Citations

Abstract Pathogenic protein-truncating variants of RAD51C, which plays an integral role in promoting DNA damage repair, increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. A large number of RAD51C missense variants of uncertain significance (VUS) have been identified, but the effects of the majority of these variants on RAD51C function and cancer predisposition have not been established. Here, analysis of 173 missense variants by a homology-directed repair (HDR) assay in reconstituted RAD51C−/− cells identified 30 nonfunctional (deleterious) variants, including 18 in a hotspot within the ATP-binding region. The deleterious variants conferred sensitivity to cisplatin and olaparib and disrupted formation of RAD51C/XRCC3 and RAD51B/RAD51C/RAD51D/XRCC2 complexes. Computational analysis indicated the deleterious variant effects were consistent with structural effects on ATP-binding to RAD51C. A subset of the variants displayed similar effects on RAD51C activity in reconstituted human RAD51C-depleted cancer cells. Case–control association studies of deleterious variants in women with breast and ovarian cancer and noncancer controls showed associations with moderate breast cancer risk [OR, 3.92; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 2.18–7.59] and high ovarian cancer risk (OR, 14.8; 95% CI, 7.71–30.36), similar to protein-truncating variants. This functional data supports the clinical classification of inactivating RAD51C missense variants as pathogenic or likely pathogenic, which may improve the clinical management of variant carriers. Significance: Functional analysis of the impact of a large number of missense variants on RAD51C function provides insight into RAD51C activity and information for classification of the cancer relevance of RAD51C variants.

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) >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.

PURPOSETo determine the contribution of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in hereditary cancer testing panel genes to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study included 2,999 women with ILC from a population-based cohort and 3,796 women with ILC undergoing clinical multigene panel testing (clinical cohort). Frequencies of germline PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes ( ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were compared between women with ILC and unaffected female controls and between women with ILC and infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC).RESULTSThe frequency of PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes among women with ILC was 6.5% in the clinical cohort and 5.2% in the population-based cohort. In case-control analysis, CDH1 and BRCA2 PVs were associated with high risks of ILC (odds ratio [OR] > 4) and CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PVs were associated with moderate (OR = 2-4) risks. BRCA1 PVs and CHEK2 p.Ile157Thr were not associated with clinically relevant risks (OR < 2) of ILC. Compared with IDC, CDH1 PVs were > 10-fold enriched, whereas PVs in BRCA1 were substantially reduced in ILC.CONCLUSIONThe study establishes that PVs in ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of ILC, whereas BRCA1 PVs are not. The similar overall PV frequencies for ILC and IDC suggest that cancer histology should not influence the decision to proceed with genetic testing. Similar to IDC, multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with ILC, but CDH1 should be specifically discussed because of low prevalence and gastric cancer risk.

PURPOSE The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in established breast cancer predisposition genes in women in the general population over age 65 years is not well-defined. However, testing guidelines suggest that women diagnosed with breast cancer over age 65 years might have < 2.5% likelihood of a PV in a high-penetrance gene. This study aimed to establish the frequency of PVs and remaining risks of breast cancer for each gene in women over age 65 years. METHODS A total of 26,707 women over age 65 years from population-based studies (51.5% with breast cancer and 48.5% unaffected) were tested for PVs in germline predisposition gene. Frequencies of PVs and associations between PVs in each gene and breast cancer were assessed, and remaining lifetime breast cancer risks were estimated for non-Hispanic White women with PVs. RESULTS The frequency of PVs in predisposition genes was 3.18% for women with breast cancer and 1.48% for unaffected women over age 65 years. PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 were found in 3.42% of women diagnosed with estrogen receptor (ER)–negative, 1.0% with ER-positive, and 3.01% with triple-negative breast cancer. Frequencies of PVs were lower among women with no first-degree relatives with breast cancer. PVs in CHEK2, PALB2, BRCA2, and BRCA1 were associated with increased risks (odds ratio = 2.9-4.0) of breast cancer. Remaining lifetime risks of breast cancer were ≥ 15% for those with PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2. CONCLUSION This study suggests that all women diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer or ER-negative breast cancer should receive genetic testing and that women over age 65 years with BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs and perhaps with PALB2 and CHEK2 PVs should be considered for magnetic resonance imaging screening.

