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

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

The INSIG2 rs7566605 polymorphism is not associated with body mass index and breast cancer risk

Abstract Background The single nucleotide polymorphism rs7566605, located in the promoter of the INSIG2 gene, has been the subject of a strong scientific effort aimed to elucidate its possible association with body mass index (BMI). The first report showing that rs7566605 could be associated with body fatness was a genome-wide association study (GWAS) which used BMI as the primary phenotype. Many follow-up studies sought to validate the association of rs7566605 with various markers of obesity, with several publications reporting inconsistent findings. BMI is considered to be one of the measures of choice to evaluate body fatness and there is evidence that body fatness is related with an increased risk of breast cancer (BC). Methods we tested in a large-scale association study (3,973 women, including 1,269 invasive BC cases and 2,194 controls), nested within the EPIC cohort, the involvement of rs7566605 as predictor of BMI and BC risk. Results and Conclusions In this study we were not able to find any statistically significant association between this SNP and BMI, nor did we find any significant association between the SNP and an increased risk of breast cancer overall and by subgroups of age, or menopausal status.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

Detecting differential allelic expression using high-resolution melting curve analysis: application to the breast cancer susceptibility gene CHEK2

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The gene <it>CHEK2 </it>encodes a checkpoint kinase playing a key role in the DNA damage pathway. Though <it>CHEK2 </it>has been identified as an intermediate breast cancer susceptibility gene, only a small proportion of high-risk families have been explained by genetic variants located in its coding region. Alteration in gene expression regulation provides a potential mechanism for generating disease susceptibility. The detection of differential allelic expression (DAE) represents a sensitive assay to direct the search for a functional sequence variant within the transcriptional regulatory elements of a candidate gene. We aimed to assess whether <it>CHEK2 </it>was subject to DAE in lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) from high-risk breast cancer patients for whom no mutation in <it>BRCA1</it> or <it>BRCA2</it> had been identified.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We implemented an assay based on high-resolution melting (HRM) curve analysis and developed an analysis tool for DAE assessment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We observed allelic expression imbalance in 4 of the 41 LCLs examined. All four were carriers of the truncating mutation 1100delC. We confirmed previous findings that this mutation induces non-sense mediated mRNA decay. In our series, we ruled out the possibility of a functional sequence variant located in the promoter region or in a regulatory element of <it>CHEK2 </it>that would lead to DAE in the transcriptional regulatory milieu of freely proliferating LCLs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results support that HRM is a sensitive and accurate method for DAE assessment. This approach would be of great interest for high-throughput mutation screening projects aiming to identify genes carrying functional regulatory polymorphisms.</p

Evaluation of the XRCC1 gene as a phenotypic modifier in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Results from the consortium of investigators of modifiers of BRCA1/BRCA2

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in DNA repair are good candidates to be tested as phenotypic modifiers for carriers of mutations in the high-risk susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. The base excision repair (BER) pathway could be particularly interesting given the relation of synthetic lethality that exists between one of the components of the pathway, PARP1, and both BRCA1 and BRCA2. In this study, we have evaluated the XRCC1 gene that participates in the BER pathway, as phenotypic modifier of BRCA1 and BRCA2. METHODS: Three common SNPs in the gene, c.-77C>T (rs3213245) p.Arg280His (rs25489) and p.Gln399Arg (rs25487) were analysed in a series of 701 BRCA1 and 576 BRCA2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: An association was observed between p.Arg280His-rs25489 and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers, with rare homozygotes at increased risk relative to common homozygotes (hazard ratio: 22.3, 95% confidence interval: 14.3-34, P<0.001). This association was further tested in a second series of 4480 BRCA1 and 3016 BRCA2 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2. CONCLUSIONS AND INTERPRETATION: No evidence of association was found when the larger series was analysed which lead us to conclude that none of the three SNPs are significant modifiers of breast cancer risk for mutation carriers

The TP53 Arg72Pro and MDM2 309G>T polymorphisms are not associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background: The TP53 pathway, in which TP53 and its negative regulator MDM2 are the central elements, has an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly in BRCA1- and BRCA2-mediated carcinogenesis. A single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of MDM2 (309T>G, rs2279744) and a coding SNP of TP53 (Arg72Pro, rs1042522) have been shown to be of functional significance. Methods: To investigate whether these SNPs modify breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we pooled genotype data on the TP53 Arg72Pro SNP in 7011 mutation carriers and on the MDM2 309T>G SNP in 2222 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Data were analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model within a retrospective likelihood framework. Results: No association was found between these SNPs and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 (TP53: per-allele hazard ratio (HR)=1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93–1.10, Ptrend=0.77; MDM2: HR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.84–1.09, Ptrend=0.54) or for BRCA2 mutation carriers (TP53: HR=0.99, 95%CI: 0.87–1.12, Ptrend=0.83; MDM2: HR=0.98, 95%CI: 0.80–1.21, Ptrend=0.88). We also evaluated the potential combined effects of both SNPs on breast cancer risk, however, none of their combined genotypes showed any evidence of association. Conclusion: There was no evidence that TP53 Arg72Pro or MDM2 309T>G, either singly or in combination, influence breast cancer risk in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. O M Sinilnikova1,2, A C Antoniou3, J Simard4, S Healey5, M Léoné1, D Sinnett6,7, A B Spurdle5, J Beesley5, X Chen5, kConFab8, M H Greene9, J T Loud9, F Lejbkowicz10, G Rennert10, S Dishon10, I L Andrulis11,12, OCGN11, S M Domchek13, K L Nathanson13, S Manoukian14, P Radice15,16, I Konstantopoulou17, I Blanco18, A L Laborde19, M Durán20, A Osorio21, J Benitez21, U Hamann22, F B L Hogervorst23, T A M van Os24, H J P Gille25, HEBON23, S Peock3, M Cook3, C Luccarini26, D G Evans27, F Lalloo27, R Eeles28, G Pichert29, R Davidson30, T Cole31, J Cook32, J Paterson33, C Brewer34, EMBRACE3, D J Hughes35, I Coupier36,37, S Giraud1, F Coulet38, C Colas38, F Soubrier38, E Rouleau39, I Bièche39, R Lidereau39, L Demange40, C Nogues40, H T Lynch41, GEMO1,2,42, R K Schmutzler43, B Versmold43, C Engel44, A Meindl45, N Arnold46, C Sutter47, H Deissler48, D Schaefer49, U G Froster50, GC-HBOC43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50, K Aittomäki51, H Nevanlinna52, L McGuffog3, D F Easton3, G Chenevix-Trench5 and D Stoppa-Lyonnet42 on behalf of the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/

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

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 association. The 17q21.31 locus was also associated with ovarian cancer risk in 8,211 BRCA2 carriers (P = 2×10−4). These loci may lead to an improved understanding of the etiology of breast and ovarian tumors in BRCA1 carriers. Based on the joint distribution of the known BRCA1 breast cancer risk-modifying loci, we estimated that the breast cancer lifetime risks for the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk are 28%–50% compared to 81%–100% for the 5% at highest risk. Similarly, based on the known ovarian cancer risk-modifying loci, the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk have an estimated lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer of 28% or lower, whereas the 5% at highest risk will have a risk of 63% or higher. Such differences in risk may have important implications for risk prediction and clinical management for BRCA1 carriers