Inherited BRCA2 mutation associated with high grade breast cancer

Inheritance is believed to play a major role in 5–10% of breast cancer. The breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are estimated to account for more than half of these cases. Recent studies have suggested that breast cancers associated with BRCA1 germline mutations are of higher grade than sporadic cases. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there are significant pathologic and biologic differences between hereditary BRCA2 related breast carcinomas and non-hereditary breast cancers. Forty cases of hereditary breast cancer from families associated with a specific 999del5 BRCA2 mutation were compared with regard to histologic and biologic factors to an age matched control group. Thirty-four patients (85%) had ductal carcinoma, two had lobular carcinoma, and one patient had medullary carcinoma. Compared to the control group, the BRCA2 tumors had less tubule formation (p=0.02), more nuclear pleomorphism (p=0.02), and higher mitotic rates (p=0.002), and were thus of higher histologic grade (p=0.003). By flow cytometry the BRCA2 tumors also had significantly higher S-phase fractions than the control tumors (p = 0.02). Significant differences in axillary lymph-node involvement or ploidy status were not detected. According to the results of this study, hereditary breast cancers associated with the 999del5 BRCA2 mutation are high grade tumors with a rapid proliferation rate. Other or additional factors than the defining BRCA2 mutation are involved in determining the tumor type.     

Tetraploidy in BRCA2 breast tumours

Tetraploidy and aneuploidy can be caused by cell division errors and are frequently observed in many human carcinomas. We have recently reported delayed cytokinesis in primary human fibroblasts from BRCA2 mutation carriers, implying a function for the BRCA2 tumour suppressor in completion of cell division. Here, we address ploidy aberrations in breast tumours derived from BRCA2 germline mutation carriers. Ploidy aberrations were evaluated from flow cytometry histograms on selected breast tumour samples (n=236), previously screened for local BRCA mutations. The ploidy between BRCA2-mutated (n=71) and matched sporadic (n=165) cancers was compared. Differences in ploidy distribution were examined with respect to molecular tumour subtypes, previously defined by immunohistochemistry on tissue microarray sections. Tetraploidy was significantly 3 times more common in BRCA2 breast cancers than sporadic. However, no differences were found in the overall ploidy distribution between BRCA2-mutation carriers and non-carriers. In BRCA2 cancers, tetraploidy was associated with luminal characteristics. The increased frequency of tetraploidy in BRCA2 associated cancers may be linked to cell division errors, particularly cytokinesis. Additionally, tetraploidy emerges predominantly in BRCA2 breast cancers displaying luminal rather than triple-negative phenotypes.     

Frequent somatic loss of BRCA1 in breast tumours from BRCA2 germ-line mutation carriers and vice versa.

Breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumour suppressor genes the alleles of which have to be inactivated before tumour development occurs. Hereditary breast cancers linked to germ-line mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes almost invariably show allelic imbalance (AI) at the respective loci. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are believed to take part in a common pathway in maintenance of genomic integrity in cells. We carried out AI and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses of BRCA2 in breast tumours from germ-line BRCA1 mutation carriers and vice versa. For comparison, 14 sporadic breast tumours were also studied. 8 of the 11 (73%) informative BRCA1 mutation tumours showed AI at the BRCA2 locus. 53% of these tumours showed a copy number loss of the BRCA2 gene by FISH. 5 of the 6 (83%) informative BRCA2 mutation tumours showed AI at the BRCA1 locus. Half of the tumours (4/8) showed a physical deletion of the BRCA1 gene by FISH. Combined allelic loss of both BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene was seen in 12 of the 17 (71%) informative hereditary tumours, whereas copy number losses of both BRCA genes was seen in only 4/14 (29%) sporadic control tumours studied by FISH. In conclusion, the high prevalence of AI at BRCA1 in BRCA2 mutation tumours and vice versa suggests that somatic events occurring at the other breast cancer susceptibility gene locus may be selected in the cancer development. The mechanism resulting in AI at these loci seems more complex than a physical deletion.     