10581 Background: The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes among women with invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) and the risk of ILC in PV carriers is not well-defined. Methods: The study included 2,999 women with ILC and 32,544 unaffected controls from a population-based cohort; 3,796 women with ILC and 20,323 women with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) undergoing clinical multigene panel testing (clinical cohort); and 125,748 exome sequences from unrelated women without a cancer diagnosis in the gnomAD 3.0 dataset. Frequencies of germline PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes ( ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were compared between women with ILC and unaffected controls in both cohorts and between women with ILC and IDC in the clinical cohort. Results: The frequency of PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes among women with ILC was 6.5% in the clinical cohort and 5.2% in the population-based cohort. In case-control analyses, CDH1 and BRCA2 PVs were associated with high risks of ILC (Odds ratio (OR) > 4), and CHEK2, ATM and PALB2 PVs were associated with moderate (OR = 2-4) risks. BRCA1 PVs and CHEK2 p.Ile157Thr were not associated with clinically relevant risks (OR < 2) of ILC. PV frequencies in these genes in ILC and IDC were similar except for PV frequencies in BRCA1 and CDH1. Conclusions: The study establishes that PVs in ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2 and PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of ILC, whereas BRCA1 PVs are not. The similar overall PV frequencies for ILC and IDC suggest that cancer histology should not influence the decision to proceed with genetic testing. While, multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with ILC, CDH1 should be specifically discussed in the context of low prevalence and attendant gastric cancer risk.

10525 Background: Several groups have described disparities in genetic test results for inherited breast cancer predisposition, with a disproportionate number of variants of unknown significance (VUS) reported in non-Caucasian individuals. These disparities are due in part to the underrepresentation of non-Caucasians in reference databases and clinical genetic testing cohorts. Over the past few years, diversification efforts have been made however, little data exists on how ethnicity- and gene-specific VUS rates have changed over time and whether such disparities have improved or worsened. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed demographic information and test results for individuals who underwent hereditary cancer multigene panel testing between March 2012 and September 2020 at a single laboratory. Individuals who self-reported as African American, Asian, Caucasian, or Hispanic on the test requisition form and whose testing included ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and PALB2 (five commonly tested breast cancer predisposition genes with management guidelines) were included in the study (n = 284,130). The frequency of germline variants of unknown significance (VUS) in the five genes was assessed in September 2015 and September 2020. Results: Amongst patients tested between March 2012 and September 2015, 82.8% of the study cohort self-reported as Caucasian and 17.2% were not Caucasian (6.5% African American, 6.0% Hispanic, and 4.6% Asian). The proportion of non-Caucasian individuals in the study cohort increased slightly by September 2020 to 22.8% (77.2% Caucasian, 9.2% African American, 8.4% Hispanic, and 5.3% Asian). Consistent with previous reports, Caucasians had the lowest VUS rate overall in both 2015 and 2020. This was also true at the individual gene level, with the exception of CHEK2. Over time, we observed a relative decrease in VUS rates across all ethnicities. Between 2015 and 2020, the overall VUS rate for the five included genes in non-Caucasian individuals was reduced by 32.0% in non-Caucasians compared to 23.6% in Caucasians. The absolute difference in VUS rate between non-Caucasians and Caucasians decreased from 7.9% in 2015 to 4.5% in 2020. Conclusions: While VUS rates for commonly tested breast cancer predisposition genes remain higher in non-Caucasians relative to Caucasians, our results demonstrate that this gap has been reduced over a five-year time period. These findings may be indicative of efforts by clinicians and laboratories to reduce these disparities. Further studies are necessary to improve the clinical utility of genetic testing in under-represented populations.[Table: see text]

Abstract To evaluate the racial and ethnic differences in prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) and the effect of race and ethnicity on breast cancer (BC) risk among carriers, results of multigene testing of 77 900 women with BC (non-Hispanic White [NHW] = 57 003; Ashkenazi-Jewish = 4798; Black = 6722; Hispanic = 5194; and Asian = 4183) were analyzed, and the frequency of PVs in each gene were compared between BC patients (cases) and race- and ethnicity-matched gnomAD reference controls. Compared with NHWs, BRCA1 PVs were enriched in Ashkenazi-Jews and Hispanics, whereas CHEK2 PVs were statistically significantly lower in Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians (all 2-sided P &lt; .05). In case-control studies, BARD1 PVs were associated with high risks (odds ratio &gt; 4.00) of BC in Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians; ATM PVs were associated with increased risk of BC among all races and ethnicities except Asians, whereas CHEK2 and BRIP1 PVs were associated with increased risk of BC among NHWs and Hispanics only. These findings suggest a need for personalized management of BC risk in PV carriers based on race and ethnicity.

