scholarly journals Characterization of three alternative transcripts of the BRCA1 gene in patients with breast cancer and a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer who tested negative for pathogenic mutations

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 950-956 ◽  
Author(s):  
GAETANA GAMBINO ◽  
MARIELLA TANCREDI ◽  
ELISABETTA FALASCHI ◽  
PAOLO ARETINI ◽  
MARIA ADELAIDE CALIGO
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 889
Author(s):  
Ava Kwong ◽  
Cecilia Y. S. Ho ◽  
Vivian Y. Shin ◽  
Chun Hang Au ◽  
Tsun Leung Chan ◽  
...  

The germline carrier of the BRCA1 pathogenic mutation has been well proven to confer an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Despite BRCA1 biallelic pathogenic mutations being extremely rare, they have been reported to be embryonically lethal or to cause Fanconi anemia (FA). Here we describe a patient who was a 48-year-old female identified with biallelic pathogenic mutations of the BRCA1 gene, with no or very subtle FA-features. She was diagnosed with ovarian cancer and breast cancer at the ages of 43 and 44 and had a strong family history of breast and gynecological cancers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce O’Shaughnessy ◽  
Christine Brezden-Masley ◽  
Marina Cazzaniga ◽  
Tapashi Dalvi ◽  
Graham Walker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The global observational BREAKOUT study investigated germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm) prevalence in a population of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods Eligible patients had initiated first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy for HER2-negative MBC within 90 days prior to enrollment. Hormone receptor (HR)-positive patients had experienced disease progression on or after prior endocrine therapy, or endocrine therapy was considered unsuitable. gBRCAm status was determined using baseline blood samples or prior germline test results. For patients with a negative gBRCAm test, archival tissue was tested for somatic BRCAm and homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm). Details of first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy were also collected. Results Between March 2017 and April 2018, 384 patients from 14 countries were screened and consented to study enrollment; 341 patients were included in the full analysis set (median [range] age at enrollment: 56 [25–89] years; 256 (75.3%) postmenopausal). Overall, 33 patients (9.7%) had a gBRCAm (16 [4.7%] in gBRCA1 only, 12 [3.5%] in gBRCA2 only, and 5 [1.5%] in both gBRCA1 and gBRCA2). gBRCAm prevalence was similar in HR-positive and HR-negative patients. gBRCAm prevalence was 9.0% in European patients and 10.6% in Asian patients and was higher in patients aged ≤ 50 years at initial breast cancer (BC) diagnosis (12.9%) than patients aged > 50 years (5.4%). In patients with any risk factor for having a gBRCAm (family history of BC and/or ovarian cancer, aged ≤ 50 years at initial BC diagnosis, or triple-negative BC), prevalence was 10.4%, versus 5.8% in patients without these risk factors. HRRm prevalence was 14.1% (n = 9/64) in patients with germline BRCA wildtype. Conclusions Patient demographic and disease characteristics supported the association of a gBRCAm with younger age at initial BC diagnosis and family history of BC and/or ovarian cancer. gBRCAm prevalence in this cohort, not selected on the basis of risk factors for gBRCAm, was slightly higher than previous results suggested. gBRCAm prevalence among patients without a traditional risk factor for harboring a gBRCAm (5.8%) supports current guideline recommendations of routine gBRCAm testing in HER2-negative MBC, as these patients may benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. Trial registration NCT03078036.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 21093-21093
Author(s):  
J. A. Shin ◽  
S. Gelber ◽  
J. Garber ◽  
R. Rosenberg ◽  
M. Przypyszny ◽  
...  

