scholarly journals Hereditary Breast Cancer and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) Syndromeand Other Hereditary Tumors

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 173-176
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Nakayama
2017 ◽  
Vol 146 (1) ◽  
pp. 205-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Linton Peters ◽  
Judy E. Garber ◽  
Nadine Tung

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9534-9534
Author(s):  
N. Kauff ◽  
T. Cigler ◽  
K. Hurley ◽  
H. Huang ◽  
H. Rapaport ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (12) ◽  
pp. 760-767
Author(s):  
D. I. Vodolazhsky ◽  
A. V. Mayakovskaya ◽  
A. V. Kubyshkin ◽  
K. A. Aliev ◽  
I. I. Fomochkina

The review presents classical and modern views on the molecular genetic causes underlying hereditary predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer. A computerized literature search was carried out in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, published between January 1994 and May 2021, using the keywords: «hereditary breast and ovarian cancer», «BRCA» and «DNA repair». Current views on the role of germline mutations in genes for susceptibility to breast cancer (BC): BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, TP53, CHEK2, PTEN, ATM, and PPM1D are presented. The role of a complex of genes involved in homologous DNA repair and causing other hereditary oncological diseases is considered. The role of the loss of heterozygosity in these genes, which increases the level of chromosomal instability and leads to an increased risk of malignant transformation, is considered. Germinal mutations in the genes under consideration in 90% of clinical cases are the cause of initiation of tissue malignancy and greatly increase the risk of developing hereditary breast cancer and OC. The review emphasizes the complex nature of pathogenesis and significant polymorphism of genetic targets for hereditary breast cancer and OC. It is concluded that it is necessary to use NGS panels for complex screening of genes of hereditary susceptibility to these oncological diseases. The review provides data on the clinical significance of each group of genes of hereditary predisposition in the pathogenesis of breast cancer and OC, and also demonstrates the possible role of methylation of the promoter regions of genes and the state of mitochondrial DNA in the development of these pathologies. The purpose of this review was to broaden the horizons of specialists in the field of oncology and clinical diagnostics in the context of the rapidly expanding spectrum of molecular genetic markers of hereditary breast and ovarian cancers.


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9534-9534
Author(s):  
N. Kauff ◽  
T. Cigler ◽  
K. Hurley ◽  
H. Huang ◽  
H. Rapaport ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 740-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry T. Lynch ◽  
Carrie L. Snyder ◽  
Jane F. Lynch ◽  
Bronson D. Riley ◽  
Wendy S. Rubinstein

Purpose: To provide practical considerations for diagnosing, counseling, and managing patients at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. Design: We have studied 98 extended hereditary breast cancer (HBC)/hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) families with BRCA1/2 germline mutations. From these families, 1,315 individuals were counseled and sampled for DNA testing. Herein, 716 of these individuals received their DNA test results in concert with genetic counseling. Several challenging pedigrees were selected from Creighton University’s hereditary cancer family registry, as well as one family from Evanston/Northwestern Healthcare, to be discussed in this present report. Results: Many obstacles were identified in diagnosis, counseling, and managing patients at high risk for HBC/HBOC. These obstacles were early noncancer death of key relatives, perception of insurance or employment discrimination, fear, anxiety, apprehension, reduced gene penetrance, and poor compliance. Other important issues such as physician culpability and malpractice implications for failure to collect or act on the cancer family history were identified. Conclusion: When clinical gene testing emerged for BRCA1 and BRCA2, little was known about the efficacy of medical interventions. Potential barriers to uptake of testing were largely unexplored. Identification and referral of high-risk patients and families to genetic counseling can greatly enhance the care of the population at the highest risk for cancer. However, because premonitory physical stigmata are absent in most of these syndromes, an HBOC diagnosis may be missed unless a careful family history of cancer of the breast, ovary, or several integrally associated cancers is obtained.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22191-e22191
Author(s):  
T. Wafa

e22191 Background: Hereditary breast cancer accounts for 3–8% of all breast cancers. It was recently estimated that a combination of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes mutations is responsible for 30% of hereditary breast cancer cases. Methods: To investigate the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in breast cancer patients with affected relatives in Tunisia, 36 patients who had at least one first degree relative affected with breast and/or ovarian cancer were analysed. Thirty three patients are suggestive of BRCA1 mutation and 3 are suggestive of BRCA2 mutation. Results: Four mutations in BRCA1 gene were described among which, one novel splice site mutation (330 dupA) and 3 frameshift mutations including the 4160 delAG, the 2789 delG and the 5385 insC. Our study is the first to describe the 5385 insC mutation which was described only among Jewish Ashkenazi population. Two frameshift mutations (1537 del4 and 5909 insA) were screened in BRCA2 gene. Nineteen percent (7/36) of the familial cases were altered on BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes with deleterious mutations at heterozygous state and 55% (20/36) by mutation with uncertain value (UV) or by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Conclusions: Almost all the cases mutated by deleterious mutations on BRCA1 gene reported a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer in the index case or in their relatives. On the contrary, patients with an UV mutation or SNPs have no history of ovarian cancer in their corresponding families. Our data are the first to contribute to information on mutation spectrum of BRCA genes and offer a recommended screening mode for clinical genetic testing policy in Tunisia. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2019 ◽  
Vol 111 (12) ◽  
pp. 1332-1338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Na Li ◽  
Simone McInerny ◽  
Magnus Zethoven ◽  
Dane Cheasley ◽  
Belle W X Lim ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Loss-of-function variants in RAD51C are associated with familial ovarian cancer, but its role in hereditary breast cancer remains unclear. The aim of this study was to couple breast tumor sequencing with case-control data to clarify the contribution of RAD51C to hereditary breast cancer. Methods RAD51C was sequenced in 3080 breast cancer index cases that were negative in BRCA1/2 clinical tests and 4840 population-matched cancer-free controls. Pedigree and pathology data were analyzed. Nine breast cancers and one ovarian cancer from RAD51C variant carriers were sequenced to identify biallelic inactivation of RAD51C, copy number variation, mutational signatures, and the spectrum of somatic mutations in breast cancer driver genes. The promoter of RAD51C was analyzed for DNA methylation. Results A statistically significant excess of loss-of-function variants was identified in 3080 cases (0.4%) compared with 2 among 4840 controls (0.04%; odds ratio = 8.67, 95% confidence interval = 1.89 to 80.52, P< .001), with more than half of the carriers having no personal or family history of ovarian cancer. In addition, the association was highly statistically significant among cases with estrogen-negative (P <. 001) or triple-negative cancer (P < .001), but not in estrogen-positive cases. Tumor sequencing from carriers confirmed bi-allelic inactivation in all the triple-negative cases and was associated with high homologous recombination deficiency scores and mutational signature 3 indicating homologous recombination repair deficiency. Conclusions This study provides evidence that germline loss-of-function variants of RAD51C are associated with hereditary breast cancer, particularly triple-negative type. RAD51C-null breast cancers possess similar genomic and clinical features to BRCA1-null cancers and may also be vulnerable to DNA double-strand break inducing chemotherapies and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 54-65
Author(s):  
V. V. Semiglazov ◽  
A. Е. Protasova ◽  
G. K. Kalikeev

This article analyzes current problems associated with surgical and systemic treatment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancers (including those associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations). We discuss the issues related to clinical course of multiple primary tumors and their sensitivity to cytostatic and targeted therapy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document