Abstract Background: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast accounts for approximately 10-15% of all histologic subtypes of breast cancer. However, apart from germline mutations in CDH1, the contributions of mutations in other cancer predisposition genes to ILC are largely unknown. Methods: The study population included 3,893 women with ILC of the breast who underwent germline multigene panel testing of cancer predisposition genes at Ambry Genetics from March 2012 to December 2016. The prevalence of predisposition gene mutations in women with ILC was assessed relative to 38,004 women with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) who underwent germline multigene panel testing at Ambry Genetics during the same timeframe. Associations between mutations in each gene and risk of ILC were evaluated using reference controls. Results: Of the 3,893 women with ILC included in this study, 70.7% were non-Hispanic white, 65.1% had a family history of breast cancer, and 96.4% had estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer. The overall frequency of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDKN2A, CHEK2, MLH1, MRE11A, MSH2, MSH6, NBN, NF1, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D and TP53) was 7.8% for women with ILC and 10.7% for women with IDC. Mutations in CDH1 were significantly more frequent (Odds Ratio (OR)=12.1, p&lt;0.001), whereas mutations in BRCA1 (OR=0.1; p&lt;0.001) and PALB2 (OR=0.4; p&lt;0.001)were less frequent in women with ILC, compared to women with IDC. When restricting the analysis to ER positive cases only, significant differences in frequencies of ATM (OR=0.6, p=0.03), BRCA1 (OR=0.3, p&lt;0.001), CDH1 (OR=7.7, p&lt;0.001) and PALB2 (OR=0.3, p&lt;0.001) were observed in ILC compared to IDC. By comparison with gnomAD reference controls, ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2 and PTEN mutations were significantly associated with an increased risk of lLC and IDC (OR&gt;2), NBN mutations were associated with ILC (OR=3.4; p&lt;0.001) but not IDC, and BRCA1 mutations were not associated with increased risk of ILC. Among 274 women with ILC over the age of 50 without history of any other cancer or a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, 14 (5.1%) were found to carry a mutation in one of the genes evaluated. Conclusions: In a large cohort of patients with ILC, the frequencies of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes were similar between ILC and IDC except for ATM, BRCA1, CDH1 and PALB2. Six genes, in addition to CDH1, were found to be germline predisposition genes for ILC. A substantial proportion of patients older than 50 with ILC without a family history of breast or ovarian cancer or a personal history of other cancers were found to be mutation carriers. These findings improve our understanding of germline genetic drivers of ILC and suggest that multigene genetic testing should be considered for all ILC patients. Citation Format: Siddhartha Yadav, Holly LaDuca, Eric C. Polley, Chunling Hu, Steven N. Hart, Jie Na, Rohan Gnanaolivu, Brandon Smith, David E Goldgar, Tina Pesaran, Jill S. Dolinsky, Fergus J. Couch. Germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-08-04.

Abstract Background: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) based on a large number of SNPs associated with breast cancer have recently been made available in combination with multigene panel testing for clinical management of breast cancer risk. Breast cancer risk assessment has historically been performed using various non-genetic risk models, which predict lifetime risk of breast cancer in unaffected women based on personal and family history information. While clinical use of PRS in combination with these models continues to increase, the predictive performance of a PRS combined with clinical information in real-world patient populations has not been thoroughly investigated. Methods: We assessed a 100-SNP breast cancer PRS in combination with the Tyrer-Cuzick model-estimated lifetime breast cancer risk in 5,374 Caucasian women from the case-control Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer Study (MCBCS), comprised of 3,373 breast cancer cases and 2,001 unaffected controls seen at Mayo Clinic from 2004 to 2016. Clinical, family history, and demographic information was collected on all MCBCS participants via questionnaires and medical record review. SNPs were selected for the PRS if they exceeded genome-wide significance in ≥2 large-scale breast cancer genome wide association studies (GWAS) in women of European descent. Selected SNPs were then used to construct a population standardized PRS, accounting for per-allele odds ratios reported in the largest GWAS to date and population-specific allele frequencies. PRS and Tyrer-Cuzick model associations with breast cancer and related clinical features were tested using multivariate logistic regression. Results: Among cases and controls, mean±SD age at diagnosis and study enrollment was 56.4±12.4 and 56.2±14.1, respectively. Approximately 36.9% of cases and 16.9% of controls had ≥1 first- or second-degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer, respectively. Among unaffected women, the median (IQR) estimated lifetime risk of breast cancer to age 85 based on Tyrer-Cuzick alone was 8.3% (6.9%), and 2.6% had a clinically actionable lifetime risk of ≥20%. The mean±SD sum of the risk alleles across 100 SNPs was significantly higher for cases vs. controls (94.8±6.3 vs. 92.7±6.2, p&lt;0.001). Compared to women in the lowest quartile of PRS, those in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quartiles were 1.47 (95% CI: 1.26-1.72), 1.87 (95% CI: 1.60-2.19), and 2.22 (95% CI: 1.89-2.61) times more likely to have breast cancer after adjustment for age and family history. The AUC was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.58-0.61) for PRS and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.58-0.61) for Tyrer-Cuzick model estimated risk alone; but when combined, the model achieved an AUC of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.62-0.65). Among unaffected women, 6.7% had ≥20% lifetime risk of breast cancer based on the combined PRS-clinical model. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the 100-SNP PRS significantly improves estimation of breast cancer risk based on non-genetic models, and can be used to further identify women at increased lifetime risk who would otherwise not be identified by clinical assessment alone. Citation Format: Mary Helen Black, Shuwei Li, Holly LaDuca, Sebastian Armasu, Eric C. Polley, Patrick Fitz-Gibbon, Chris G. Scott, Stacey J. Winham, Janet E. Olson, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Celine M. Vachon, Fergus J. Couch. Performance of a polygenic risk score combined with clinical assessment for breast cancer risk [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-07-06.