Szabo, Csilla I.

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>3.0, p<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 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 BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) testing is uninformative in approximately 80% of families with clinical features of inherited susceptibility to breast cancer. Early identification of the individuals at risk in BRCAx families may lead to enhanced screening and prevention strategies, and potentially improved overall survival as has been seen for carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. A proportion of these families are likely explained by mutations in other high penetrance and moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Although multi-gene panels are now commercially available for clinical testing, only limited information is available on the spectrum of mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes in specific subgroups of high-risk breast cancer patients. We performed whole exome sequencing in 278 BRCA1/2 negative individuals with high-risk familial breast cancer, defined as a proband and at least two first or second degree relatives with breast cancer. Samples included 232 individuals from 97 families and 49 unrelated individuals, for a total of 146 independent cases. Data were analyzed for identification of all variants in 18 known high and moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2. Two of the 97 families and one of the 49 singletons (2% of independent cases) were found to have deleterious mutations in high penetrance genes, namely TP53 (2) and CDH1 (1). In addition, nine of 146 independent cases (6%) were found to have deleterious mutations in the other predisposition genes. Mutations in ATM and CHEK2 accounted for seven of the ten moderate penetrance mutations identified; additionally one family had a mutation in BLM, one in MRE11A, and one in PALB2. Furthermore, 15 of 146 independent cases (10%) were found to have variants of unknown significance (VUS) in one of eight genes. There were no deleterious mutations or VUS in eight of the 18 genes. Our data show that significant genetic heterogeneity exists in BRCAx families. Large-scale collaborative efforts will be required to attain sufficient power to understand how to appropriately apply these results clinically in cancer risk evaluation. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Lucia Guidugli, Kasmintan Schrader, Steven Hart, Vijai Joseph, Tinu Thomas, Xianshu Wang, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Robert Klein, Susan M. Domchek, Csilla Szabo, Susan Neuhausen, Jeffrey Weitzel, Katherine L. Nathanson, Kenneth Offit, Fergus Couch. High and moderate penetrance germline mutations in a number of genes are responsible for a small proportion of familial breast cancer risk in BRCAx families. [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 1291. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-1291

Abstract Background:BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer. The incomplete penetrance coupled with the variable age at diagnosis in carriers of the same mutation suggests the existence of genetic and nongenetic modifying factors. In this study, we evaluated the putative role of variants in many candidate modifier genes. Methods: Genotyping data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers, for known variants (n = 3,248) located within or around 445 candidate genes, were available through the iCOGS custom-designed array. Breast and ovarian cancer association analysis was performed within a retrospective cohort approach. Results: The observed P values of association ranged between 0.005 and 1.000. None of the variants was significantly associated with breast or ovarian cancer risk in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, after multiple testing adjustments. Conclusion: There is little evidence that any of the evaluated candidate variants act as modifiers of breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Impact: Genome-wide association studies have been more successful at identifying genetic modifiers of BRCA1/2 penetrance than candidate gene studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(1); 308–16. ©2014 AACR.

Abstract Inactivating mutations in several genes that encode components of the DNA repair machinery have been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. To assess whether alterations in other DNA repair genes contribute to breast cancer and to further determine the relevance of these genes to pancreatic cancer, we performed mutational analysis of 32 DNA double-strand break repair genes in genomic DNA from 38 breast tumors, 48 pancreatic tumors, and 10 non-BRCA1/BRCA2 hereditary breast cancer patients. A total of 494 coding exons were screened by denatured high-performance liquid chromatography and direct DNA sequencing. Two inactivating mutations were identified in breast tumor samples, a germline single-nucleotide deletion in POLQ (c.3605delT) and a somatic nonsense change in PRKDC (c.2408C>A, p.Ser803X). Two germline-inactivating mutations in RAD50 (c.1875C>G, p.Tyr625X and IVS14+1G>A) were also detected in separate pancreatic tumor samples. In addition, 35 novel nonsynonymous amino acid substitutions, resulting from two in-frame deletions and 33 single nucleotide alterations, were identified. Seven of these were predicted to influence protein function. A separate analysis of the CLSPN c.3839C>T (rs35490896) variant that was observed more frequently in breast tumors than in pancreatic tumors or normal controls failed to detect a significant association with breast cancer risk in a Mayo Clinic breast cancer case-control study. In conclusion, this screen of DNA repair genes implicates PRKDC and POLQ as candidate tumor suppressor genes involved in breast cancer and suggests that inactivating mutations in RAD50 predispose to pancreatic cancer as well as breast cancer. [Cancer Res 2008;68(4):971–5]

AbstractThe AURKA oncogene is associated with abnormal chromosome segregation and aneuploidy and predisposition to cancer. Amplification of AURKA has been detected at higher frequency in tumors from BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers than in sporadic breast tumors, suggesting that overexpression of AURKA and inactivation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 cooperate during tumor development and progression. The F31I polymorphism in AURKA has been associated with breast cancer risk in the homozygous state in prior studies. We evaluated whether the AURKA F31I polymorphism modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 was established to provide sufficient statistical power through increased numbers of mutation carriers to identify polymorphisms that act as modifiers of cancer risk and can refine breast cancer risk estimates in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. A total of 4,935 BRCA1 and 2,241 BRCA2 mutation carriers and 11 individuals carrying both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations was genotyped for F31I. Overall, homozygosity for the 31I allele was not significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers combined [hazard ratio (HR), 0.91; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.77-1.06]. Similarly, no significant association was seen in BRCA1 (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.08) or BRCA2 carriers (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67-1.29) or when assessing the modifying effects of either bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy or menopausal status of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. In summary, the F31I polymorphism in AURKA is not associated with a modified risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(7):1416–21)