21093 Background: Young women with breast cancer have an increased risk of harboring a BRCA1/2 mutation. The frequency of genetic testing in this population is not well described. We evaluated the reported frequency and factors associated with genetic testing among young breast cancer survivors identified through the Young Survival Coalition (YSC), an international advocacy group for young women with breast cancer. Methods: Items regarding family history and genetic testing were included in a large web-based survey addressing quality of life and fertility issues for young women with breast cancer. All YSC members were invited by email in March 2003 (N= 1,703 women) to participate in this cross-sectional survey. Results: 657 women completed the on-line survey; 622 were eligible for this analysis (age <40, no metastatic or recurrent disease). Mean age at breast cancer diagnosis was 33 years; mean age when surveyed 35.5 years. Stages included: 0 (10%), I (27%), II (49%), III (12%), missing (3%). 90% of women were white; 64% married; 49% with children; 78% had at least a college education; 42% of women reported a 1st or 2nd degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer, and 13% considered themselves high-risk for harboring a genetic mutation at the time of diagnosis. At the time of the survey, 23% of women had undergone genetic testing, and 26% of those tested reported that a mutation was found. In a multivariate model, women who were younger (age 36–40 vs. age =30, O.R. 2.26, p=0.004), more educated (< college vs. > college education, O.R. 2.62, p=0.0009), had a family history of breast or ovarian cancer (O.R. 3.15, p<0.0001), and had had a mastectomy (O.R. 1.99, p=0.001) were more likely to have undergone genetic testing. Non-significant covariates included: age at survey, stage, time since diagnosis, race, marital status, employment, finances, insurance, number of children, comorbidities, baseline anxiety and depression, and fear of recurrence. Conclusion: The majority of women diagnosed with breast cancer age 40 and younger do not undergo genetic testing. Younger, more educated women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer are more likely to get tested. Further research to define the appropriateness of genetic testing in this relatively high-risk population is warranted. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2006 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongyu Wu ◽  
Kangmin Zhu ◽  
Ismail Jatoi ◽  
Mona Shah ◽  
Craig D. Shriver ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdul Khalid Siraj ◽  
Tariq Masoodi ◽  
Rong Bu ◽  
Sandeep Kumar Parvathareddy ◽  
Kaleem Iqbal ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The data on prevalence and clinical relevance of TP53 germline mutations in early onset Middle-Eastern breast cancer (BC) is limited. Methods We determined TP53 germline mutations in a cohort of 464 early onset BC patients from Saudi Arabia using capture sequencing based next generation sequencing. Results Germline TP53 pathogenic mutations were found in 1.5% (7/464) of early onset Saudi BC patients. A total of six pathogenic missense mutations, one stop gain mutation and two variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were detected in our cohort. No TP53 pathogenic mutations were detected among 463 healthy controls. TP53 mutations carriers were significantly more likely to have bilateral breast cancer (p = 0.0008). At median follow-up of 41 months, TP53 mutations were an unfavorable factor for overall survival in univariate analysis. All the patients carrying TP53 mutations were negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Majority of patients (85.7%; 6/7) carrying TP53 mutation had no family history suggestive of Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (LFS) or personal history of multiple LFS related tumors. Only one patient had a positive family history suggestive of LFS. Conclusions TP53 germline mutation screening detects a clinically meaningful risk of early onset BC from this ethnicity and should be considered in all early onset BC regardless of the family history of cancer, especially in young patients that are negative for BRCA mutations.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1013-1013
Author(s):  
A. R. Uyei ◽  
K. R. Broglio ◽  
T. L. Solomon ◽  
K. J. Vogel ◽  
C. I. Amos ◽  
...  

