomic polarizabilities is presently looming as the largest source of uncertainty in the new generation of optical frequency standards. Accurate polarizabilities for the group I and II atoms and ions of the periodic table have recently become available by a variety of techniques. These include refined many-body perturbation theory and coupled-cluster calculations sometimes combined with precise experimental data for selected transitions, microwave spectroscopy of Rydberg atoms and ions, refractive index measurements in microwave cavities, ab initio calculations of atomic structures using explicitly correlated wave functions, interferometry with atom beams, and velocity changes of laser cooled atoms induced by an electric field. This review examines existing theoretical methods of determining atomic and ionic polarizabilities, and discusses their relevance to various applications with particular emphasis on cold-atom physics and the metrology of atomic frequency standards.Comment: Review paper, 44 page

Optimal selection for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing using a combination of ' easy to apply ' probability models

To establish an efficient, reliable and easy to apply risk assessment tool to select families with breast and/or ovarian cancer patients for BRCA mutation testing, using available probability models. In a retrospective study of 263 families with breast and/or ovarian cancer patients, the utility of the Frank (Myriad), Gilpin (family history assessment tool) and Evans (Manchester) model was analysed, to select 49 BRCA mutation-positive families. For various cutoff levels and combinations, the sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared. The best combinations were subsequently validated in additional sets of families. Comparable sensitivity and specificity were obtained with the Gilpin and Evans models. They appeared to be complementary to the Frank model. To obtain an optimal sensitivity, five ‘additional criteria' were introduced that are specific for the selection of small or uninformative families. The optimal selection is made by the combination ‘Frank ⩾16% or Evans2 ⩾12 or one of five additional criteria'. The efficiency of the selection of families for mutation testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 can be optimised by using a combination of available easy to apply risk assessment models

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods: We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through population-based GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results: The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1 carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, P = 8.2 x 10(53)). In BRCA2 carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, P = 7.2 x 10(-20)). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2 carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions: BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management

An entire exon 3 germ-line rearrangement in the BRCA2 gene: pathogenic relevance of exon 3 deletion in breast cancer predisposition

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Germ-line mutations in the <it>BRCA1 </it>and <it>BRCA2 </it>genes are major contributors to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Large rearrangements are less frequent in the <it>BRCA2 </it>gene than in <it>BRCA1</it>. We report, here, the first total deletion of exon 3 in the <it>BRCA2 </it>gene that was detected during screening of 2058 index cases from breast/ovarian cancer families for <it>BRCA2 </it>large rearrangements. Deletion of exon 3, which is in phase, does not alter the reading frame. Low levels of alternative transcripts lacking exon 3 (Δ3 delta3 transcript) have been reported in normal tissues, which raises the question whether deletion of exon 3 is pathogenic.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Large <it>BRCA2 </it>rearrangements were analysed by QMPSF (Quantitative Multiplex PCR of Short Fluorescent Fragments) or MLPA (Multiplex Ligation-Dependent Probe Amplification). The exon 3 deletion was characterized with a "zoom-in" dedicated CGH array to the <it>BRCA2 </it>gene and sequencing. To determine the effect of exon 3 deletion and assess its pathogenic effect, three methods of transcript quantification were used: fragment analysis of FAM-labelled PCR products, specific allelic expression using an intron 2 polymorphism and competitive quantitative RT-PCR.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Large rearrangements of <it>BRCA2 </it>were detected in six index cases out of 2058 tested (3% of all deleterious <it>BRCA2 </it>mutations). This study reports the first large rearrangement of the <it>BRCA2 </it>gene that includes all of exon 3 and leads to an <it>in frame </it>deletion of exon 3 at the transcriptional level. Thirty five variants in exon 3 and junction regions of <it>BRCA2 </it>are also reported, that contribute to the interpretation of the pathogenicity of the deletion. The quantitative approaches showed that there are three classes of delta3 <it>BRCA2 </it>transcripts (low, moderate and exclusive). Exclusive expression of the delta3 transcript by the mutant allele and segregation data provide evidence for a causal effect of the exon 3 deletion.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This paper highlights that large rearrangements and total deletion of exon 3 in the <it>BRCA2 </it>gene could contribute to hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. In addition, our findings suggest that, to interpret the pathogenic effect of any variants of exon 3, both accurate transcript quantification and co-segregation analysis are required.</p

BRCA2 polymorphic stop codon K3326X and the risk of breast, prostate, and ovarian cancers

Background: The K3326X variant in BRCA2 (BRCA2*c.9976A&gt;T; p.Lys3326*; rs11571833) has been found to be associated with small increased risks of breast cancer. However, it is not clear to what extent linkage disequilibrium with fully pathogenic mutations might account for this association. There is scant information about the effect of K3326X in other hormone-related cancers. Methods: Using weighted logistic regression, we analyzed data from the large iCOGS study including 76 637 cancer case patients and 83 796 control patients to estimate odds ratios (ORw) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for K3326X variant carriers in relation to breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer risks, with weights defined as probability of not having a pathogenic BRCA2 variant. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling, we also examined the associations of K3326X with breast and ovarian cancer risks among 7183 BRCA1 variant carriers. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: The K3326X variant was associated with breast (ORw = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.40, P = 5.9x10- 6) and invasive ovarian cancer (ORw = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.43, P = 3.8x10-3). These associations were stronger for serous ovarian cancer and for estrogen receptor–negative breast cancer (ORw = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.70, P = 3.4x10-5 and ORw = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.76, P = 4.1x10-5, respectively). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, there was a statistically significant inverse association of the K3326X variant with risk of ovarian cancer (HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.84, P = .013) but no association with breast cancer. No association with prostate cancer was observed. Conclusions: Our study provides evidence that the K3326X variant is associated with risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers independent of other pathogenic variants in BRCA2. Further studies are needed to determine the biological mechanism of action responsible for these associations