Universal truth(s)?

Die Arbeit befasst sich mit zeitgenössischen Neuinterpretationen von Mythen des klassischen Altertums. Der Hauptaugenmerk liegt dabei auf drei Romanen anglophoner Schriftstellerinnen, welche in einer 2005 gestarteten Serie des schottischen Verlags Canongate unter dem Serientitel Myths erschienen sind: Margaret Atwoods The Penelopiad, Jeanette Wintersons Weight und Ali Smiths Girl Meets Boy. Ausgehend von der Feststellung, dass zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts weder die Mythen noch die Idee solcher Neuinterpretationen oder re-tellings etwas Neues sind, stellt sich die Frage, welchen Nutzen die Romane sich selbst, und Geschichten im Allgemeinen, zuschreiben, und wie sie sich angesichts ihrer fehlenden Originalität rechtfertigen. Es ist das Ziel der Arbeit, zu untersuchen ob in dieser Hinsicht überhaupt eine einheitliche Aussage getroffen werden kann, und wenn ja, welche dies ist. Zwei unterschiedliche Konzeptionen von Neuinterpretationen dienen dabei als Ausgangspunkte für Vergleiche: einerseits das Konzept der revision, worunter Neuinterpretationen mit einer klaren politischen Zuordnung, zum Beispiel zum Feminismus, und der Ambition mithilfe der künstlerischen Tätigkeit gesellschaftliche Veränderungen herbeizuführen, zu verstehen sind; andererseits das Konzept der historiographical metafiction, worunter nach Linda Hutcheon jene typisch postmodernen Werke zu verstehen sind, welche nicht nur stark selbstreflexiv geprägt sind, sondern auch auf vielen Ebenen paradoxe und widersprüchliche Bedeutungen tragen, und denen zwar ein Potential zur kritischen Stellungnahme zu politischen und gesellschaftlichen Themen zugeschrieben wird, die jedoch den selben kritischen Blick auch auf die Ideologien anwenden, welche hinter politischen Bewegungen wie dem Feminismus stehen. In der Analyse werden sowohl das intertextuelle Verhältnis zwischen dem Mythos, welcher den Quelltext darstellt, und der Neuinterpretation, als auch die metafiktionale Selbstreflexion der Werke und ihre Behandlung des Themas Geschichtenerzählen untersucht, um die kritische – und möglicherweise ideologisch geprägte – Auseinandersetzung der Werke mit politischen und gesellschaftlichen Themen – vor allem, aber nicht nur, im Bereich der Genderpolitik – mit metafiktionalen Überlegungen zu den Möglichkeiten des Geschichtenerzählens in Verbindung zu bringen. Wie die Analysen zeigen, ist es, trotz beträchtlicher Unterschiede zwischen den einzelnen Texten, möglich, eine gemeinsame Grundtendenz zu finden. In allen drei Texten spielt der Gegensatz zwischen authoritären, festgesetzten, und demnach oppressiven Bedeutungen – welche mehr oder weniger stark mit den kanonisierten Mythen in Verbindung gebracht werden – und einem pluralistischen, flexiblen und subversiven Begriff von Bedeutung – welcher in allen Fällen mit dem Erzählen, und vor allem Wiedererzählen von Geschichten in Verbindung gebracht wird. Während alle drei Werke die Ideologie der re-vision zu reflektieren scheinen, und die Möglichkeit des Geschichtenerzählens für politische Zwecke und zur Erwirkung gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen in Erwägung ziehen, nehmen sie dennoch eine Position der kritschen Distanz gegenüber jener Ideologie ein, und sprechen dem Geschichtenerzählen – und vor allem dem re-telling – unterschiedlichen Bedeutungen und Fähigkeiten zu. Zum einen wird es als eine Möglichkeit zur Dekonstruktion dominanter Narrative und festgefahrener Bedeutungen gesehen, zum anderen aber auch als ein Weg, individuelle Narrative – und damit Identitäten wie auch Zukunftsvisionen – zu konstruieren. Letztendlich