1013 Background: Women with an increased risk for breast cancer have many risk reduction options including: prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic oophorectomy, chemoprevention, and screening. Women without breast cancer make such decisions in a purely preventive setting and factors that affect their decisions are unclear. Method: We performed an IRB approved retrospective review of the medical records on women who underwent BRCA testing. We evaluated the women without a history of breast cancer to assess clinical characteristics and their relation to decision making. The risk reduction categories analyzed were: prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic oophorectomy, tamoxifen, increased surveillance with MRI, and standard screening (clinical breast exam and mammography). Patient characteristics were tabulated by clinical decision group and the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used. Results: From 2001, 627 patients have undergone genetic testing. 202 of these women did not have a history of breast cancer among whom 58 were mutation carriers. Most patients chose standard screening (47%) or increased surveillance (38%). 4% chose tamoxifen, 7% chose prophylactic mastectomy, 3% chose both prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy, and 5% chose oophorectomy. The tamoxifen group was too small to do further analysis. Increased surveillance did not show any significant association with any of the clinical factors that we evaluated. The majority of women who chose standard screening had a personal history of ovarian cancer (p<0.0001) and had no family history of ovarian cancer (p=0.02). Prophylactic surgeries were significantly associated with positive BRCA status (p=0.01). Women with a family history of ovarian cancer tended to have prophylactic surgery (p=0.02). Women who had DCIS or a breast biopsy tended to have prophylactic mastectomies (p=0.0001 and p<0.001 respectively). Conclusion: In breast cancer free women, BRCA status, family history of ovarian cancer, DCIS, and breast biopsy were associated with prophylactic surgeries. Having ovarian cancer or no family history of ovarian cancer were associated with standard screening. We are performing a questionnaire study to determine the reasons behind these women’s choices. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12579-e12579
Author(s):  
Patricia Rioja ◽  
Rossana Ruiz ◽  
Zaida Morante ◽  
Raul Mantilla ◽  
Gabriel Antonio De la Cruz Ku ◽  
...  

e12579 Background: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) seems to be associated with a hereditary disease cause based on the earlier age of onset, the high rate of TNBC cases with a positive family history of cancer, and the higher prevalence of breast cancer susceptibility genes. The impact of family history in breast and/or ovarian cancer (FHBOC) in TNBC overall survival is unclear, we conducted this study to evaluate this factor in a Peruvian cohort. Methods: Retrospectively reviewed the medical files from TNBC patients diagnosed at Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas (INEN) in Lima, Peru, from 2000 to 2014. New cases with histologically confirmed TNBC defined as lack of expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors by immunohistochemistry and HER2- were included. A positive FHBOC was defined as a history of breast and/or ovarian cancer in 1st, 2nd and/or 3rd degree relatives at any age. Patients who had three affected relatives in two generations with two of them being first-degree relatives were considered as exhibiting a clinical autosomal dominant (AD) inheritance pattern. Results: 2006 patients, 99.8% were females. Mean age was 50.2 years old (19 - 95) and 54.6% were postmenopausal. According clinical staging: stage I, 7.2%; stage II, 34.2%; stage III, 51.0%; and stage IV, 6.5%. 76.5% of women underwent surgery. 13% (n=266) had a positive FHBOC. Of these, 44.0% (n=117), 35.0% (n=93), and 13.5% (n=36) had 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree affected relatives, respectively. An AD inheritance pattern was observed in 20.7% (n=55) of patients with FHBOC. With a median follow-up of 80 months (range 0 - 249), 5y-overall survival (OS) for the whole population was 53.8%. 5 year-OS was significantly better in patients with FHBOC as compared to those without it; 64.5% vs. 52.2%, respectively (HR 0.73; 95% CI [0.60-0.88] p=0.001). FHBOC showed a positive impact on survival rates among patients with stages III and IV (5-year OS 42.3% vs. 32.7%; HR 0.79; 95% CI [0.64-0.99], p=0.041) but not in stages I and II (5-year OS 88.4% vs. 81.3%; HR 0.72; 95% CI [0.49-1.08], p=0.11). The 5y-OS for the patients with an AD inheritance pattern was 70.9%. However, pairwise multiple comparison did not find a significant difference between these patients and those with FHBOC without an AD inheritance pattern (62.8%). On multivariate analysis, FHBOC (HR: 0.80; 95% CI [0.66-0.97], p=0.023), had an independent effect on OS, adjusted for age, menopausal status, clinical stage and surgery. Conclusions: A positive FHBOC was associated with an improved survival in patients with TNBC, suggesting FHBOC as an independent prognostic factor. These results need validation and confirmation through additional retrospective cohorts and analysis in prospective clinical trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document