Risk of contralateral breast cancer associated with common variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2: potential modifying effect of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carrier status

Rare deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are associated with an elevated risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Whether or not common variants in these genes are independently associated with risk of breast cancer remains unclear. In this study, we included 632 Caucasian women with asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC, cases) and 1,221 women with unilateral breast cancer (UBC, controls) from the WECARE (Women's Environment, Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology) Study. BRCA1 and BRCA2 deleterious mutation status was measured using denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography followed by direct sequencing, yielding including 88 BRCA1 and 60 BRCA2 deleterious mutation carriers. We also genotyped samples on the Illumina Omni1-Quad platform. We assessed the association between CBC risk and common (minor allele frequency (MAF)?>?0.05) single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in BRCA1 (n SNPs?=?22) and BRCA2 (n SNPs?=?30) and haplotypes using conditional logistic regression accounting for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation status. We found no significant associations between any single-SNPs or haplotypes of BRCA1 or BRCA2 and risk of CBC among all women. When we stratified by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status, we found suggestive evidence that risk estimates for selected SNPs in BRCA1 (rs8176318, rs1060915, and rs16940) and BRCA2 (rs11571686, rs206115, and rs206117) may differ in non-carriers and carriers of deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. One common haplotype on BRCA1 was inversely significantly associated with risk only among non-BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. The association between common variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and risk of CBC may differ depending on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status.     

Basal cytokeratins in breast tumours among BRCA1, BRCA2 and mutation-negative breast cancer families

Introduction

Finding new immunohistochemical markers that are specific to hereditary breast cancer could help us to select candidates for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing and to understand the biological pathways of tumour development.

Methods

Using breast cancer tumour microarrays, immunohistochemical expression of cytokeratin (CK)-5/6, CK-14 and CK-17 was evaluated in breast tumours from BRCA1 families (n = 46), BRCA2 families (n = 40), non-BRCA1/BRCA2 families (n = 358) and familial breast cancer patients with one first-degree relative affected by breast or ovarian cancer (n = 270), as well as from patients with sporadic breast cancer (n = 364). Staining for CK-5/6, CK-14 and CK-17 was compared between these groups and correlated with other clinical and histological factors.

Results

CK-5/6, CK-14 and CK-17 were detected mostly among oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative and high-grade tumours. We found the highest percentages of samples positive for these CKs among ER-negative/HER2-negative tumours. In univariate analysis, CK-14 was significantly associated with tumours from BRCA1 (39%; P < 0.0005), BRCA2 (27%; P = 0.011), and non-BRCA1/BRCA2 (21%; P < 0.005) families, as compared with sporadic tumours (10%). However, in multivariate analysis, CKs were not found to be independently associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status, and the most effective predictors of BRCA1 mutations were age at onset, HER2 status, and either ER or PR status.

Conclusion

Although our study confirms that basal CKs can help to identify BRCA1 mutation carriers, this effect was weaker than previously suggested and CKs did not independently predict BRCA1 mutation either from sporadic or familial breast cancer cases. The most effective, independent predictors of BRCA1 mutations were age at onset, HER2 status, and either ER or PR status, as compared with sporadic or non-BRCA1/BRCA2 cancers.     

Contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

PURPOSE: To estimate the risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers after diagnosis and to determine which factors are predictive of the risk of a second primary breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients included 491 women with stage I or stage II breast cancer, for whom a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation had been identified in the family. Patients were followed from the initial diagnosis of cancer until contralateral mastectomy, contralateral breast cancer, death, or last follow-up. RESULTS: The actuarial risk of contralateral breast cancer was 29.5% at 10 years. Factors that were predictive of a reduced risk were the presence of a BRCA2 mutation (v BRCA1 mutation; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.15); age 50 years or older at first diagnosis (v 相似文献   

Breast conservation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with early stage breast cancer

The role of breast conservation therapy (limited surgery and irradiation of the breast with/without axilla) in the approximately 5% of breast cancer patients who harbour a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2, is a largely unexplored area and is seen by some as controversial. The relatively high cumulative risk of second primary cancers in such patients and concern about a possible decreased ability of mutation carriers to repair DNA damage caused by radiation has fuelled this controversy. Published studies of breast conservation therapy in carriers of a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are reviewed, with particular attention to their methodology. These studies have not demonstrated any increase in radiation sensitivity of normal tissues in mutation carriers, either in terms of increased early or late toxicity or tumourigenesis. Likewise, tumour sensitivity to radiotherapy, which might be expected based on the known functions of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, has not been documented to date in mutation carriers. Further, methodologically rigorous studies of large numbers of breast cancer patients who carry a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are required to fully elucidate these issues.     

