Citations

Background: A breast cancer diagnosis can entail numerous physical and psychosocial challenges. Yoga practice (YP) may contribute to improved well-being for these patients. Primary Study Objective: Investigate feasibility and impact of YP on quality of life (QoL), mood, fatigue, and perceived stress immediately after breast cancer diagnosis. Methods: Thirty women were randomly assigned to a yoga group (YG) or control group (CG) immediately after cancer diagnosis. Setting: Pilot study conducted at an academic medical center breast clinic. Participant(s): Females (N = 30) who received a biopsy-proven breast cancer diagnosis without metastatic disease. Intervention (YG): One individual YP session at baseline, then 2 individual and 8 weekly group sessions followed by weekly gentle yoga at home (DVD). Questionnaires and saliva samples (ie, cortisol) completed at baseline and 12 weeks postdiagnosis. Results: Both groups reported significant improvements in QoL postintervention but with no significant difference between groups. Emotional well-being, mood-related tension-anxiety, depression-dejection, and confusion-bewilderment scores improved for both groups, and cortisol and cortisone levels decreased. Lumpectomies were prevalent with YG (67%) and CG (47%). YP was rated as “very effective,” providing relaxation (85%), stress relief (69%), and reduced muscle tension/general feeling of wellness (each 62%). Conclusion: Feasibility of YP immediately after breast cancer diagnosis was good. Improvement in emotional well-being, anxiety, depression, and levels of confusion was found in both groups. To our knowledge, this is the first study examining the impact of YP immediately after breast cancer diagnosis. Further research in this area is warranted.

Abstract The relevance of many BRCA2 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) to breast cancer has not been determined due to limited genetic information from families carrying these alterations. Here, we classified six new variants as pathogenic or nonpathogenic by analysis of genetic information from families carrying 64 individual BRCA2 DNA binding domain (DBD) missense mutations using a multifactorial likelihood model of cancer causality. Next, we evaluated the use of a homology-directed DNA break repair (HDR) functional assay as a method for inferring the clinical relevance of VUS in the DBD of BRCA2 using 18 established nonpathogenic missense variants and all 13 established pathogenic missense mutations from the BRCA2 DBD. Compared with the known status of these variants based on the multifactorial likelihood model, the sensitivity of the HDR assay for pathogenic mutations was estimated at 100% [95% confidence interval (CI): 75.3%–100%] and specificity was estimated at 100% (95% CI: 81.5%–100%). A statistical classifier for predicting the probability of pathogenicity of BRCA2 DBD variants was developed using these functional results. When applied to 33 additional VUS, the classifier identified eight with 99% or more probability of nonpathogenicity and 18 with 99% or more probability of pathogenicity. Thus, in the absence of genetic evidence, a cell-based HDR assay can provide a probability of pathogenicity for all VUS in the BRCA2 DBD, suggesting that the assay can be used in combination with other information to determine the cancer relevance of BRCA2 VUS. Cancer Res; 73(1); 265–75. ©2012 AACR.

Abstract Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) identified variants at 19p13.1 and ZNF365 (10q21.2) as risk factors for breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. We explored associations with ovarian cancer and with breast cancer by tumor histopathology for these variants in mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Methods: Genotyping data for 12,599 BRCA1 and 7,132 BRCA2 mutation carriers from 40 studies were combined. Results: We confirmed associations between rs8170 at 19p13.1 and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers [HR, 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07–1.27; P = 7.42 × 10−4] and between rs16917302 at ZNF365 (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73–0.97; P = 0.017) but not rs311499 at 20q13.3 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.94–1.31; P = 0.22) and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Analyses based on tumor histopathology showed that 19p13 variants were predominantly associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, whereas rs16917302 at ZNF365 was mainly associated with ER-positive breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We also found for the first time that rs67397200 at 19p13.1 was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer for BRCA1 (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.05–1.29; P = 3.8 × 10−4) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10–1.52; P = 1.8 × 10−3). Conclusions: 19p13.1 and ZNF365 are susceptibility loci for ovarian cancer and ER subtypes of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Impact: These findings can lead to an improved understanding of tumor development and may prove useful for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 21(4); 645–57. ©2012 AACR.

Abstract Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have a lifetime breast cancer risk of 40% to 80%, suggesting the presence of risk modifiers. We previously identified significant associations in genetic variants in the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) signaling pathway. Here, we investigate additional IGF signaling genes as risk modifiers for breast cancer development in BRCA carriers. Methods: A cohort of 1,019 BRCA1 and 500 BRCA2 mutation carriers were genotyped for 99 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in 13 genes. Proportional hazards regression was used to model time from birth to diagnosis of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers separately. For linkage disequilibrium (LD) blocks with multiple SNPs, an additive genetic model was used. For an SNP analysis, no additivity assumptions were made. Results: Significant associations were found between risk of breast cancer and LD blocks in IGF2 for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (global P values of 0.009 for BRCA1 and 0.007 for BRCA2), HTRA1 for BRCA1 carriers (global P value of 0.005), and MMP3 for BRCA2 carriers (global P = 0.0000007 for BRCA2). Conclusions: We identified significant associations of genetic variants involved in IGF signaling. With the known interaction of BRCA1 and IGF signaling and the loss of PTEN in a majority of BRCA1 tumors, this suggests that signaling through AKT may modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers. Impact: These results suggest potential avenues for future research targeting the IGF signaling pathway in modifying risk in BRCA1and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(8); 1690–702. ©2011 AACR.