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

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

BRIP1 (BACH1) variants and familial breast cancer risk: a case-control study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Inactivating and truncating mutations of the nuclear BRCA1-interacting protein 1 (BRIP1) have been shown to be the major cause of Fanconi anaemia and, due to subsequent alterations of BRCA1 function, predispose to breast cancer (BC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated the effect of BRIP1 -64G>A and Pro919Ser on familial BC risk by means of TaqMan allelic discrimination, analysing <it>BRCA1/BRCA2 </it>mutation-negative index patients of 571 German BC families and 712 control individuals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No significant differences in genotype frequencies between BC cases and controls for BRIP1 -64G>A and Pro919Ser were observed.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found no effect of the putatively functional BRIP1 variants -64G>A and Pro919Ser on the risk of familial BC.</p

A putative relay circuit providing low-threshold mechanoreceptive input to lamina I projection neurons via vertical cells in lamina II of the rat dorsal horn

Background: Lamina I projection neurons respond to painful stimuli, and some are also activated by touch or hair movement. Neuropathic pain resulting from peripheral nerve damage is often associated with tactile allodynia (touch-evoked pain), and this may result from increased responsiveness of lamina I projection neurons to non-noxious mechanical stimuli. It is thought that polysynaptic pathways involving excitatory interneurons can transmit tactile inputs to lamina I projection neurons, but that these are normally suppressed by inhibitory interneurons. Vertical cells in lamina II provide a potential route through which tactile stimuli can activate lamina I projection neurons, since their dendrites extend into the region where tactile afferents terminate, while their axons can innervate the projection cells. The aim of this study was to determine whether vertical cell dendrites were contacted by the central terminals of low-threshold mechanoreceptive primary afferents. Results: We initially demonstrated contacts between dendritic spines of vertical cells that had been recorded in spinal cord slices and axonal boutons containing the vesicular glutamate transporter 1 (VGLUT1), which is expressed by myelinated low-threshold mechanoreceptive afferents. To confirm that the VGLUT1 boutons included primary afferents, we then examined vertical cells recorded in rats that had received injections of cholera toxin B subunit (CTb) into the sciatic nerve. We found that over half of the VGLUT1 boutons contacting the vertical cells were CTb-immunoreactive, indicating that they were of primary afferent origin. Conclusions: These results show that vertical cell dendritic spines are frequently contacted by the central terminals of myelinated low-threshold mechanoreceptive afferents. Since dendritic spines are associated with excitatory synapses, it is likely that most of these contacts were synaptic. Vertical cells in lamina II are therefore a potential route through which tactile afferents can activate lamina I projection neurons, and this pathway could play a role in tactile allodynia

Cholinergic Interneurons Mediate Fast VGluT3-Dependent Glutamatergic Transmission in the Striatum

The neurotransmitter glutamate is released by excitatory projection neurons throughout the brain. However, non-glutamatergic cells, including cholinergic and monoaminergic neurons, express markers that suggest that they are also capable of vesicular glutamate release. Striatal cholinergic interneurons (CINs) express the Type-3 vesicular glutamate transporter (VGluT3), although whether they form functional glutamatergic synapses is unclear. To examine this possibility, we utilized mice expressing Cre-recombinase under control of the endogenous choline acetyltransferase locus and conditionally expressed light-activated Channelrhodopsin2 in CINs. Optical stimulation evoked action potentials in CINs and produced postsynaptic responses in medium spiny neurons that were blocked by glutamate receptor antagonists. CIN-mediated glutamatergic responses exhibited a large contribution of NMDA-type glutamate receptors, distinguishing them from corticostriatal inputs. CIN-mediated glutamatergic responses were insensitive to antagonists of acetylcholine receptors and were not seen in mice lacking VGluT3. Our results indicate that CINs are capable of mediating fast glutamatergic transmission, suggesting a new role for these cells in regulating striatal activity

Evaluation of the current knowledge limitations in breast cancer research: a gap analysis

BACKGROUND A gap analysis was conducted to determine which areas of breast cancer research, if targeted by researchers and funding bodies, could produce the greatest impact on patients. METHODS Fifty-six Breast Cancer Campaign grant holders and prominent UK breast cancer researchers participated in a gap analysis of current breast cancer research. Before, during and following the meeting, groups in seven key research areas participated in cycles of presentation, literature review and discussion. Summary papers were prepared by each group and collated into this position paper highlighting the research gaps, with recommendations for action. RESULTS Gaps were identified in all seven themes. General barriers to progress were lack of financial and practical resources, and poor collaboration between disciplines. Critical gaps in each theme included: (1) genetics (knowledge of genetic changes, their effects and interactions); (2) initiation of breast cancer (how developmental signalling pathways cause ductal elongation and branching at the cellular level and influence stem cell dynamics, and how their disruption initiates tumour formation); (3) progression of breast cancer (deciphering the intracellular and extracellular regulators of early progression, tumour growth, angiogenesis and metastasis); (4) therapies and targets (understanding who develops advanced disease); (5) disease markers (incorporating intelligent trial design into all studies to ensure new treatments are tested in patient groups stratified using biomarkers); (6) prevention (strategies to prevent oestrogen-receptor negative tumours and the long-term effects of chemoprevention for oestrogen-receptor positive tumours); (7) psychosocial aspects of cancer (the use of appropriate psychosocial interventions, and the personal impact of all stages of the disease among patients from a range of ethnic and demographic backgrounds). CONCLUSION Through recommendations to address these gaps with future research, the long-term benefits to patients will include: better estimation of risk in families with breast cancer and strategies to reduce risk; better prediction of drug response and patient prognosis; improved tailoring of treatments to patient subgroups and development of new therapeutic approaches; earlier initiation of treatment; more effective use of resources for screening populations; and an enhanced experience for people with or at risk of breast cancer and their families. The challenge to funding bodies and researchers in all disciplines is to focus on these gaps and to drive advances in knowledge into improvements in patient care

A PALB2 mutation associated with high risk of breast cancer

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

Neuronal circuitry for pain processing in the dorsal horn

Neurons in the spinal dorsal horn process sensory information, which is then transmitted to several brain regions, including those responsible for pain perception. The dorsal horn provides numerous potential targets for the development of novel analgesics and is thought to undergo changes that contribute to the exaggerated pain felt after nerve injury and inflammation. Despite its obvious importance, we still know little about the neuronal circuits that process sensory information, mainly because of the heterogeneity of the various neuronal components that make up these circuits. Recent studies have begun to shed light on the neuronal organization and circuitry of this complex region

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