249 research outputs found
Association of tamoxifen use and reduced risk of contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers
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
Variability in organ-specific EGFR mutational spectra in tumour epithelium and stroma may be the biological basis for differential responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors
Organ-specific differences in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational spectra and frequencies were found in lung cancer and sporadic and BRCA1/2-related breast cancers. Additionally, we found a high frequency of EGFR mutations in the tumour stroma of these invasive breast carcinomas. Those organ-specific mutational spectra and potential targets in the cancer-associated stroma might influence the efficacy of TKI therapy
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
About 1% of the breast and ovarian Spanish families testing negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2 are carriers of RAD51D pathogenic variants
RAD51D mutations have been recently identified in breast (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) families. Although an etiological role in OC appears to be present, the association of RAD51D mutations and BC risk is more unclear. We aimed to determine the prevalence of germline RAD51D mutations in Spanish BC/OC families negative for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. We analyzed 842 index patients: 491 from BC/OC families, 171 BC families, 51 OC families and 129 patients without family history but with early-onset BC or OC or metachronous BC and OC. Mutation detection was performed with high-resolution melting, denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography or Sanger sequencing. Three mutations were found in four families with BC and OC cases (0.82%). Two were novel: c.1A>T (p.Met1?) and c.667+2_667+23del, leading to the exon 7 skipping and one previously described: c.674C>T (p.Arg232*). All were present in BC/OC families with only one OC. The c.667+2_667+23del cosegregated in the family with one early-onset BC and two bilateral BC cases. We also identified the c.629C>T (p.Ala210Val) variant, which was predicted in silico to be potentially pathogenic. About 1% of the BC and OC Spanish families negative for BRCA1/BRCA2 are carriers of RAD51D mutations. The presence of several BC mutation carriers, albeit in the context of familial OC, suggests an increased risk for BC, which should be taken into account in the follow-up and early detection measures. RAD51D testing should be considered in clinical setting for families with BC and OC, irrespective of the number of OC cases in the family
Tamoxifen and risk of contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers
Purpose To determine whether adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer (BC) is associated with reduced contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Methods Analysis of pooled observational cohort data, self-reported at enrollment and at follow-up from the International BRCA1, and BRCA2 Carrier Cohort Study, Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer, and Breast Cancer Family Registry. Eligible women were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers diagnosed with unilateral BC since 1970 and no other invasive cancer or tamoxifen use before first BC. Hazard ratios (HRs) for CBC associated with tamoxifen use were estimated using Cox regression, adjusting for year and age of diagnosis, country, and bilateral oophorectomy and censoring at contralateral mastectomy, death, or loss to follow-up. Results Of 1,583 BRCA1 and 881 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 383 (24%) and 454 (52%), respectively, took tamoxifen after first BC d
Inheritance of deleterious mutations at both BRCA1 and BRCA2 in an international sample of 32,295 women
Background: Most or mutation carriers have inherited a single (heterozygous) mutation. Transheterozygotes (TH) who have inherited deleterious mutations in both and are rare, and the consequences of transheterozygosity are poorly understood.
Methods: From 32,295 female mutation carriers, we identified 93 TH (0.3 %). "Cases" were defined as TH, and "controls" were single mutations at (SH1) or (SH2). Matched SH1 "controls" carried a BRCA1 mutation found in the TH "case". Matched SH2 "controls" carried a BRCA2 mutation found in the TH "case". After matching the TH carriers with SH1 or SH2, 91 TH were matched to 9316 SH1, and 89 TH were matched to 3370 SH2.
Results: The majority of TH (45.2 %) involved the three common Jewish mutations. TH were more likely than SH1 and SH2 women to have been ever diagnosed with breast cancer (BC; = 0.002). TH were more likely to be diagnosed with ovarian cancer (OC) than SH2 ( = 0.017), but not SH1. Age at BC diagnosis was the same in TH vs. SH1 ( = 0.231), but was on average 4.5 years younger in TH than in SH2 ( < 0.001). BC in TH was more likely to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive ( = 0.010) or progesterone receptor (PR) positive ( = 0.013) than in SH1, but less likely to be ER positive ( < 0.001) or PR positive ( = 0.012) than SH2. Among 15 tumors from TH patients, there was no clear pattern of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) for or in either BC or OC.
Conclusions: Our observations suggest that clinical TH phenotypes resemble SH1. However, TH breast tumor marker characteristics are phenotypically intermediate to SH1 and SH2.ACA and the CIMBA data management are funded by Cancer Research UK (C12292/A20861 and C12292/A11174). TRR was supported by R01-CA083855, R01-CA102776, and P50-CA083638. KLN, TMF, and SMD are supported by the Basser Research Center at the University of Pennsylvania. BP is supported by R01-CA112520. Cancer Research UK provided financial support for this work. ACA is a Senior Cancer Research UK Cancer Research Fellow. DFE is Cancer Research UK Principal Research Fellow. Tumor analysis was funded by STOP CANCER (to SJR). Study-specific acknowledgements are as provided in the manuscript
Does “soft conditionality” increase the impact of cash transfers on desired outcomes? Evidence from a randomized control trial in Lesotho
Cash transfers programs have been shown to have positive effects on a variety of outcomes. While much of the literature focuses on the role of conditionality in achieving desired impact, this paper focuses on the role of ‘soft conditionality’ implemented through both ‘labeling’ and ‘messaging’ in evaluating the impact of the Child Grants Program in Lesotho, an unconditional cash transfer targeting poor households with orphans and vulnerable children. Beneficiary households received a clear message that the transfer should be spent on the interest and needs of children. Our findings are based on a randomized experiment and suggest that ‘soft conditionality’ does play a strong role in increasing expenditure for children, especially on education, clothing and footwear. Results indicate in fact that transfer income is spent differently from general income as it exerts both an income and a substitution effect. This behavioral change is confirmed by comparing the ex-ante expected behaviors with the ex-post actual response to the program. We find that for expenditure categories linked to the wellbeing of children the ex-post response was much higher than the ex-ante expected behavior
- …