Incidence of malignant tumours in relatives of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation carriers

We investigated cancer incidence between 1958 and 1995 in 1873 individuals belonging to 29 consecutively identified BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 associated families from Southern Sweden using data from parish and local tax authorities, as well as the Swedish Cancer Registry, Cause of Death Registry and Census Registry. 150 malignant tumours were analysed from 1145 relatives in the BRCA1 families and 87 tumours were analysed from 728 relatives in the BRCA2 families. After excluding index cases which led to the mutation analysis, the incidence for all malignant tumours was significantly increased for both BRCA1- standardised morbidity rate, SMR, 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-2.45; P < 0.0001 and BRCA2- (SMR 1.79, 95% CI 1.35-2.31; P < 0.0001) associated family members. For women in BRCA1-associated families, the incidence of breast cancer (SMR 3.76, 95% CI 2.29-5.80, P < 0.0001), ovarian cancer (SMR 15.49, 95% CI 9.46-23.92, P < 0.0001), stomach cancer (SMR 5.86, 95% CI 1.60-15.01, P = 0.005) were significantly increased. Amongst men only invasive squamous cell cancer of the skin was significantly increased (SMR 6.02, 95% CI 1.96-14.05, P = 0.002). In BRCA2 associated families, female breast cancer (SMR 3.03, 95% CI 1.61-5.18, P = 0.0005) was increased after exclusion of index cases. If these were included, ovarian cancer (SMR 5.16, 95% CI 1.89-11.24, P = 0.001), invasive cervical cancer (SMR 4.21, 95% CI 1.15-10.79, P = 0.016), male breast cancer (SMR 290.52, 95% CI 125.42-572.43, P < 0.0001), and prostate cancer (SMR 2.21, 95% CI 0.89-4.56, P = 0.042) were significantly increased. The increased risk for ovarian cancer in BRCA2 related families were limited to the cases leading to mutation analysis. Our data suggest that apart from breast and ovarian cancer, the incidence of other cancer types do not appear to be greatly increased in BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated families and does not warrant specific clinical follow-up in carriers.     

乳腺癌易感基因BRCA1和BRCA2的突变检测及其临床意义

乳腺癌易感基因BRCA1、BRCA2在家族性和遗传性乳腺癌中突变率较高.现就其功能、检测及临床应用方面的研究进展作一综述.     

Predictors of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Purpose:

The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers; and measure the extent to which host, family history, and cancer treatment-related factors modify the risk.

Patients and methods:

Patients were 810 women, with stage I or II breast cancer, for whom a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation had been identified in the family. Patients were followed from the initial diagnosis of cancer until contralateral mastectomy, contralateral breast cancer, death, or last follow-up.

Results:

Overall, 149 subjects (18.4%) developed a contralateral breast cancer. The 15-year actuarial risk of contralateral breast cancer was 36.1% for women with a BRCA1 mutation and was 28.5% for women with a BRCA2 mutation. Women younger than 50 years of age at the time of breast cancer diagnosis were significantly more likely to develop a contralateral breast cancer at 15 years, compared with those older than 50 years (37.6 vs 16.8% P=0.003). Women aged <50 years with two or more first-degree relatives with early-onset breast cancer were at high risk of contralateral breast cancer, compared with women with fewer, or no first-degree relatives with breast cancer (50 vs 36% P=0.005). The risk of contralateral breast cancer was reduced with oophorectomy (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.30–0.76; P=0.002).

Conclusion:

The risk of contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers declines with the age of diagnosis and increases with the number of first-degree relatives affected with breast cancer. Oophorectomy reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer in young women with a BRCA mutation.     

Risk of ipsilateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have an elevated risk of breast cancer and of contralateral breast cancer. In this study, we estimate the risk of non-synchronous ipsilateral breast cancer after a diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA carriers and evaluate the effects of various treatments on this risk. Patients were 396 women with stage I or stage II breast cancer with an intact ipsilateral breast and for whom a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation had been identified in the family. Patients were followed from the initial diagnosis of cancer until the first of ipsilateral mastectomy, ipsilateral breast cancer, death or last follow-up. The 5-year actuarial risk of ipsilateral breast cancer was 5.8% (95% CI 3.2-8.4%) and the 10-year risk was 12.9% (95% CI 8.7-17.1%). Subjects who received chemotherapy had a significantly lower risk of ipsilateral breast cancer compared to those who did not receive chemotherapy (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.24-0.84; P = 0.01). Radiotherapy was associated with a reduced risk of ipsilateral breast cancer (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.12-0.63; P = 0.002). Oophorectomy was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of ipsilateral breast cancer (RR 0.33; 95% CI; 0.13-0.81; P = 0.02). On average, following a diagnosis of breast cancer, the annual risk of ipsilateral breast cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers is 1.2% per year. For women treated with chemotherapy, radiation therapy or oophorectomy the risk is low, compared to women who did not receive any of these treatments.     

