Back to Authors

Yao, Song

Mayo Clinic

Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center

Citations 5

Pathogenic Variants, Family History, and Cumulative Risk of Breast Cancer in US Women
Keil, Alexander P. , Taylor, Jack A. , Yadav, Siddhartha , Culver, Hoda Anton, Auer, Paul L. , Bodelón, Clara , Haiman, Christopher A., Lindströem, Sara, Martinez, Maria Elena, Nathanson, Katherine L. , Patel, Alpa V. , Penney, Kathryn L., Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Teras, Lauren R., Vachon, Celine M. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Yao, Song, Weitzel, Jeffrey N , Yadav, Siddhartha , Taylor, Jack A , Nathanson, Katherine L , O’Brien, Katie M. , Weinberg, Clarice R. , Polley, Eric C. , Boddicker, Nicholas , Hu, Chunling , Ambrosone, Christine B. , Brantley, Kristen D. , Burnside, Elizabeth S. , Chen, Fei , Domchek, Susan M. , Eliassen, A. Heather , Hodge, James M. , Kraft, Peter , Lacey, James V. , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Olson, Janet E. , Palmer, Julie R. , Penney, Kathryn , Scott, Christopher G. , Teras, Lauren R. , Trentham‐Dietz, Amy , Vachon, Celine M. , Yao, Song , Zirpoli, Gary , Couch, Fergus J. , Sandler, Dale P.

JAMA Oncology | October 9, 2025 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1458

10.1001/jamaoncol.2025.3875 Get It

Importance Inherited pathogenic variants (PVs) in known predisposition genes can greatly increase breast cancer risk, but the combined impact of PV status, family history, and other factors on breast cancer risk in the general US population has not been well described. Objective To evaluate population-based breast cancer risk estimates for those with established PVs overall and stratified by first-degree family history of breast cancer and other factors. Design, Setting, and Participants This study used pooled data from 13 US-based breast cancer case-control studies participating in the Cancer Risk Estimates Related to Susceptibility (CARRIERS) consortium. Enrollment for individual studies occurred between 1976 and 2013, and results are based on data released March 2023, with analyses conducted from June 2022 to July 2025. Exposures PVs, breast cancer family history, self-reported race and ethnicity, and established risk factors. Main Outcomes and Measures Breast cancer rate ratios for PVs in 7 genes were estimated from the CARRIERS consortium. PV status and incidence and mortality statistics were combined using the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimation (iCARE) model to estimate conditional cumulative breast cancer risks and 95% CIs, stratified by family history and standardized to the US population. Models that incorporated population-based data and published estimates for established epidemiologic risk factors were also evaluated. Results A total of 67 692 women were studied, including 33 841 who were diagnosed with breast cancer. PVs in ATM , BRCA1 , BRCA2 , CHEK2 , and PALB2 were strongly associated with breast cancer risk, with BRCA1 and PALB2 PVs showing evidence of heterogeneity by family history. In models considering PVs, family history, and established risk factors, the estimated cumulative risks of breast cancer by age 50 years ranged from 2.4% (95% CI, 2.4-2.4) in women with no PVs and no family history to 35.5% (95% CI, 21.6-55.1) in PALB2 PV carriers with a family history. Among women who have not been diagnosed with breast cancer by age 50 years, the cumulative risk of breast cancer by age 80 years ranged from 11.1% (95% CI, 11.0-11.2) in noncarriers with no family history to 70.5% (95% CI, 52.8-83.5) for PALB2 carriers with a family history. PV-specific cumulative risk estimates varied across subgroups defined by race and ethnicity and potentially modifiable epidemiologic risk factors. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, population-based estimates of cumulative breast cancer risk for established PVs, as informed by the CARRIERS case-control sample, varied by family history and potentially modifiable risk factors. These estimates provide guidance for identifying individuals who will most benefit from enhanced screening and prevention strategies.
Comprehensive molecular and immune characterization of adrenergic stress-signaling receptor ADRB2 in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC).
Deshmukh, Sachin Kumar , Wu, Sharon , Xiu, Joanne , Yao, Song, Sudmeier, Lisa , Kaliński, Paweł , Repasky, Elizabeth A. , Leone, José Pablo , Chumsri, Saranya , Sledge, G. W., Hong, Chi‐Chen , Yao, Song , Chalasani, Pavani , Ernstoff, Marc S. , Graff, Stephanie L. , Lustberg, Maryam B. , Kalinsky, Kevin M. , Gandhi, Shipra