bleibt allen drei Romanen eine Gemeinsamkeit, nämlich das paradoxe, und wohl auch bewussterweise nie ganz realisierbare Ideal der Pluralität, Flexibilität und Differenz.The paper is concerned with contemporary re-tellings of classical myths from Greek and Roman antiquity. It is mainly focussed on three novels by Anglo-American writers that were published as part of a series called Myths by the Scottish publisher Canongate. The novels are Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad, Jeanette Winterson’s Weight and Ali Smith’s Girl Meets Boy. Considering the fact that neither the myths nor the idea of re-tellings are anything new at the beginning of the 21st century, the question arises after the use or purpose that the novels claim for themselves and for stories in general, and how they justify themselves in the face of their apparent unoriginality. It is the aim of the paper, to explore, if generalising answers to this question can be abstracted from the analyses of the three novels, and if yes, what they are. Two different concepts of re-tellings serve as starting points for comparison and contrast. On the one hand, there is the concept of re-vision, which refers to a form of re-telling with a clear political affiliation – as for example feminism – and with the ambition to directly influence and change social reality through the artistic practice of writing. On the other hand, there is the concept of historiographical metafiction, which, according to Linda Hutcheon, is a typically postmodern form of fiction, which does not only have a strong self-reflexive (and self-critical) focus, but is also characterised by its paradoxical meanings, which can be found on many levels and which is credited with the potential for a critical, and hence subversive, portrayal of political and social issues, but which applies the same critical gaze to the very ideologies behind political movements like feminism. The analyses will consider the intertextual relationship between the texts that provide the sources for the myths retold and the re-tellings, as well as the metafictional self-reflexivity of the texts and their ideas on the theme of storytelling, in order to link their critical, and possibly ideologically informed portrayal of political and social issues – predominantly, but not only, concerning gender – to metafictional reflexions on the power and potential of storytelling. The analyses reveal that despite considerable differences between the texts, it is possible to find common tendencies. In all three of the texts, there can be found a dichotomy between authoritative, fixed and therefore oppressive meanings – which are more or less strongly associated with canonical myths – and plural, flexible and subversive meanings – which are always associated with a positive view of storytelling and especially re-telling. While all three texts seem to consider the ideology of re-vision and the possiblity of telling stories for political purposes, and for effecting social change, they adopt a critical position toward this idea, and reflect diverse ideas regarding the meanings and possibilities of storytelling, and particularly re-telling. On the one hand, storytelling is regarded as a means for deconstructing the dominant narratives and their deadlocked meanings, on the other hand its potential for constructing individual narratives – and hence identities, visions of the future, and more – is recognised. Ultimately, there is one real common ground that the texts share despite their differences – the paradoxical, and never fully achievable ideal of plurality, flexibility and difference

