Schrader, Kasmintan A.

PURPOSE BRCA carriers face high risks of developing both breast and ovarian/fallopian tube cancers (hereafter referred to as ovarian ). Among BRCA carriers with ovarian cancer, it is not clear whether the risk of breast cancer is sufficiently high that risk-reducing mastectomy should be offered. This study aimed to assess the risk of breast cancer BRCA carriers after a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. METHODS We included women with a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2 , a diagnosis of ovarian cancer, and no other cancer history and no risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy. Women were followed for incident breast cancer from the date of ovarian cancer diagnosis or the date of baseline questionnaire, whichever came last. The 5-, 10-, and 15-year cumulative risks of breast cancer were compared for women with ovarian cancer and an age-matched set of control women without ovarian cancer. RESULTS A total of 960 participants with ovarian cancer were identified (814 BRCA1 and 146 BRCA2 carriers). After a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, 41 women (4.3%) developed breast cancer, at a mean age at diagnosis of 57.5 years (range, 39-74). Actuarial cumulative breast cancer risks after ovarian cancer were 4.4%, 8.9%, and 11.5% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. Only three breast cancer–related deaths occurred. Among 741 age-matched BRCA carriers without ovarian cancer, actuarial cumulative risks of breast cancer were 20.9%, 38.6%, and 47.2% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. The hazard ratio for breast cancer, after an ovarian cancer diagnosis, compared with no ovarian cancer, was 0.18 ([95% CI, 0.12 to 0.27]; P < .0001). CONCLUSION After ovarian cancer, BRCA carriers have a relatively low risk of breast cancer. Risk-reducing mastectomy should not be recommended routinely, but might be considered for long-term survivors. Magnetic resonance imaging surveillance and/or mammography is a realistic alternative.

Background: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) is a highly lethal malignancy with a survival rate of only 12%. Surveillance is recommended for high-risk individuals (HRIs), but it is not widely adopted. To address this unmet clinical need and drive early diagnosis research, we established the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection (PRECEDE) Consortium. Methods: PRECEDE is a multi-institutional international collaboration that has undertaken an observational prospective cohort study. Individuals (aged 18–90 years) are enrolled into 1 of 7 cohorts based on family history and pathogenic germline variant (PGV) status. From April 1, 2020, to November 21, 2022, a total of 3,402 participants were enrolled in 1 of 7 study cohorts, with 1,759 (51.7%) meeting criteria for the highest-risk cohort (Cohort 1). Cohort 1 HRIs underwent germline testing and pancreas imaging by MRI/MR-cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound. Results: A total of 1,400 participants in Cohort 1 (79.6%) had completed baseline imaging and were subclassified into 3 groups based on familial PC (FPC; n=670), a PGV and FPC (PGV+/FPC+; n=115), and a PGV with a pedigree that does not meet FPC criteria (PGV+/FPC–; n=615). One HRI was diagnosed with stage IIB PC on study entry, and 35.1% of HRIs harbored pancreatic cysts. Increasing age (odds ratio, 1.05; P <.001) and FPC group assignment (odds ratio, 1.57; P <.001; relative to PGV+/FPC–) were independent predictors of harboring a pancreatic cyst. Conclusions: PRECEDE provides infrastructure support to increase access to clinical surveillance for HRIs worldwide, while aiming to drive early PC detection advancements through longitudinal standardized clinical data, imaging, and biospecimen captures. Increased cyst prevalence in HRIs with FPC suggests that FPC may infer distinct biological processes. To enable the development of PC surveillance approaches better tailored to risk category, we recommend adoption of subclassification of HRIs into FPC, PGV+/FPC+, and PGV+/FPC– risk groups by surveillance protocols.