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 1107-1107

10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.1107 Get It

1107 Background: Chronic stress-mediated β2-adrenergic receptor (β2-AR) signaling promotes tumor growth via immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment (TME) in preclinical models. Blockade of β2-AR has shown higher survival benefit in patients with TNBC in observational studies compared to other breast cancer (BC) subtypes. However, the molecular and immunological features associated with ADRB2 (gene for β2-AR) gene expression in TNBC are unknown, prompting this investigation. Methods: 3,038 TNBC samples were analyzed via NGS (592-gene panel, NextSeq; WES/WTS, NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Immune cell fractions were calculated by deconvolution of WTS: Quantiseq. TNBC ADRB2 -high(H) and ADRB2 -low(L) RNA expression were classified as above or below the 50 th percentile, respectively. Real-world overall survival (OS) was obtained from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection to last contact using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests with multiple comparison adjustments (q < 0.05). Results: ADRB2 gene expression was lowest in TNBC (median (TPM: 1.6) compared to N = 453 HR-HER2+ (1.9), N = 629 HR+HER2+ (2.0) and N = 4,918 HR+HER2- (2.2) BC (all q < 0.05). African American or Black patients (N = 670) had lower expression of ADRB2 compared to European American or White (N = 1,412) TNBC patients (1.3 vs 1.7, q < 0.05). ADRB2 -H TNBC had higher mutation frequency of PIK3CA (21% vs 15.4%), CDH1 (7% vs 3.5%), NF1 (8% vs 4%), AKT1 (3.5% vs 2.1%), but lower frequency of TP53 (81.6% vs 87.5%), NOTCH1 (2.5% vs 4.5%) and NOTCH3 (4.4% vs 11.7%) compared to ADRB2 -L, all q < 0.05. ADRB2 -H had greater PD-L1 (22C3) positivity (39.1% vs 30.2%, q < 0.05), higher % of B cells (4.5 vs 3.4), M1 Mφ (3.4 vs 2.8), M2 Mφ (3.9 vs 2.2), Tregs (2.2 vs 1.3), NK cells (3.1 vs 2.6), DC (3.1 vs 2.9), CD8 + T cells (0.9 vs 0.2), all q < 0.05. ADRB2 -H TNBC had higher T-cell inflamed score (95 vs -80), IFN γ score (-0.23 vs -0.37), MAPK activation score (-0.46 vs -1.7), all q < 0.05; and higher expression of immune checkpoint genes ( CD274, PDCD1, PDCD1LG2, CTLA4, LAG3, HAVCR2, FOXP3, IDO1, TNFSF14, TIGIT, BTLA, CEACAM1, CD47, CD274 ; fold change: 1.6-3.7, all q < 0.05). ADRB2 -H tumors had higher expression of genes related to inflammatory response, IFNγ response, IL6-JAK-STAT3 signaling (normalized enrichment score (NES): 1.9 – 2.1), while ADRB2 -L had enrichment of MYC targets V1, MYC targets V2, E2F targets and G2M checkpoint (NES: 2.5 – 4.2), all FDR < 0.01. ADRB2 -H TNBC had better OS (mOS: 23.6 vs 18.6 months; HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89, p < 0.0001) compared to ADRB2 -L. Conclusions: High ADRB2 expression in TNBC is associated with better survival and an immune enriched TME, elevated immune checkpoints and other targetable vulnerabilities. Future studies are needed to investigate ADRB2 as a potential stress biomarker and therapeutic target.
Abstract A003: Risks of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast associated with pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes
Couch, Ronan E. , LaDuca, Holly , Goldgar, David E. , Pesaran, Tina , Dolinsky, Jill S. , Teras, Lauren R., Patel, Alpa V. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Vachon, Celine M. , Yao, Song, Huang, Huaizhi , Yadav, Siddhartha , Polley, Eric C. , Boddicker, Nicholas , Na, Jie , Gnanaolivu, Rohan , Hart, Steven N. , Palmer, Julie R. , Teras, Lauren R. , Olson, Janet E. , Vachon, Celine M. , Kraft, Peter , Yao, Song , Trentham‐Dietz, Amy , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Domchek, Susan M. , Couch, Fergus J. , Hu, Chunling

Cancer Prevention Research | December 1, 2022 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 12_Supplement_1 | Pages: A003-A003

