SNPs in lncRNA regions and breast cancer risk

Peer reviewe

Department of Radiation Oncology and Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas jefferson University, The intronic G13964C variant in p53 is not a high-risk mutation in familial breast cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for approximately 50% of breast cancer families with more than four affected cases, whereas exonic mutations in p53, PTEN, CHK2 and ATM may account for a very small proportion. It was recently reported that an intronic variant of p53--G13964C--occurred in three out of 42 (7.1%) \u27hereditary\u27 breast cancer patients, but not in any of 171 \u27sporadic\u27 breast cancer control individuals (P = 0.0003). If this relatively frequent occurrence of G13964C in familial breast cancer and absence in control individuals were confirmed, then this would suggest that the G13964C variant plays a role in breast cancer susceptibility. METHOD: We genotyped 71 familial breast cancer patients and 143 control individuals for the G13964C variant using polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. RESULTS: Three (4.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-8.9%) G13964C heterozygotes were identified. The variant was also identified in 5 out of 143 (3.5%; 95% CI 0.6-6.4%) control individuals without breast cancer or a family history of breast cancer, however, which is no different to the proportion found in familial cases (P = 0.9). CONCLUSION: The present study would have had 80% power to detect an odds ratio of 4.4, and we therefore conclude that the G13946C polymorphism is not a \u27high-risk\u27 mutation for familial breast cancer

Are estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers sporadic?

There is a strong association between BRCA1 mutation carrier status and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer. This has led to the idea that estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers may be incidental or sporadic in nature and not as a direct result of BRCA1 dysfunction. A recent paper in Breast Cancer Research challenges this view

No evidence for association of ataxia-telangiectasia mutated gene T2119C and C3161G amino acid substitution variants with risk of breast cancer

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that certain mutations in the double-strand break repair pathway ataxia-telangiectasia mutated gene act in a dominant-negative manner to increase the risk of breast cancer. There are also some reports to suggest that the amino acid substitution variants T2119C Ser707Pro and C3161G Pro1054Arg may be associated with breast cancer risk. We investigate the breast cancer risk associated with these two nonconservative amino acid substitution variants using a large Australian population-based case–control study. METHODS: The polymorphisms were genotyped in more than 1300 cases and 600 controls using 5' exonuclease assays. Case–control analyses and genotype distributions were compared by logistic regression. RESULTS: The 2119C variant was rare, occurring at frequencies of 1.4 and 1.3% in cases and controls, respectively (P = 0.8). There was no difference in genotype distribution between cases and controls (P = 0.8), and the TC genotype was not associated with increased risk of breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = 0.59–1.97, P = 0.8). Similarly, the 3161G variant was no more common in cases than in controls (2.9% versus 2.2%, P = 0.2), there was no difference in genotype distribution between cases and controls (P = 0.1), and the CG genotype was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval = 0.85–1.98, P = 0.2). This lack of evidence for an association persisted within groups defined by the family history of breast cancer or by age. CONCLUSION: The 2119C and 3161G amino acid substitution variants are not associated with moderate or high risks of breast cancer in Australian women

Mutation analysis of FANCD2, BRIP1/BACH1, LMO4 and SFN in familial breast cancer

INTRODUCTION: Mutations in known predisposition genes account for only about a third of all multiple-case breast cancer families. We hypothesized that germline mutations in FANCD2, BRIP1/BACH1, LMO4 and SFN may account for some of the unexplained multiple-case breast cancer families. METHODS: The families used in this study were ascertained through the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab). Denaturing high performance liquid chromatography (DHPLC) analysis of the coding regions of these four genes was conducted in the youngest affected cases of 30 to 267 non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families. In addition, a further 399 index cases were also screened for mutations in two functionally significant regions of the FANCD2 gene and 253 index cases were screened for two previously reported mutations in BACH1 (p. P47A and p. M299I). RESULTS: DHPLC analysis of FANCD2 identified six silent exonic variants, and a large number of intronic variants, which tagged two common haplotypes. One protein truncating variant was found in BRIP1/BACH1, as well as four missense variants, a silent change and a variant in the 3' untranslated region. No missense or splice site mutations were found in LMO4 or SFN. Analysis of the missense, silent and frameshift variants of FANCD2 and BACH1 in relatives of the index cases, and in a panel of controls, found no evidence suggestive of pathogenicity. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence that highly penetrant exonic or splice site mutations in FANCD2, BRIP1/BACH1, LMO4 or SFN contribute to familial breast cancer. Large scale association studies will be necessary to determine whether any of the polymorphisms or haplotypes identified in these genes contributes to breast cancer risk

