Germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes among women with invasive lobular cancer of breast.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10581-10581
Author(s):  
Siddhartha Yadav ◽  
Chunling Hu ◽  
Susan M. Domchek ◽  
Jeffrey N. Weitzel ◽  
David Goldgar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Clinical Cohort ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Predisposition Genes ◽  
Multigene Panel Testing ◽  
Multigene Panel

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.

scholarly journals Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes Among Women With Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siddhartha Yadav ◽  
Chunling Hu ◽  
Katherine L. Nathanson ◽  
Jeffrey N. Weitzel ◽  
David E. Goldgar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Clinical Cohort ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Predisposition Genes ◽  
Multigene Panel

PURPOSE To determine the contribution of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in hereditary cancer testing panel genes to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast. MATERIALS AND METHODS The 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). 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 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. CONCLUSION 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. 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.

scholarly journals Multigene Panel Testing Increases the Number of Loci Associated with Gastric Cancer Predisposition

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianluca Tedaldi ◽  
Francesca Pirini ◽  
Michela Tebaldi ◽  
Valentina Zampiga ◽  
Ilaria Cangini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Multigene Panel Testing ◽  
Multigene Panel

The main gene involved in gastric cancer (GC) predisposition is CDH1, the pathogenic variants of which are associated with diffuse-type gastric cancer (DGC) and lobular breast cancer (LBC). CDH1 only explains a fraction (10–50%) of patients suspected of DGC/LBC genetic predisposition. To identify novel susceptibility genes, thus improving the management of families at risk, we performed a multigene panel testing on selected patients. We searched for germline pathogenic variants in 94 cancer-related genes in 96 GC or LBC Italian patients with early-onset and/or family history of GC. We found CDH1 pathogenic variants in 10.4% of patients. In 11.5% of cases, we identified loss-of-function variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and ATM breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility genes, as well as in MSH2, PMS2, BMPR1A, PRF1, and BLM genes. In 78.1% of patients, we did not find any variants with clear-cut clinical significance; however, 37.3% of these cases harbored rare missense variants predicted to be damaging by bioinformatics tools. Multigene panel testing decreased the number of patients that would have otherwise remained genetically unexplained. Besides CDH1, our results demonstrated that GC pathogenic variants are distributed across a number of susceptibility genes and reinforced the emerging link between gastric and breast cancer predisposition.

Racial and ethnic differences in the results of multigene panel testing of inherited cancer predisposition genes in breast cancer patients.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1514-1514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siddhartha Yadav ◽  
Holly LaDuca ◽  
Eric Polley ◽  
Hermela Shimelis ◽  
Nancy Niguidula ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Ashkenazi Jewish ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Ethnic Populations ◽  
Predisposition Genes ◽  
Multigene Panel

1514 Background: The prevalence of germline mutations in non-white patients with breast cancer and the germline genetic drivers of breast cancer risk in non-white populations are largely unknown. Methods: The study population included 77,900 women with breast cancer (Non-Hispanic white: 57,003; Black: 6,722; Asian: 4,183; Hispanic: 5,194; Ashkenazi-Jewish: 4,798) who underwent germline multigene panel testing of cancer predisposition genes from March 2012 to December 2016. The prevalence of predisposition gene mutations in racial and ethnic populations relative to non-Hispanic Whites was assessed while accounting for age at diagnosis of breast cancer, family history of breast and ovarian cancer, and estrogen receptor status of breast tumors. Associations between mutations in each gene and breast cancer risk were evaluated using reference controls. Results: The overall frequency of pathogenic mutations in known breast cancer predisposition genes was 9.1% for non-Hispanic Whites, 9.8% for African Americans, 10.2% for Hispanics, 7.6% for Ashkenazi-Jewish, and 7.5% for Asians. BRCA1 mutations were enriched (p < 0.05) and CHEK2 mutations were under-represented in all racial and ethnic populations relative to non-Hispanic Whites. BRCA2 and BARD1 mutations were enriched in African Americans and Hispanics relative to non-Hispanic Whites, whereas PALB2 and RAD51C mutations were enriched in Hispanics. Among genes with mutation counts large enough for assessment, mutations in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and TP53 were significantly associated with clinically relevant increased risks (odds ratio (OR) > 2) of breast cancer across all ethnicities and races. Rates of variants of uncertain significance were highest among Asians (29%), followed by blacks (27%), Hispanics (21%), non-Hispanic whites (16%) and Ashkenazi-Jews (14%). Conclusions: While there is some similarity across ethnic groups, substantial heterogeneity exists in the prevalence of mutations in breast cancer predisposition genes across major racial and ethnic groups in the US population. These findings contribute to our understanding of breast cancer risk and have significant implications for genetic testing, screening, and management of patients with an inherited predisposition to breast cancer, with a need for continued analysis with increased cohort size in ethnic minority groups.

scholarly journals Population-based estimates of breast cancer risk for carriers of pathogenic variants identified by gene-panel testing

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa C. Southey ◽  
James G. Dowty ◽  
Moeen Riaz ◽  
Jason A. Steen ◽  
Anne-Laure Renault ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Gene Panel ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Gene Panel Testing