10.1158/1940-6215.dcis22-a003 Get It

Abstract Introduction: The relationship between germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is not well established. The objective of this study is to determine the risks of DCIS and contralateral breast cancer among women with DCIS associated with germline PVs in cancer predisposition genes. Methods: Associations between pathogenic variants in 11 cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, MSH6, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D) and DCIS were determined in case control analyses of a population-based cohort of 3876 women with DCIS and age-matched unaffected women, and in a clinical cohort of 9887 DCIS cases undergoing clinical genetic testing at Ambry Genetics and unaffected reference controls. The incidence of contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PV carriers with DCIS was also evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. Results: The mean age at diagnosis of DCIS was 50 years in the clinical testing cohort and 59 years in the population-based cohort. The frequency of PVs in 11 predisposition genes among DCIS cases was 6.9% in the clinical testing cohort and 4.9% in the population-based cohort. PVs in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, MSH6, PALB2, and RAD51D were associated with significantly increased risks (Odds Ratio (OR) &gt;2) of DCIS in the clinical testing cohort whereas only PVs in BRCA1, CHEK2, PALB2, and ATM were associated with significantly increased risks of DCIS in the population-based cohort. The cumulative incidence of contralateral breast cancer among BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PV carriers with DCIS was 11% in 5-years and 20% in 15-years. Conclusions: This study provides new insights into PVs that predispose to DCIS. In addition, it establishes an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer risk among women with DCIS who are carriers of PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2. These findings will guide surveillance and risk reducing strategies in germline PV carriers with DCIS. Citation Format: Huaizhi Huang, Ronan E. Couch, Holly LaDuca, Siddhartha Yadav, Eric C. Polley, Nicholas J. Boddicker, Jie Na, Rohan D. Gnanaolivu, David E. Goldgar, Tina Pesaran, Steven N. Hart, Jill S. Dolinsky, Julie R. Palmer, Lauren Teras, Alpa V. Patel, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Janet E. Olson, Celine M. Vachon, Peter Kraft, Song Yao, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Katherine L. Nathanson, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Susan M. Domchek, Fergus J. Couch, Chunling Hu. Risks of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast associated with pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Rethinking DCIS: An Opportunity for Prevention?; 2022 Sep 8-11; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Can Prev Res 2022;15(12 Suppl_1): Abstract nr A003.
Abstract P2-09-01: Population-based risk estimates of clinical subtypes of breast cancer among carriers of germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes
Yadav, Siddhartha , Huang, Hongyan , Yao, Song, Vachon, Celine M. , Martínez, Elena, Lindströem, Sara, Haiman, Christopher A. , Gaudet, Mia M. , Auer, Paul, Goldgar, David E. , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Yadav, Siddhartha , Nathanson, Katherine L , Hu, Chunling , Boddicker, Nicholas , Polley, Eric C. , Hart, Steven N. , Gnanaolivu, Rohan , Na, Jie , Yao, Song , Vachon, Celine M. , Teras, Lauren R. , Taylor, Jack A. , Sandler, Dale P. , Palmer, Julie R. , Olson, Janet E. , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Marchand, Loı̈c Le , Kooperberg, Charles , Lacey, James V. , Bertrand, Kimberly A. , Bernstein, Leslie , Ambrosone, Christine B. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Kraft, Peter , Domchek, Susan M. , Couch, Fergus J.

Cancer Research | March 8, 2022 | Volume: 82 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: P2-09-01-P2-09-01