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

Background: The K3326X variant in BRCA2 (BRCA2*c.9976A>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

Refined cut-off for TP53 immunohistochemistry improves prediction of TP53 mutation status in ovarian mucinous tumors: implications for outcome analyses.

TP53 mutations are implicated in the progression of mucinous borderline tumors (MBOT) to mucinous ovarian carcinomas (MOC). Optimized immunohistochemistry (IHC) for TP53 has been established as a proxy for the TP53 mutation status in other ovarian tumor types. We aimed to confirm the ability of TP53 IHC to predict TP53 mutation status in ovarian mucinous tumors and to evaluate the association of TP53 mutation status with survival among patients with MBOT and MOC. Tumor tissue from an initial cohort of 113 women with MBOT/MOC was stained with optimized IHC for TP53 using tissue microarrays (75.2%) or full sections (24.8%) and interpreted using established criteria as normal or abnormal (overexpression, complete absence, or cytoplasmic). Cases were considered concordant if abnormal IHC staining predicted deleterious TP53 mutations. Discordant tissue microarray cases were re-evaluated on full sections and interpretational criteria were refined. The initial cohort was expanded to a total of 165 MBOT and 424 MOC for the examination of the association of survival with TP53 mutation status, assessed either by TP53 IHC and/or sequencing. Initially, 82/113 (72.6%) cases were concordant using the established criteria. Refined criteria for overexpression to account for intratumoral heterogeneity and terminal differentiation improved concordance to 93.8% (106/113). In the expanded cohort, 19.4% (32/165) of MBOT showed evidence for TP53 mutation and this was associated with a higher risk of recurrence, disease-specific death, and all-cause mortality (overall survival: HR = 4.6, 95% CI 1.5-14.3, p = 0.0087). Within MOC, 61.1% (259/424) harbored a TP53 mutation, but this was not associated with survival (overall survival, p = 0.77). TP53 IHC is an accurate proxy for TP53 mutation status with refined interpretation criteria accounting for intratumoral heterogeneity and terminal differentiation in ovarian mucinous tumors. TP53 mutation status is an important biomarker to identify MBOT with a higher risk of mortality.KLG is supported by the Victorian Cancer Agency (MCRF15013) and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1045783 and #628434). This study was supported by the Peter MacCallum Cancer Foundation. CS is supported by a University of Melbourne Postgraduate Scholarship. DDB is supported by National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) grants APP1092856 and APP1117044 and by the US National Cancer Institute U54 programme (U54CA209978-04). ELG and SHK are supported through P50 CA136393-10. The following cohorts that contributed to the GAMuT study were supported as follows: CASCADE: Supported by the Peter MacCallum Cancer Foundation AOCS: The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group was supported by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command under DAMD17-01-1-0729, The Cancer Council Victoria, Queensland Cancer Fund, The Cancer Council New South Wales, The Cancer Council South Australia, The Cancer Council Tasmania and The Cancer Foundation of Western Australia (Multi-State Applications 191, 211 and 182) and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC; ID400413 and ID400281). The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study gratefully acknowledges additional support from Ovarian Cancer Australia and the Peter MacCallum Foundation. The AOCS also acknowledges the cooperation of the participating institutions in Australia and acknowledges the contribution of the study nurses, research assistants and all clinical and scientific collaborators to the study. The complete AOCS Study Group can be found at www.aocstudy.org. We would like to thank all of the women who participated in these research programs. OVCARE receives core funding from The BC Cancer Foundation and the VGH and UBC Hospital Foundation. The Gynaecological Oncology Biobank at Westmead is a member of the Australasian Biospecimen Network-Oncology group, which was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council Enabling Grants ID 310670 & ID 628903 and the Cancer Institute NSW Grants ID 12/RIG/1-17 & 15/RIG/1-16. COEUR: This study uses resources provided by the Canadian Ovarian Cancer Research Consortium’s - COEUR biobank funded by the Terry Fox Research Institute and managed and supervised by the Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CRCHUM). The Consortium acknowledges contributions to its COEUR biobank from Institutions across Canada (for a full list see http://www.tfri.ca/en/research/translational-research/coeur/coeur_biobanks.aspx). The following cohorts that contributed to OTTA were supported as follows: AOV: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-86727), Cancer Research Society (19319). BAV: ELAN Funds of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg; DOV: NCI/NIH R01CA168758. Huntsman Cancer Foundation and the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number P30CA042014. HAW: U.S. National 19 Institutes of Health (R01-CA58598, N01-CN-55424 and N01-PC-67001); MAY: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA122443, P30-CA15083, P50-CA136393); Mayo Foundation; Minnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance; Fred C. and Katherine B. Andersen Foundation; SEA: SEARCH team: Mitul Shah, Jennifer Alsopp, Mercedes Jiminez-Linan SEARCH funding: Cancer Research UK (C490/A16561), the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Cancer Centre and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centres. The University of Cambridge has received salary support for PDPP from the NHS in the East of England through the Clinical Academic Reserve. JBD: Cancer Research UK Institute Group Award UK A22905 and A15601; STA: NIH grants U01 CA71966 and U01 CA69417; SWE: Swedish Cancer foundation, WeCanCureCancer and årKampMotCancer foundation; TVA: Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant (MOP-86727) and NIH/NCI 1 R01CA160669- 01A1; VAN: M.S. Anglesio is funded through a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar Award and the Janet D. Cottrelle Foundation Scholars program managed by the BC Cancer Foundation. The Vancouver study cohort (TVAN) is supported by BC’s Ovarian Cancer Research team (OVCARE), the BC Cancer Foundation and The VGH+UBC Hospital Foundation. WMH: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Enabling Grants ID 310670 & ID 628903. Cancer Institute NSW Grants 12/RIG/1-17 & 15/RIG/1-16