PURPOSE Women with breast cancer have a 4%-16% lifetime risk of a second primary cancer. Whether mutations in genes other than BRCA1/2 are enriched in patients with breast and another primary cancer over those with a single breast cancer (S-BC) is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS We identified pathogenic germline mutations in 17 cancer susceptibility genes in patients with BRCA1/2-negative breast cancer in 2 different cohorts: cohort 1, high-risk breast cancer program (multiple primary breast cancer [MP-BC], n = 551; S-BC, n = 449) and cohort 2, familial breast cancer research study (MP-BC, n = 340; S-BC, n = 1,464). Mutation rates in these 2 cohorts were compared with a control data set (Exome Aggregation Consortium [ExAC]). RESULTS Overall, pathogenic mutation rates for autosomal, dominantly inherited genes were higher in patients with MP-BC versus S-BC in both cohorts (8.5% v 4.9% [ P = .02] and 7.1% v 4.2% [ P = .03]). There were differences in individual gene mutation rates between cohorts. In both cohorts, younger age at first breast cancer was associated with higher mutation rates; the age of non–breast cancers was unrelated to mutation rate. TP53 and MSH6 mutations were significantly enriched in patients with MP-BC but not S-BC, whereas ATM and PALB2 mutations were significantly enriched in both groups compared with ExAC. CONCLUSION Mutation rates are at least 7% in all patients with BRCA1/2 mutation–negative MP-BC, regardless of age at diagnosis of breast cancer, with mutation rates up to 25% in patients with a first breast cancer diagnosed at age < 30 years. Our results suggest that all patients with breast cancer with a second primary cancer, regardless of age of onset, should undergo multigene panel testing.

Abstract A better understanding of gene-specific risks for development of breast cancer will lead to improved screening, prevention, and therapeutic strategies for individuals identified to carry germline mutations. We performed targeted massively-parallel sequencing to identify mutations and large genomic rearrangements in 26 known or proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes in 2134 BRCA-negative women with familial breast cancer (FBC). A case-control analysis was performed comparing the frequency of internally classified mutations identified in FBC cases to that in non-Finnish European controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) excluding samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Including large genomic rearrangements, mutations were identified in 8.2% of FBC cases compared to 6.2% of ExAC controls, including mutations in high-penetrance genes (0.6% in cases vs. 0.1% in controls), moderate-penetrance genes (3.7% vs 1.7%), and seven cases with two mutations (0.3%). The remainder of FBC cases and ExAC controls had mutations in proposed breast cancer genes (1.6% of cases vs 2.4% of controls), Lynch syndrome genes (0.5% vs. 0.5%) or were heterozygous MUTYH carriers (1.5% vs. 1.5%). Case-control analysis demonstrated significant associations with FBC for ATM, PALB2, and TP53 mutations (OR&gt;3.0, p&lt;10-4), BARD1 mutations (OR=3.2, p=0.012), and CHEK2 truncating mutations (OR=1.6, p=0.041). Our results therefore demonstrate that only approximately 4% of BRCA1/2 negative FBC patients have mutations in genes definitively associated with breast cancer at this time. Large case-control studies are needed to fully evaluate the breast cancer risks associated with moderate penetrance and proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Thomas Paul Slavin, Jenna M. Lilyquist, Joseph Vijai, Susan L. Neuhausen, Steven N. Hart, Vignesh Ravichandran, Tinu Thomas, Ann Maria, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Raymond Moore, Chunling Hu, Brad Wubbenhorst, Brandon M. Wenz, Kurt D'Andrea, Susan M. Domchek, Mark E. Robson, Paulo Peterlongo, Paolo Radice, James M. Ford, Judy E. Garber, Csilla Szabo, Kenneth Offit, Katherine L. Nathanson, Fergus J. Couch, Jeffrey N. Weitzel. Risks of familial breast cancer associated with known and proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4265. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-4265

