Frequency of pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2 and TP53 in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed in women under the age of 50 years

a: TP53 pathogenic variants in cases. b: TP53 VUS in cases. (DOCX 20 kb

PIK3CA mutations are common in lobular carcinoma in situ, but are not a biomarker of progression

Sample and data collection were funded by Cancer Research UK. Analysis was funded by Breast Cancer Now, the Rosetrees Trust, Guys & St Thomas’ Charity (CanHelp) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy’s and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London

Genetic predisposition to ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive form of breast cancer. It is often associated with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and is considered to be a non-obligate precursor of IDC. It is not clear to what extent these two forms of cancer share low-risk susceptibility loci, or whether there are differences in the strength of association for shared loci. METHODS: To identify genetic polymorphisms that predispose to DCIS, we pooled data from 38 studies comprising 5,067 cases of DCIS, 24,584 cases of IDC and 37,467 controls, all genotyped using the iCOGS chip. RESULTS: Most (67 %) of the 76 known breast cancer predisposition loci showed an association with DCIS in the same direction as previously reported for invasive breast cancer. Case-only analysis showed no evidence for differences between associations for IDC and DCIS after considering multiple testing. Analysis by estrogen receptor (ER) status confirmed that loci associated with ER positive IDC were also associated with ER positive DCIS. Analysis of DCIS by grade suggested that two independent SNPs at 11q13.3 near CCND1 were specific to low/intermediate grade DCIS (rs75915166, rs554219). These associations with grade remained after adjusting for ER status and were also found in IDC. We found no novel DCIS-specific loci at a genome wide significance level of P < 5.0x10(-8). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study provides the strongest evidence to date of a shared genetic susceptibility for IDC and DCIS. Studies with larger numbers of DCIS are needed to determine if IDC or DCIS specific loci exist

Genetic predisposition to ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Background: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive form of breast cancer. It is often associated with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and is considered to be a non-obligate precursor of IDC. It is not clear to what extent these two forms of cancer share low-risk susceptibility loci, or whether there are differences in the strength of association for shared loci. Methods: To identify genetic polymorphisms that predispose to DCIS, we pooled data from 38 studies comprising 5,067 cases of DCIS, 24,584 cases of IDC and 37,467 controls, all genotyped using the iCOGS chip. Results: Most (67 %) of the 76 known breast cancer predisposition loci showed an association with DCIS in the same direction as previously reported for invasive breast cancer. Case-only analysis showed no evidence for differences between associations for IDC and DCIS after considering multiple testing. Analysis by estrogen receptor (ER) status confirmed that loci associated with ER positive IDC were also associated with ER positive DCIS. Analysis of DCIS by grade suggested that two independent SNPs at 11q13.3 near CCND1 were specific to low/intermediate grade DCIS (rs75915166, rs554219). These associations with grade remained after adjusting for ER status and were also found in IDC. We found no novel DCIS-specific loci at a genome wide significance level of P < 5.0x10-8. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study provides the strongest evidence to date of a shared genetic susceptibility for IDC and DCIS. Studies with larger numbers of DCIS are needed to determine if IDC or DCIS specific loci exist

Carboplatin in BRCA1/2-mutated and triple-negative breast cancer BRCAness subgroups: the TNT Trial

Germline mutations in BRCA1/2 predispose individuals to breast cancer (termed germline-mutated BRCA1/2 breast cancer, gBRCA-BC) by impairing homologous recombination (HR) and causing genomic instability. HR also repairs DNA lesions caused by platinum agents and PARP inhibitors. Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) harbor subpopulations with BRCA1/2 mutations, hypothesized to be especially platinum-sensitive. Cancers in putative ‘BRCAness’ subgroups—tumors with BRCA1 methylation; low levels of BRCA1 mRNA (BRCA1 mRNA-low); or mutational signatures for HR deficiency and those with basal phenotypes—may also be sensitive to platinum. We assessed the efficacy of carboplatin and another mechanistically distinct therapy, docetaxel, in a phase 3 trial in subjects with unselected advanced TNBC. A prespecified protocol enabled biomarker–treatment interaction analyses in gBRCA-BC and BRCAness subgroups. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). In the unselected population (376 subjects; 188 carboplatin, 188 docetaxel), carboplatin was not more active than docetaxel (ORR, 31.4% versus 34.0%, respectively; P = 0.66). In contrast, in subjects with gBRCA-BC, carboplatin had double the ORR of docetaxel (68% versus 33%, respectively; biomarker, treatment interaction P = 0.01). Such benefit was not observed for subjects with BRCA1 methylation, BRCA1 mRNA-low tumors or a high score in a Myriad HRD assay. Significant interaction between treatment and the basal-like subtype was driven by high docetaxel response in the nonbasal subgroup. We conclude that patients with advanced TNBC benefit from characterization of BRCA1/2 mutations, but not BRCA1 methylation or Myriad HRD analyses, to inform choices on platinum-based chemotherapy. Additionally, gene expression analysis of basal-like cancers may also influence treatment selection

The proteasomal de-ubiquitinating enzyme POH1 promotes the double-strand DNA break response

The regulation of Ubiquitin (Ub) conjugates generated by the complex network of proteins that promote the mammalian DNA double-strand break (DSB) response is not fully understood. We show here that the Ub protease POH1/rpn11/PSMD14 resident in the 19S proteasome regulatory particle is required for processing poly-Ub formed in the DSB response. Proteasome activity is required to restrict tudor domain-dependent 53BP1 accumulation at sites of DNA damage. This occurs both through antagonism of RNF8/RNF168-mediated lysine 63-linked poly-Ub and through the promotion of JMJD2A retention on chromatin. Consistent with this role POH1 acts in opposition to RNF8/RNF168 to modulate end-joining DNA repair. Additionally, POH1 acts independently of 53BP1 in homologous recombination repair to promote RAD51 loading. Accordingly, POH1-deficient cells are sensitive to DNA damaging agents. These data demonstrate that proteasomal POH1 is a key de-ubiquitinating enzyme that regulates ubiquitin conjugates generated in response to damage and that several aspects of the DSB response are regulated by the proteasome

Common bean proteomics: Present status and future strategies

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is a legume of appreciable importance and usefulness worldwide to the human population providing food and feed. It is rich in high-quality protein, energy, fiber and micronutrients especially iron, zinc, and pro-vitamin A; and possesses potentially diseasepreventing and health-promoting compounds. The recently published genome sequence of common bean is an important landmark in common bean research, opening new avenues for understanding its genetics in depth. This legume crop is affected by diverse biotic and abiotic stresses severely limiting its productivity. Looking at the trend of increasing world population and the need for food crops bestsuited to the health of humankind, the legumes will be in great demand, including the common bean mostly for its nutritive values. Hence the need for new research in understanding the biology of this crop brings us to utilize and apply high-throughput omics approaches. In this mini-review our focus will be on the need for proteomics studies in common bean, potential of proteomics for understanding genetic regulation under abiotic and biotic stresses and how proteogenomics will lead to nutritional improvement. We will also discuss future proteomics-based strategies that must be adopted to mine new genomic resources by identifying molecular switches regulating various biological processes