Re-evaluating cancer risks associated with the CHEK2 p.Ser428Phe Ashkenazi Jewish founder pathogenic variant

Abstract Purpose We assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Methods Retrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)–negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort. Results The ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25–1.33], P = 3×10−72). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27–1.36], P = 7×10−50). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25–1.40], P = 3×10−22) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30–1.60], P = 4×10−12) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar. Conclusion Population-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.

Download Full-text

Engaging Men With BRCA-Related Cancer Risks: Practical Advice for BRCA Risk Management From Male Stakeholders

American Journal of Men s Health ◽

10.1177/1557988320924932 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 14 (3) ◽

pp. 155798832092493

Author(s):

Marleah Dean ◽

Gemme Campbell-Salome ◽

Emily A. Rauscher

Keyword(s):

Real Life ◽

Brca2 Gene ◽

Comparison Method ◽

Pathogenic Variant ◽

Cancer Risks ◽

Hereditary Cancers ◽

Practical Advice ◽

Semistructured Interviews ◽

Family Narrative ◽

Engaging Men

Men are at risk for developing hereditary cancers such as breast, prostate, pancreatic, and melanoma due to a pathogenic germline variant in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene. The purpose of this study was to identify and provide practical advice for men managing their BRCA-related cancer risks based on men’s real-life experiences. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 25 men who either tested positive for a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/2 gene or who had an immediate family member who had tested positive for a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/2. A thematic analysis of the interview transcripts was completed utilizing the constant comparison method. Qualitative analysis produced three categories of participant advice for men who recently learned of their hereditary cancer risk. Specifically, participants advised the following: (a) know the basics, (b) engage in the family narrative, and (c) advocate for yourself. Results showed the need for men to know and understand their BRCA cancer risks and communicate that genetic risk information to their family members and practitioners. In particular, the findings stress the importance of addressing men’s risks and medical management from a family-focused approach. Overall, because men are historically undereducated about their BRCA-related cancer risks, this practical advice serves as a first step for men managing BRCA-related cancer risks and may ultimately assist them in making preventive and screening health behaviors.

Download Full-text

Ovarian and Breast Cancer Risks Associated With Pathogenic Variants in RAD51C and RAD51D

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute ◽

10.1093/jnci/djaa030 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 112 (12) ◽

pp. 1242-1250 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Xin Yang ◽

Honglin Song ◽

Goska Leslie ◽

Christoph Engel ◽

Eric Hahnen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Statistical Tests ◽

Pathogenic Variant ◽

Cancer Risks ◽

First Degree Relatives ◽

Relative Risks ◽

Pathogenic Variants ◽

Complex Segregation Analysis ◽

Cumulative Risks

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to estimate precise age-specific tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC) and breast cancer (BC) risks for carriers of pathogenic variants in RAD51C and RAD51D. Methods We analyzed data from 6178 families, 125 with pathogenic variants in RAD51C, and 6690 families, 60 with pathogenic variants in RAD51D. TOC and BC relative and cumulative risks were estimated using complex segregation analysis to model the cancer inheritance patterns in families while adjusting for the mode of ascertainment of each family. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Pathogenic variants in both RAD51C and RAD51D were associated with TOC (RAD51C: relative risk [RR] = 7.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.60 to 10.19; P = 5 × 10-40; RAD51D: RR = 7.60, 95% CI = 5.61 to 10.30; P = 5 × 10-39) and BC (RAD51C: RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.39 to 2.85; P = 1.55 × 10-4; RAD51D: RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.72; P = .002). For both RAD51C and RAD51D, there was a suggestion that the TOC relative risks increased with age until around age 60 years and decreased thereafter. The estimated cumulative risks of developing TOC to age 80 years were 11% (95% CI = 6% to 21%) for RAD51C and 13% (95% CI = 7% to 23%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. The estimated cumulative risks of developing BC to 80 years were 21% (95% CI = 15% to 29%) for RAD51C and 20% (95% CI = 14% to 28%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. Both TOC and BC risks for RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers varied by cancer family history and could be as high as 32–36% for TOC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with TOC, or 44–46% for BC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with BC. Conclusions These estimates will facilitate the genetic counseling of RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers and justify the incorporation of RAD51C and RAD51D into cancer risk prediction models.

Download Full-text

Clinical features and cancer risk in families with pathogenic CDH1 variants irrespective of clinical criteria

Journal of Medical Genetics ◽

10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-105991 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 56 (12) ◽

pp. 838-843 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

Rosa M Xicola ◽

Shuwei Li ◽

Nicolette Rodriguez ◽

Patrick Reinecke ◽

Rachid Karam ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Gastric Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Pathogenic Variant ◽

Age At Diagnosis ◽

Breast Cancers ◽

Cancer Risks ◽

Clinical Criteria ◽

Gastric Cancers ◽

Risk Of Cancer

BackgroundThe clinical phenotype of CDH1 pathogenic variant carriers has mostly been studied in families that fulfil criteria of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC). We aimed at determining cancer phenotype and cancer risk estimation among families with CDH1 pathogenic variants not selected by HDGC clinical criteria.MethodsPatients were all consecutively identified CDH1 pathogenic variant carriers from a clinical laboratory tested with multigene panel testing and from an academic cancer genetics programme. Clinical and demographic features, cancer phenotypes and genotype–phenotype correlations were determined among CDH1 families. Age-specific cumulative cancer risks (penetrance) were calculated based on 38 families with available pedigrees.ResultsWithin the 113 CDH1 pathogenic variant probands and 476 relatives, 113 had gastric cancer, 177 breast cancer and 196 other cancers. Mean age at diagnosis was 47 for gastric and 54 for breast cancer. Forty-six per cent fulfilled criteria of HDGC. While 36% of families had both gastric and breast cancers, 36% had breast but no gastric cancers and 16% had gastric but not breast cancers. Cumulative risk of cancer by age 80 was 37.2% for gastric and 42.9% for breast cancer.ConclusionIn unselected CDH1 pathogenic variant carrier families, gastric cancer risks were lower and age at diagnosis higher than previously reported in families pre-selected for HDGC criteria. A substantial proportion of families did not present with any gastric cancers and their cancers were limited to breast. Thus, clinical criteria for CDH1 testing should be widened, including breast cancer families only, and a consideration for delayed prophylactic gastrectomy/surveillance should be evaluated.

Download Full-text