Kinome profiling reveals breast cancer heterogeneity and identifies targeted therapeutic opportunities for triple negative breast cancer

Our understanding of breast cancer heterogeneity at the protein level is limited despite proteins being the ultimate effectors of cellular functions. We investigated the heterogeneity of breast cancer (41 primary tumors and 15 breast cancer cell lines) at the protein and phosphoprotein levels to identify activated oncogenic pathways and developing targeted therapeutic strategies. Heterogeneity was observed not only across histological subtypes, but also within subtypes. Tumors of the Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtype distributed across four different clusters where one cluster (cluster ii) showed high deregulation of many proteins and phosphoproteins. The majority of TNBC cell lines, particularly mesenchymal lines, resembled the cluster ii TNBC tumors. Indeed, TNBC cell lines were more sensitive than non-TNBC cell lines when treated with targeted inhibitors selected based on upregulated pathways in cluster ii. In line with the enrichment of the upregulated pathways with onco-clients of Hsp90, we found synergy in combining Hsp90 inhibitors with several kinase inhibitors, particularly Erk5 inhibitors. The combination of Erk5 and Hsp90 inhibitors was effective in vitro and in vivo against TNBC leading to upregulation of pro-apoptotic effectors. Our studies contribute to proteomic profiling and improve our understanding of TNBC heterogeneity to provide therapeutic opportunities for this disease

Evaluating the role of alcohol consumption in breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility using population-based cohort studies and two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses.

Alcohol consumption is correlated positively with risk for breast cancer in observational studies, but observational studies are subject to reverse causation and confounding. The association with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is unclear. We performed both observational Cox regression and two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses using data from various European cohort studies (observational) and publicly available cancer consortia (MR). These estimates were compared to World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) findings. In our observational analyses, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for a one standard drink/day increase was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.04, 1.08) for breast cancer and 1.00 (0.92, 1.08) for EOC, both of which were consistent with previous WCRF findings. MR ORs per genetically predicted one standard drink/day increase estimated via 34 SNPs using MR-PRESSO were 1.00 (0.93, 1.08) for breast cancer and 0.95 (0.85, 1.06) for EOC. Stratification by EOC subtype or estrogen receptor status in breast cancers made no meaningful difference to the results. For breast cancer, the CIs for the genetically derived estimates include the point-estimate from observational studies so are not inconsistent with a small increase in risk. Our data provide additional evidence that alcohol intake is unlikely to have anything other than a very small effect on risk of EOC

Variation in the RAD51 gene and familial breast cancer

INTRODUCTION: Human RAD51 is a homologue of the Escherichia coli RecA protein and is known to function in recombinational repair of double-stranded DNA breaks. Mutations in the lower eukaryotic homologues of RAD51 result in a deficiency in the repair of double-stranded DNA breaks. Loss of RAD51 function would therefore be expected to result in an elevated mutation rate, leading to accumulation of DNA damage and, hence, to increased cancer risk. RAD51 interacts directly or indirectly with a number of proteins implicated in breast cancer, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2. Similar to BRCA1 mice, RAD51(-/- )mice are embryonic lethal. The RAD51 gene region has been shown to exhibit loss of heterozygosity in breast tumours, and deregulated RAD51 expression in breast cancer patients has also been reported. Few studies have investigated the role of coding region variation in the RAD51 gene in familial breast cancer, with only one coding region variant – exon 6 c.449G>A (p.R150Q) – reported to date. METHODS: All nine coding exons of the RAD51 gene were analysed for variation in 46 well-characterised, BRCA1/2-negative breast cancer families using denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography. Genotyping of the exon 6 p.R150Q variant was performed in an additional 66 families. Additionally, lymphoblastoid cell lines from breast cancer patients were subjected to single nucleotide primer extension analysis to assess RAD51 expression. RESULTS: No coding region variation was found, and all intronic variation detected was either found in unaffected controls or was unlikely to have functional consequences. Single nucleotide primer extension analysis did not reveal any allele-specific changes in RAD51 expression in all lymphoblastoid cell lines tested. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that RAD51 is not a major familial breast cancer predisposition gene