Contribution of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 sequence alterations to breast cancer in Northern India

BACKGROUND: A large number of distinct mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have been reported worldwide, but little is known regarding the role of these inherited susceptibility genes in breast cancer risk among Indian women. We investigated the distribution and the nature of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations and polymorphisms in a cohort of 204 Indian breast cancer patients and 140 age-matched controls. METHOD: Cases were selected with regard to early onset disease (≤40 years) and family history of breast and ovarian cancer. Two hundred four breast cancer cases along with 140 age-matched controls were analyzed for mutations. All coding regions and exon-intron boundaries of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes were screened by heteroduplex analysis followed by direct sequencing of detected variants. RESULTS: In total, 18 genetic alterations were identified. Three deleterious frame-shift mutations (185delAG in exon 2; 4184del4 and 3596del4 in exon 11) were identified in BRCA1, along with one missense mutation (K1667R), one 5'UTR alteration (22C>G), three intronic variants (IVS10-12delG, IVS13+2T>C, IVS7+38T>C) and one silent substitution (5154C>T). Similarly three pathogenic protein-truncating mutations (6376insAA in exon 11, 8576insC in exon19, and 9999delA in exon 27) along with one missense mutation (A2951T), four intronic alterations (IVS2+90T>A, IVS7+75A>T, IVS8+56C>T, IVS25+58insG) and one silent substitution (1593A>G) were identified in BRCA2. Four previously reported polymorphisms (K1183R, S1613G, and M1652I in BRCA1, and 7470A>G in BRCA2) were detected in both controls and breast cancer patients. Rare BRCA1/2 sequence alterations were observed in 15 out of 105 (14.2%) early-onset cases without family history and 11.7% (4/34) breast cancer cases with family history. Of these, six were pathogenic protein truncating mutations. In addition, several variants of uncertain clinical significance were identified. Among these are two missense variants, one alteration of a consensus splice donor sequence, and a variant that potentially disrupts translational initiation. CONCLUSION: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations appear to account for a lower proportion of breast cancer patients at increased risk of harboring such mutations in Northern India (6/204, 2.9%) than has been reported in other populations. However, given the limited extent of reported family history among these patients, the observed mutation frequency is not dissimilar from that reported in other cohorts of early onset breast cancer patients. Several of the identified mutations are unique and novel to Indian patients

Design Considerations for Massively Parallel Sequencing Studies of Complex Human Disease

Massively Parallel Sequencing (MPS) allows sequencing of entire exomes and genomes to now be done at reasonable cost, and its utility for identifying genes responsible for rare Mendelian disorders has been demonstrated. However, for a complex disease, study designs need to accommodate substantial degrees of locus, allelic, and phenotypic heterogeneity, as well as complex relationships between genotype and phenotype. Such considerations include careful selection of samples for sequencing and a well-developed strategy for identifying the few “true” disease susceptibility genes from among the many irrelevant genes that will be found to harbor rare variants. To examine these issues we have performed simulation-based analyses in order to compare several strategies for MPS sequencing in complex disease. Factors examined include genetic architecture, sample size, number and relationship of individuals selected for sequencing, and a variety of filters based on variant type, multiple observations of genes and concordance of genetic variants within pedigrees. A two-stage design was assumed where genes from the MPS analysis of high-risk families are evaluated in a secondary screening phase of a larger set of probands with more modest family histories. Designs were evaluated using a cost function that assumes the cost of sequencing the whole exome is 400 times that of sequencing a single candidate gene. Results indicate that while requiring variants to be identified in multiple pedigrees and/or in multiple individuals in the same pedigree are effective strategies for reducing false positives, there is a danger of over-filtering so that most true susceptibility genes are missed. In most cases, sequencing more than two individuals per pedigree results in reduced power without any benefit in terms of reduced overall cost. Further, our results suggest that although no single strategy is optimal, simulations can provide important guidelines for study design

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

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Trend-TDT – a transmission/disequilibrium based association test on functional mini/microsatellites

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minisatellites and microsatellites are associated with human disease, not only as markers of risk but also involved directly in disease pathogenesis. They may play significant roles in replication, repair and mutation of DNA, regulation of gene transcription and protein structure alteration. Phenotypes can thus be affected by mini/microsatellites in a manner proportional to the length of the allele. Here we propose a new method to assess the linear trend toward transmission of shorter or longer alleles from heterozygote parents to affected child.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>This test (trend-TDT) performs better than other TDT (Transmission/Disequilibrium Test) type tests, such as TDT_maxand TDT_L/S, under most marker-disease association models.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The trend-TDT test is a more powerful association test when there is a biological basis to suspect a relationship between allele length and disease risk.</p

Breast cancer risk prediction using a polygenic risk score in the familial setting: a prospective study from the Breast Cancer Family Registry and kConFab.

PURPOSE: This study examined the utility of sets of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in familial but non-BRCA-associated breast cancer (BC). METHODS: We derived a polygenic risk score (PRS) based on 24 known BC risk SNPs for 4,365 women from the Breast Cancer Family Registry and Kathleen Cuningham Consortium Foundation for Research into Familial Breast Cancer familial BC cohorts. We compared scores for women based on cancer status at baseline; 2,599 women unaffected at enrollment were followed-up for an average of 7.4 years. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the association of PRS with BC risk. The BOADICEA risk prediction algorithm was used to measure risk based on family history alone. RESULTS: The mean PRS at baseline was 2.25 (SD, 0.35) for affected women and was 2.17 (SD, 0.35) for unaffected women from combined cohorts (P < 10-6). During follow-up, 205 BC cases occurred. The hazard ratios for continuous PRS (per SD) and upper versus lower quintiles were 1.38 (95% confidence interval: 1.22-1.56) and 3.18 (95% confidence interval: 1.84-5.23) respectively. Based on their PRS-based predicted risk, management for up to 23% of women could be altered. CONCLUSION: Including BC-associated SNPs in risk assessment can provide more accurate risk prediction than family history alone and can influence recommendations for cancer screening and prevention modalities for high-risk women.Genet Med 19 1, 30-35.National Institutes of HealthThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.4

Identification of BRCA1 missense substitutions that confer partial functional activity: potential moderate risk variants?