Gene expression profiling of mucinous ovarian tumors and comparison with upper and lower gastrointestinal tumors identifies markers associated with adverse outcomes.

PURPOSE: Advanced-stage mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC) has poor chemotherapy response and prognosis and lacks biomarkers to aid stage I adjuvant treatment. Differentiating primary MOC from gastrointestinal (GI) metastases to the ovary is also challenging due to phenotypic similarities. Clinicopathologic and gene-expression data were analyzed to identify prognostic and diagnostic features. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Discovery analyses selected 19 genes with prognostic/diagnostic potential. Validation was performed through the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium and GI cancer biobanks comprising 604 patients with MOC (n = 333), mucinous borderline ovarian tumors (MBOT, n = 151), and upper GI (n = 65) and lower GI tumors (n = 55). RESULTS: Infiltrative pattern of invasion was associated with decreased overall survival (OS) within 2 years from diagnosis, compared with expansile pattern in stage I MOC [hazard ratio (HR), 2.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04–7.41, P = 0.042]. Increased expression of THBS2 and TAGLN was associated with shorter OS in MOC patients (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04–1.51, P = 0.016) and (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01–1.45, P = 0.043), respectively. ERBB2 (HER2) amplification or high mRNA expression was evident in 64 of 243 (26%) of MOCs, but only 8 of 243 (3%) were also infiltrative (4/39, 10%) or stage III/IV (4/31, 13%). CONCLUSIONS: An infiltrative growth pattern infers poor prognosis within 2 years from diagnosis and may help select stage I patients for adjuvant therapy. High expression of THBS2 and TAGLN in MOC confers an adverse prognosis and is upregulated in the infiltrative subtype, which warrants further investigation. Anti-HER2 therapy should be investigated in a subset of patients. MOC samples clustered with upper GI, yet markers to differentiate these entities remain elusive, suggesting similar underlying biology and shared treatment strategies

p53 and ovarian carcinoma survival: an Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium study

Our objective was to test whether p53 expression status is associated with survival for women diagnosed with the most common ovarian carcinoma histotypes (high-grade serous carcinoma [HGSC], endometrioid carcinoma [EC], and clear cell carcinoma [CCC]) using a large multi-institutional cohort from the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis (OTTA) consortium. p53 expression was assessed on 6,678 cases represented on tissue microarrays from 25 participating OTTA study sites using a previously validated immunohistochemical (IHC) assay as a surrogate for the presence and functional effect of TP53 mutations. Three abnormal expression patterns (overexpression, complete absence, and cytoplasmic) and the normal (wild type) pattern were recorded. Survival analyses were performed by histotype. The frequency of abnormal p53 expression was 93.4% (4,630/4,957) in HGSC compared to 11.9% (116/973) in EC and 11.5% (86/748) in CCC. In HGSC, there were no differences in overall survival across the abnormal p53 expression patterns. However, in EC and CCC, abnormal p53 expression was associated with an increased risk of death for women diagnosed with EC in multivariate analysis compared to normal p53 as the reference (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-3.47, p = 0.0011) and with CCC (HR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.11-2.22, p = 0.012). Abnormal p53 was also associated with shorter overall survival in The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I/II EC and CCC. Our study provides further evidence that functional groups of TP53 mutations assessed by abnormal surrogate p53 IHC patterns are not associated with survival in HGSC. In contrast, we validate that abnormal p53 IHC is a strong independent prognostic marker for EC and demonstrate for the first time an independent prognostic association of abnormal p53 IHC with overall survival in patients with CCC