AbstractPopulation-based estimates of breast cancer risk for carriers of pathogenic variants identified by gene-panel testing are urgently required. Most prior research has been based on women selected for high-risk features and more data is needed to make inference about breast cancer risk for women unselected for family history, an important consideration of population screening. We tested 1464 women diagnosed with breast cancer and 862 age-matched controls participating in the Australian Breast Cancer Family Study (ABCFS), and 6549 healthy, older Australian women enroled in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) study for rare germline variants using a 24-gene-panel. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using unconditional logistic regression adjusted for age and other potential confounders. We identified pathogenic variants in 11.1% of the ABCFS cases, 3.7% of the ABCFS controls and 2.2% of the ASPREE (control) participants. The estimated breast cancer OR [95% confidence interval] was 5.3 [2.1–16.2] for BRCA1, 4.0 [1.9–9.1] for BRCA2, 3.4 [1.4–8.4] for ATM and 4.3 [1.0–17.0] for PALB2. Our findings provide a population-based perspective to gene-panel testing for breast cancer predisposition and opportunities to improve predictors for identifying women who carry pathogenic variants in breast cancer predisposition genes.

scholarly journals Inherited breast cancer predisposition in Asians: multigene panel testing outcomes from Singapore

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward S Y Wong ◽  
Sandhya Shekar ◽  
Marie Met-Domestici ◽  
Claire Chan ◽  
Melody Sze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Inherited Breast Cancer ◽  
Multigene Panel Testing ◽  
Multigene Panel

scholarly journals Multigene Panel Testing Provides a New Perspective on Lynch Syndrome

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (22) ◽  
pp. 2568-2575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carin R. Espenschied ◽  
Holly LaDuca ◽  
Shuwei Li ◽  
Rachel McFarland ◽  
Chia-Ling Gau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Lynch Syndrome ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Brca1 And Brca2 ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Multigene Panel Testing ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Testing Criteria ◽  
Multigene Panel

Purpose Most existing literature describes Lynch syndrome (LS) as a hereditary syndrome leading to high risks of colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer mainly as a result of mutations in MLH1 and MSH2. Most of these studies were performed on cohorts with disease suggestive of hereditary CRC and population-based CRC and endometrial cancer cohorts, possibly biasing results. We aimed to describe a large cohort of mismatch repair (MMR) mutation carriers ascertained through multigene panel testing, evaluate their phenotype, and compare the results with those of previous studies. Methods We retrospectively reviewed clinical histories of patients who had multigene panel testing, including the MMR and EPCAM genes, between March 2012 and June 2015 (N = 34,981) and performed a series of statistical comparisons. Results Overall, MSH6 mutations were most frequent, followed by PMS2, MSH2, MLH1, and EPCAM mutations, respectively. Of 528 patients who had MMR mutations, 63 (11.9%) had breast cancer only and 144 (27.3%) had CRC only. When comparing those with breast cancer only to those with CRC only, MSH6 and PMS2 mutations were more frequent than MLH1 and MSH2 mutations ( P = 2.3 × 10−5). Of the 528 patients, 22.2% met BRCA1 and BRCA2 ( BRCA1/2) testing criteria and not LS criteria, and 5.1% met neither BRCA1/2 nor LS testing criteria. MSH6 and PMS2 mutations were more frequent than MLH1 and MSH2 mutations among patients who met BRCA1/2 testing criteria but did not meet LS testing criteria ( P = 4.3 × 10−7). Conclusion These results provide a new perspective on LS and suggest that individuals with MSH6 and PMS2 mutations may present with a hereditary breast and ovarian cancer phenotype. These data also highlight the limitations of current testing criteria in identifying these patients, as well as the need for further investigation of cancer risks in patients with MMR mutations.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Germline Pathogenic and Likely Pathogenic Variants in Patients With Second Breast Cancers

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharine A Yao K ◽  
Jacob Clifford ◽  
Shuwei Li ◽  
Holly LaDuca ◽  
Peter Hulick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Breast Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Predisposition Genes ◽  
Brca1 Brca2

Abstract Background Few studies have examined gene-specific associations with contralateral and/or second breast cancer (SBC). Methods The frequency of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in clinically actionable genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PTEN, TP53, CHEK2, CDH1, ATM, PALB2, NBN, and NF1) was compared between women with a primary breast cancer (PBC) and SBC who underwent multigene panel testing at a single diagnostic testing laboratory. Race- and ethnicity-specific logistic regression burden tests adjusted for age at diagnosis of first breast cancer, histology, presence of first- or second-degree relatives with breast cancer, and prior testing for BRCA1/2 genes were used to test for associations with SBC. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results The study was comprised of 75 550 women with PBC and 7728 with SBC. Median time between breast cancers for SBC was 11 (interquartile range = 6–17) years. Restricting to women tested for all actionable genes (n = 60 310), there were 4231 (7.8%) carriers of P/LP variants in actionable genes among the controls (PBC) compared with 652 (11.1%) women with SBC (P&lt; .001). Among Caucasians, exclusive of Ashkenazi Jewish women, those carrying a P/LP variant in a clinically actionable gene were 1.44 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 1.60) times as likely to have SBC than noncarriers, after accounting for potential confounders. Among African American and Hispanic women, a P/LP variant in a clinically actionable gene was 1.88 (95% CI = 1.36 to 2.56) and 1.66 (9% CI = 1.02 to 2.58) times as likely to be associated with SBC, respectively (P &lt; .001 and P = .03). Conclusion Women with P/LP variants in breast cancer predisposition genes are more likely to have SBC than noncarriers. Prospective studies are needed confirm these findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document