Introduction: Many of the DNA sequence variants identified in the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1 remain unclassified in terms of their potential pathogenicity. Both multifactorial likelihood analysis and functional approaches have been proposed as a means to elucidate likely clinical significance of such variants, but analysis of the comparative value of these methods for classifying all sequence variants has been limited. Methods: We have compared the results from multifactorial likelihood analysis with those from several functional analyses for the four BRCA1 sequence variants A1708E, G1738R, R1699Q, and A1708V. Results: Our results show that multifactorial likelihood analysis, which incorporates sequence conservation, co-inheritance, segregation, and tumour immunohistochemical analysis, may improve classification of variants. For A1708E, previously shown to be functionally compromised, analysis of oestrogen receptor, cytokeratin 5/6, and cytokeratin 14 tumour expression data significantly strengthened the prediction of pathogenicity, giving a posterior probability of pathogenicity of 99%. For G1738R, shown to be functionally defective in this study, immunohistochemistry analysis confirmed previous findings of inconsistent 'BRCA1-like' phenotypes for the two tumours studied, and the posterior probability for this variant was 96%. The posterior probabilities of R1699Q and A1708V were 54% and 69%, respectively, only moderately suggestive of increased risk. Interestingly, results from functional analyses suggest that both of these variants have only partial functional activity. R1699Q was defective in foci formation in response to DNA damage and displayed intermediate transcriptional transactivation activity but showed no evidence for centrosome amplification. In contrast, A1708V displayed an intermediate transcriptional transactivation activity and a normal foci formation response in response to DNA damage but induced centrosome amplification. Conclusion: These data highlight the need for a range of functional studies to be performed in order to identify variants with partially compromised function. The results also raise the possibility that A1708V and R1699Q may be associated with a low or moderate risk of cancer. While data pooling strategies may provide more information for multifactorial analysis to improve the interpretation of the clinical significance of these variants, it is likely that the development of current multifactorial likelihood approaches and the consideration of alternative statistical approaches will be needed to determine whether these individually rare variants do confer a low or moderate risk of breast cancer

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing

Background: Germline genetic testing with hereditary cancer gene panels can identify women at increased risk of breast cancer. However, those at increased risk of triple-negative (estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor-negative) breast cancer (TNBC) cannot be identified because predisposition genes for TNBC, other than BRCA1, have not been established. The aim of this study was to define the cancer panel genes associated with increased risk of TNBC. Methods: Multigene panel testing for 21 genes in 8753 TNBC patients was performed by a clinical testing laboratory, and testing for 17 genes in 2148 patients was conducted by a Triple Negative Breast Cancer Consortium(TNBCC) of research studies. Associations between deleterious mutations in cancer predisposition genes and TNBC were evaluated using results from TNBC patients and reference controls. Results: Germline pathogenic variants in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51D were associated with high risk (odds ratio > 5.0) of TNBC and greater than 20% lifetime risk for overall breast cancer among Caucasians. Pathogenic variants in BRIP1, RAD51C, and TP53 were associated with moderate risk (odds ratio > 2) of TNBC. Similar trends were observed for the African American population. Pathogenic variants in these TNBC genes were detected in 12.0% (3.7% non-BRCA1/2) of all participants. Conclusions: Multigene hereditary cancer panel testing can identify women with elevated risk of TNBC due to mutations in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51D. These women can potentially benefit from improved screening, risk management, and cancer prevention strategies. Patients with mutations may also benefit from specific targeted therapeutic strategies.Peer reviewe

Whole Exome Sequencing Suggests Much of Non-BRCA1/BRCA2 Familial Breast Cancer Is Due to Moderate and Low Penetrance Susceptibility Alleles

The identification of the two most prevalent susceptibility genes in breast cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, was the beginning of a sustained effort to uncover new genes explaining the missing heritability in this disease. Today, additional high, moderate and low penetrance genes have been identified in breast cancer, such as P53, PTEN, STK11, PALB2 or ATM, globally accounting for around 35 percent of the familial cases. In the present study we used massively parallel sequencing to analyze 7 BRCA1/BRCA2 negative families, each having at least 6 affected women with breast cancer (between 6 and 10) diagnosed under the age of 60 across generations. After extensive filtering, Sanger sequencing validation and co-segregation studies, variants were prioritized through either control-population studies, including up to 750 healthy individuals, or case-control assays comprising approximately 5300 samples. As a result, a known moderate susceptibility indel variant (CHEK2 1100delC) and a catalogue of 11 rare variants presenting signs of association with breast cancer were identified. All the affected genes are involved in important cellular mechanisms like DNA repair, cell proliferation and survival or cell cycle regulation. This study highlights the need to investigate the role of rare variants in familial cancer development by means of novel high throughput analysis strategies optimized for genetically heterogeneous scenarios. Even considering the intrinsic limitations of exome resequencing studies, our findings support the hypothesis that the majority of non-BRCA1/BRCA2 breast cancer families might be explained by the action of moderate and/or low penetrance susceptibility alleles