CCNE1 and survival of patients with tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: An Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium study

BACKGROUND: Cyclin E1 (CCNE1) is a potential predictive marker and therapeutic target in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Smaller studies have revealed unfavorable associations for CCNE1 amplification and CCNE1 overexpression with survival, but to date no large-scale, histotype-specific validation has been performed. The hypothesis was that high-level amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE1 overexpression, as well as a combination of the two, are linked to shorter overall survival in HGSC. METHODS: Within the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium, amplification status and protein level in 3029 HGSC cases and mRNA expression in 2419 samples were investigated. RESULTS: High-level amplification (>8 copies by chromogenic in situ hybridization) was found in 8.6% of HGSC and overexpression (>60% with at least 5% demonstrating strong intensity by immunohistochemistry) was found in 22.4%. CCNE1 high-level amplification and overexpression both were linked to shorter overall survival in multivariate survival analysis adjusted for age and stage, with hazard stratification by study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08-1.47, p = .034, and HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32, p = .015, respectively). This was also true for cases with combined high-level amplification/overexpression (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09-1.47, p = .033). CCNE1 mRNA expression was not associated with overall survival (HR, 1.00 per 1-SD increase; 95% CI, 0.94-1.06; p = .58). CCNE1 high-level amplification is mutually exclusive with the presence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and shows an inverse association to RB1 loss. CONCLUSION: This study provides large-scale validation that CCNE1 high-level amplification is associated with shorter survival, supporting its utility as a prognostic biomarker in HGSC

Refined histopathological predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status: A large-scale analysis of breast cancer characteristics from the BCAC, CIMBA, and ENIGMA consortia

Introduction: The distribution of histopathological features of invasive breast tumors in BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation carriers differs from that of individuals with no known mutation. Histopathological features thus have utility for mutation prediction, including statistical modeling to assess pathogenicity of BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants of uncertain clinical significance. We analyzed large pathology datasets accrued by the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) to reassess histopathological predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status, and provide robust likelihood ratio (LR) estimates for statistical modeling. Methods: Selection criteria for study/center inclusion were estrogen receptor (ER) status or grade data available for invasive breast cancer diagnosed younger than 70 years. The dataset included 4,477 BRCA1 mutation carriers, 2,565 BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 47,565 BCAC breast cancer cases. Country-stratified estimates of the

Shared heritability and functional enrichment across six solid cancers

Correction: Nature Communications 10 (2019): art. 4386 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-12095-8Quantifying the genetic correlation between cancers can provide important insights into the mechanisms driving cancer etiology. Using genome-wide association study summary statistics across six cancer types based on a total of 296,215 cases and 301,319 controls of European ancestry, here we estimate the pair-wise genetic correlations between breast, colorectal, head/neck, lung, ovary and prostate cancer, and between cancers and 38 other diseases. We observed statistically significant genetic correlations between lung and head/neck cancer (r(g) = 0.57, p = 4.6 x 10(-8)), breast and ovarian cancer (r(g) = 0.24, p = 7 x 10(-5)), breast and lung cancer (r(g) = 0.18, p = 1.5 x 10(-6)) and breast and colorectal cancer (r(g) = 0.15, p = 1.1 x 10(-4)). We also found that multiple cancers are genetically correlated with non-cancer traits including smoking, psychiatric diseases and metabolic characteristics. Functional enrichment analysis revealed a significant excess contribution of conserved and regulatory regions to cancer heritability. Our comprehensive analysis of cross-cancer heritability suggests that solid tumors arising across tissues share in part a common germline genetic basis.Peer reviewe