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs21-p2-09-01 Get It

Abstract Introduction: The risk of specific clinical subtype of breast cancer (defined by ER and HER2 status) among women in the general population who are carriers of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes is not well-defined. Methods: A total of 13,153 women with breast cancer (ER+/HER2-: 9381; ER+/HER2+: 1462; ER-/HER2+: 690; and ER-/HER2-: 1620) and 25,005 unaffected women (controls) from nine studies within the CAnceR RIsk Estimates Related to Susceptibility (CARRIERS) consortium that were not enriched for family history or early onset disease were included in the present analysis. A multiplex amplicon-based panel was used to perform germline sequencing for cancer predisposition genes. Case-control associations for each of the four clinical subtype of breast cancer was performed for PVs in 5 common breast cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and PALB2) utilizing a logistic regression model adjusting for study, age at diagnosis, race/ethnicity and family history of breast cancer. Results: The frequency of PVs in 5 genes was 3.8% for ER+/HER2-, 6.2% for ER+/HER2+, 4.2% for ER-/HER2+ and 9.3% for ER-/HER2- subtypes. PVs in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were associated with high risk (Odds Ratio (OR) &gt;4) for all clinical subtypes of breast cancer, but the risk was highest (OR&gt;8) for ER-/HER2- breast cancer. PVs in PALB2 were associated with high risk (OR&gt;4) of ER-/HER2- and ER+/HER2+ subtypes and moderate risk (OR: 2-4) of ER+/HER2- breast cancer. Irrespective of the HER2 status, PVs in ATM were associated with a moderately increased risk (OR: 2-4) of ER+ breast cancer but the risk of ER- breast cancer was not elevated. In contrast, PVs in CHEK2 were associated with high risk (OR&gt;4) of ER+/HER2+ breast cancer and moderate risk (OR: 2-4) of ER+/HER2- and ER-/HER2+ breast cancer, but the risk of ER-/HER2- breast cancer was not elevated. Conclusions: This study provides population-based estimates of risk of specific clinical subtypes of breast cancer which will be useful for genetic counseling and targeting appropriate screening strategies in PV carriers based on subtype specific risks of breast cancer. Citation Format: Siddhartha Yadav, Chunling Hu, Nicholas J. Boddicker, Eric Polley, Steven Hart, Rohan Gnanaolivu, Jie Na, Hongyan Huang, Song Yao, Celine M. Vachon, Lauren Teras, Jack A. Taylor, Dale P. Sandler, Julie R. Palmer, Janet E. Olson, Susan Neuhausen, Elena Martinez, Sara Lindstroem, Loic Le Marchand, Charles Kooperberg, Christopher Haiman, Mia M. Gaudet, James V. Lacey, Kimberly A. Bertrand, Leslie Bernstein, Paul W. Auer, Christine Ambrosone, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Peter Kraft, David E. Goldgar, Katherine L. Nathanson, Susan M. Domchek, Fergus J. Couch, CARRIERS Consortium. Population-based risk estimates of clinical subtypes of breast cancer among carriers of germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-09-01.
Breast Cancer Screening Strategies for Women With ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 Pathogenic Variants
Lowry, Kathryn P. , Geuzinge, H. Amarens , Stout, Natasha K. , Alagöz, Oğuzhan , Hampton, John M. , Koning, Harry J. de , Miglioretti, Diana L. , Ravesteyn, Nicolien T. van , Sprague, Brian L. , Tosteson, Anna N.A. , Weaver, Donald L. , Yaffe, Martin J. , Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. , Kurian, Allison W. , Auer, Paul L. , Berstein, Leslie, Carter, Brian D., Gaudet, Mia M. , Haiman, Christopher, Jacobs, Eric J. , John, Esther M. , Lindström, Sara , Martínez, Elena, Patel, Alpa V. , Reid, Sonya , Taylor, Jack A. , Teras, Lauren R., Vachon, Celine M. , Yao, Song, Ziogas, Argyrios, Goldgar, David E. , Chen, Chen , Chen, C , Miglioretti, Diana L , John, Esther M , Taylor, Jack A , de Koning, Harry J , Kurian, Allison W , Kerlikowske, Karla , Schechter, Clyde B. , Trentham‐Dietz, Amy , Yeh, Jennifer M. , Couch, Fergus J. , Hu, Chunling , Kraft, Peter , Polley, Eric C. , Robson, Mark E. , Hart, Steven N. , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Domchek, Susan M. , Ambrosone, Christine B. , Anton‐Culver, Hoda , Bandera, Elisa V. , Bertrand, Kimberly A. , Burnside, Elizabeth S. , Eliassen, A. Heather , Hodge, James M. , Hunter, David J. , Kooperberg, Charles , Lacey, James V. , Marchand, Loı̈c Le , Ma, Huiyan , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Newcomb, Polly A. , O’Brien, Katie M. , Olson, Janet E. , Ong, Irene M. , Pal, Tuya , Palmer, Julie R. , Rosenberg, Lynn A. , Sandler, Dale P. , Tamimi, Rulla M. , Teras, Lauren R. , Vachon, Celine M. , Weinberg, Clarice R. , Yadav, Siddhartha , Yao, Song , Weitzel, Jeffrey N.

JAMA Oncology | February 17, 2022 | Volume: 8 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 587

10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6204 Get It