Abstract Known gene mutations account for approximately 50% of the hereditary risk for breast cancer. Moderate and low penetrance variants, discovered by genomic approaches, account for an as-yet-unknown proportion of the remaining heritability. A truncating mutation c.325C&gt;T:p.Arg109* (R109X) in the ATP-dependent helicase ERCC3 was observed recurrently among exomes sequenced in BRCA wild-type, breast cancer–affected individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. Modeling of the mutation in ERCC3-deficient or CRISPR/Cas9-edited cell lines showed a consistent pattern of reduced expression of the protein and concomitant hypomorphic functionality when challenged with UVC exposure or treatment with the DNA alkylating agent IlludinS. Overexpressing the mutant protein in ERCC3-deficient cells only partially rescued their DNA repair–deficient phenotype. Comparison of frequency of this recurrent mutation in over 6,500 chromosomes of breast cancer cases and 6,800 Ashkenazi controls showed significant association with breast cancer risk (ORBC = 1.53, ORER+ = 1.73), particularly for the estrogen receptor–positive subset (P &lt; 0.007). Significance: A functionally significant recurrent ERCC3 mutation increased the risk for breast cancer in a genetic isolate. Mutated cell lines showed lower survival after in vitro exposure to DNA-damaging agents. Thus, similar to tumors arising in the background of homologous repair defects, mutations in nucleotide excision repair genes such as ERCC3 could constitute potential therapeutic targets in a subset of hereditary breast cancers. Cancer Discov; 6(11); 1267–75. ©2016 AACR. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1197

Abstract Sequencing tests assaying panels of genes or whole exomes are widely available for cancer risk evaluation. However, methods for classification of variants resulting from this testing are not well studied. We evaluated the ability of American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guidelines to define the rate of mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in 180 medically relevant genes, including all ACMG designated reportable cancer and non-cancer genes, in individuals who met guidelines for hereditary cancer risk evaluation. We performed whole exome sequencing in 404 individuals in 257 families and classified 1640 variants from these genes. Potentially clinically actionable (likely-pathogenic/pathogenic, LP/P) versus nonactionable (VUS/likely-benign/benign) calls were 92% and 88% concordant with locus specific databases and Clinvar, respectively. LP/P mutations were identified in 11 of 25 breast cancer susceptibility genes in 27 BRCA1/2 negative families (11%). Evaluation of 84 additional autosomal dominant cancer susceptibility genes identified LP/P mutations in only four additional families (1.7%), suggesting they do not influence risk in this cohort. However, individuals from nine of 257 families (3.5%) had incidental LP/P mutations in 32 non-cancer disease genes, and 7% of individuals were monoallelic carriers of an LP/P mutation in 39 autosomal recessive cancer syndrome genes. Furthermore, 90% of individuals had at least one VUS. In summary, these data support the clinical utility of ACMG variant classification guidelines. In addition, evaluation of extended panels of cancer genes in breast/ovarian cancer families leads to only an incremental clinical benefit but substantially increases the complexity of the results. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Steven N. Hart, Joseph Vijai, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Tinu Thomas, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Vignesh Ravichandran, Raymond M. Moore, Chunling Hu, Lucia Guidugli, Brandon Wenz, Thomas P. Slavin, Susan M. Domchek, Mark E. Robson, Csilla Szabo, Susan L. Neuhausen, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Kenneth Offit, Fergus J. Couch, Katherine L. Nathanson. Evaluation of ACMG guideline classified variants in 180 cancer and incidental non-cancer genes in families with breast/ovarian cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 5220.

