HCC risk stratification after cure of hepatitis C in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease

Background&Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a main cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) due to chronic hepatitis C and who have achieved sustained virologic response (SVR). We elaborated risk stratification algorithms for de-novo-HCC-development after SVR and validated them in an independent cohort. Methods: Derivation cohort: 527 patients with pre-treatment ACLD and SVR to interferon-free therapy were evaluated for de-novo-HCC-development. Among others, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and non-invasive surrogates of portal hypertension including liver stiffness measurement (LSM) were assessed pre-/post-treatment. Validation cohort: 1500 patients with compensated ACLD (cACLD) from other European centers. Results: During a median follow-up (FU) of 41 months, 22/475 cACLD (4.6%) (1.45/100patient-years)vs.12/52 decompensated patients (23.1%, 7.00/100patient-years, p<0.001) developed de-novo-HCC. Since decompensated patients were at substantial HCC-risk, we focused on cACLD for all further analyses. In cACLD, post-treatment-values showed a higher discriminative ability for patients with/without de-novo-HCC-development during FU than pre-treatment-values or absolute/relative changes. Models based on post-treatment AFP≥4.6ngxmL-1-3points, alcohol consumption (males:>30g/d/females:>20g/d)-2points (optional), age≥59year-2points, LSM≥19.0kPa-1point, and albumin<42gxL-1-1point, accurately predicted de-novo-HCC-development (bootstrapped Harrel’s C with and without considering alcohol:0.893 and 0.836). Importantly, these parameters also provided independent prognostic information in competing risk analysis and accurately stratified patients into low-(0-3points; ≈2/3 of patients) and high-risk (≥4points; ≈1/3) groups in the derivation (algorithm with alcohol consumption; 4-year HCC-risk:0%vs.16.5%) and validation (3.3%/17.5%) cohorts. An alternative approach based on age/alcohol (optional)/FU-LSM/FU-albumin (i.e., without FU-AFP) also showed a robust performance. Conclusions: Simple algorithms based on post-treatment age/albumin/LSM, and optionally, AFP and alcohol, accurately stratified de-novo-HCC-risk in cACLD patients with SVR. Approximately 2/3 were identified as having an HCC-risk <1%/y in both the derivation and validation cohort, thereby clearly falling below the cost-effectiveness threshold for HCC-surveillance. LAY SUMMARY: Simple algorithms based on age, alcohol consumption, results of blood tests (albumin and α-fetoprotein), as well as liver stiffness measurement after the end of hepatitis C treatment identify a large proportion (approximately 2/3) of patients with advanced but still asymptomatic liver disease who are at very low risk (<1%/year) of liver cancer development, and thus, might not need to undergo 6-monthly liver ultrasound

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

Durability of SVR in chronic hepatitis C patients treated with peginterferon-a2a/ribavirin in combination with a direct-acting anti-viral

SUMMARY Background The introduction of direct-acting anti-virals has increased sustained virological response (SVR) rates in chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection. At present, data on long-term durability of viral eradication after successful triple therapy are lacking

Eight Weeks of Treatment With Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir Is Safe and Efficacious in an Integrated Analysis of Treatment-Naïve Patients With Hepatitis C Virus Infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The direct-acting antiviral combination glecaprevir/pibrentasvir has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for 8 weeks of treatment in treatment-naïve patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis. We performed an integrated analysis of data from trials to evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of 8 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis. METHODS: We pooled data from 8 phase 2 or phase 3 trials of treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 to 6 infections, without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis, who received 8 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. RESULTS: Of 1248 patients, 343 (27%) had cirrhosis. Most patients were white (80%) and had HCV genotype 1 infection (47%) or genotype 3 infection (22%); the median age was 54 years. Overall rates of sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12 were 97.6% (1218 of 1248) in the intention to treat (ITT) and 99.3% (1218 of 1226) in the modified ITT populations. When we excluded patients with genotype 3 infections with compensated cirrhosis (consistent with the European label), rates of sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12 were 97.6% in the ITT and 99.4% in the modified ITT populations. Eight virologic failures (7 in patients without cirrhosis and 1 in a patient with cirrhosis) occurred in the ITT population. Virologic failure was not associated with markers of advanced liver disease or populations of interest (current alcohol use, opioid substitution therapy, history of injection-drug use, and severe renal impairment). Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 58% of patients. The most frequent AEs (>10%) were headache (12%) and fatigue (12%). Serious AEs and AEs that led to glecaprevir/pibrentasvir discontinuation were reported in 2% and less than 1% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a pooled analysis of data from 8 trials, we found that 8 weeks of treatment with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir is efficacious and well tolerated in treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 to 6 infections, with or without cirrhosis.status: publishe

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

Associations of common breast cancer susceptibility alleles with risk of breast cancer subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Introduction: More than 70 common alleles are known to be involved in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility, and several exhibit significant heterogeneity in their associations with different BC subtypes. Although there are differences in the association patterns between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and the general population for several loci, no study has comprehensively evaluated the associations of all known BC susceptibility alleles with risk of BC subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Methods: We used data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 carriers to analyze the associations between approximately 200,000 genetic variants on the iCOGS array and risk of BC subtypes defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and triple-negative- (TN) status; morphologic subtypes; histological grade; and nodal involvement. Results: The estimated BC hazard ratios (HRs) for the 74 known BC alleles in BRCA1 carriers exhibited moderate correlations with the corresponding odds ratios from the general population. However, their associations with ER-positive BC in BRCA1 carriers were more consistent with the ER-positive as

Genome-Wide Association Study in BRCA1 Mutation Carriers Identifies Novel Loci Associated with Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk

BRCA1-associated breast and ovarian cancer risks can be modified by common genetic variants. To identify further cancer risk-modifying loci, we performed a multi-stage GWAS of 11,705 BRCA1 carriers (of whom 5,920 were diagnosed with breast and 1,839 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer), with a further replication in an additional sample of 2,646 BRCA1 carriers. We identified a novel breast cancer risk modifier locus at 1q32 for BRCA1 carriers (rs2290854, P = 2.7×10-8, HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09-1.20). In addition, we identified two novel ovarian cancer risk modifier loci: 17q21.31 (rs17631303, P = 1.4×10-8, HR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38) and 4q32.3 (rs4691139, P = 3.4×10-8, HR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38). The 4q32.3 locus was not associated with ovarian cancer risk in the general population or BRCA2 carriers, suggesting a BRCA1-specific associat