Abstract Germline mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 underlie joint susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers, but do not account for all cases. Genome wide association studies show little overlap between common variants associated with breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility, whereas rare variants in genes initially identified as breast cancer susceptibility genes also confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer cases, unselected for breast cancer. Ovarian and breast tumors also are observed in Peutz-Jeghers and possibly in Lynch syndrome. To further elucidate rare germline susceptibilities for breast and ovarian cancer, we have ascertained a unique cohort of 90 BRCA1/2-negative probands with a personal history of breast cancer and ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal cancer, unselected for family history. Cases are from the clinical genetics services of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and University of Pennsylvania. Analysis is ongoing using both targeted and exome sequencing approaches. Germline DNA of 69 cases will be subjected to whole exome sequencing. A total of 21 additional cases will undergo targeted sequencing for 28 genes (8 cases) and an extended panel of 54 genes (13 cases). The majority of ovarian cancers are high-grade serous epithelial ovarian carcinoma (n=51), in combination with invasive ductal or DCIS (n=36), invasive lobular (n=4), or unspecified (n=11) breast cancers. The remaining ovarian subgroups comprise other epithelial subtypes; endometrioid (n=9), clear cell (n=3), mucinous and low-grade serous (n=3) and non-epithelial (n=4) or unclassified (n=20), in combination with invasive ductal or DCIS (n=21), invasive lobular (n=5) or unspecified (n=13) breast cancers. Preliminary analysis of the targeted set of genes in 69 cases, reveals 43 predicted pathogenic coding or splice site variants; 17 of which are within PALB2, MSH2, MSH6, BARD1, FANCE, CDKN2A, TP53, SETD2, SIRT1, BRIP1, RAD50, and RAD51D and are not seen in dbSNP138, 1000 Genomes or Exome Variant Server ESP6500 and 26 variants with reported frequencies in MUTYH, MSH6, MLH1, FAM175A, RAD50, UIMC1, JARID2, PHF3, SIRT1, MRE11A, ATM, BRCA2, TP53BP1, CDH1, RAD51D, BRCA1, BABAM1 of less than 1% allele frequency in public databases. Analysis of these variants across and within histologic subtypes is being undertaken to look for specific genotype-phenotype correlations. Analysis of novel candidate genes and pathways by co-segregation, functional analysis, as well as external replication is underway to determine whether shared rare variants, mutated genes, or altered pathways confer cancer susceptibility in this cohort. Germline susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer is heterogenous and remains a critical research and clinical question. Improved understanding of the susceptibility genetics will allow further examination of the utility of targeted cancer prevention strategies in those who are found to be at risk. Citation Format: Kasmintan A. Schrader, Kara N. Maxwell, Joseph Vijai, Steven Hart, Tinu Thomas, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Lucia Guidugli, Robert Klein, Marina Corines, Liying Zhang, Susan Neuhausen, Jeffrey Weitzel, Namrata Gupta, Larry Norton, Clifford Hudis, Gad Getz, Mark Daly, Steven Lipkin, David Altshuler, Fergus Couch, Katherine Nathanson, Kenneth Offit. Determination of cancer susceptibility in probands with breast and ovarian cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 3282. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-3282

Abstract Massively parallel next generation sequencing data (NGS) has proved to be useful in identification of rare Mendelian disorders. Efforts are on-going to use NGS for discovery of novel rare variants in common disease etiology. Distinguishing rare private mutations from causal variants remains a major challenge in complex disorders. With decreasing cost, investigators are generating NGS data for common cancers. However, power and other considerations suggest that a consortia approach of pooling data is more likely to succeed where individual efforts fail. Combining data within such consortia brings its own level of challenges. We enumerate these challenges and suggest recommendations based on our experience of combining and harmonizing NGS data on 358 breast cancer samples from four centers; (City of Hope n=8, Mayo Clinic n=221, MSKCC n=96 and University of Pennsylvania n=33). Major concerns were ability of individual datasets to discover known and novel variations, depth of coverage across the exome, and quality of variants. Using pre- and post-processed data, we demonstrate an increased power for detecting variants when using a joint-calling method, quality control (QC) and quality assurance pre- and post-merge, as well as the advantages of combined annotations and filtering procedures. To generate a filtered list of high confident calls, we subset the data on Depth per Allele (DP), Genotyping Quality (GQ), Allele balance, Phred likelihood score (PL) as well as using frequency filters on the alternate allele both within the data and comparing against convenience control summaries. We describe general principles and QC measures to be adopted when NGS data is used from diverse sources, specifically applicable to large consortia. Note: This abstract was not presented at the meeting. Citation Format: Joseph Vijai, Steven Hart, Tinu Thomas, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Lucia Guidugli, Kasmintan Schrader, Kara Maxwell, Lauren Jacobs, Danylo Villano, Robert Klein, Steven Lipkin, Susan Neuhausen, Jeffrey Weitzel, David Altshuler, Fergus Couch, Kenneth Offit, Katherine Nathanson. Harmonization of next generation sequencing data within consortia for gene discovery in familial breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 2378. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-2378