Pathologic characteristics of breast parenchyma in patients with hereditary breast carcinoma,including BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND: BRCA1 and BRCA2 alterations are associated with an increased risk of developing breast carcinoma. The authors hypothesized that the progression of breast neoplasia may differ between patients with hereditary disease and patients with nonhereditary disease and that this difference in progression may be visualized by studying the prevalence of precursor lesions and neoplastic lesions. METHODS: The authors developed two case cohorts of high-risk patients with a strong family history of breast carcinoma who underwent prophylactic mastectomy. The first cohort was comprised of women who underwent therapeutic mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, and the second cohort was comprised of women who underwent bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Patients without a family history of breast carcinoma who underwent unilateral or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy were selected as a control group. DNA from peripheral blood leukocytes was screened for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. The available pathologic materials were reviewed independently by two pathologists, and all neoplastic and precursor lesions were identified and classified. Proliferation activity was assessed using MIB-1 immunohistochemistry on all available lesions from the unilateral mastectomy cohort. RESULTS: The 28 women from the unilateral cohort with deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations had a lower prevalence of proliferative fibrocystic changes (PFC) (7%) compared with their matched control group (25%) (P = 0.075) and with patients who had a family history but no BRCA1/2 mutation (22-33%). None of the 11 deleterious mutation carriers from the bilateral cohort (0%) had PFC compared with 36% of women in the matched control group (P = 0.03). There was no major difference in the prevalence of other precursor lesions (including in situ carcinoma) in either cohort. Invasive carcinomas from the deleterious mutation carriers in the unilateral cohort were of higher grade compared with the control group (P = 0.003) and patients without a mutation (P < 0.0001) but were of similar grade compared with carriers of unclassified variant BRCA1/2 alterations (P = 0.20). Neoplastic lesions from the deleterious mutation carriers in the unilateral cohort had higher MIB-1 proliferation indices compared with other patients with and without a family history of breast carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggest that the progression rate of breast neoplasia is accelerated in women who carry BRCA1/2 deleterious mutations compared with other patients who have breast carcinoma with or without a family history. This increased progression rate should be taken into account when considering the surveillance of asymptomatic women.     

Survival after breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND: Studies of survival following breast and ovarian cancers in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers have yielded conflicting results. We undertook an analysis of a community-based study of Ashkenazi Jews to investigate the effect of three founder mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 on survival among patients with breast or ovarian cancer. METHODS: We collected blood samples and questionnaire data from 5318 Ashkenazi Jewish volunteers. The blood samples were tested for 185delAG (two nucleotide deletion) and 5382insC (single nucleotide insertion) mutations in BRCA1 and the 6174delT (single nucleotide deletion) mutation in BRCA2. To estimate survival differences in the affected relatives according to their BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carrier status, we devised and applied a novel extension of the kin-cohort method. RESULTS: Fifty mutation carriers reported that 58 of their first-degree relatives had been diagnosed with breast cancer and 10 with ovarian cancer; 907 noncarriers reported 979 first-degree relatives with breast cancer and 116 with ovarian cancer. Kaplan-Meier estimates of median survival after breast cancer were 16 years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11-40) in the relatives of carriers and 18 years (95% CI = 15-22) in the relatives of noncarriers, a difference that was not statistically significant (two-sided P = .87). There was also no difference in survival times among the 126 first-degree relatives with ovarian cancer. We found no survival difference between patients with breast or ovarian cancer who were inferred carriers of BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations and noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: Carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations appeared to have neither better nor worse survival prognosis.     

Oral contraceptives and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Estrogen and progestin in oral contraceptives may be carcinogenic to the breast, and their use has been associated with a modest increase in the risk of breast cancer in the general female population. Women who carry deleterious mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, have a significantly higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer. The literature on the role of oral contraceptives in carriers is sparse and the results are inconclusive. Findings from some case-control studies and the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study suggest that oral contraceptive use may be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Understanding the potential effects of oral contraceptive use among carriers has important implications for preventive strategies and clinical management. Both the possible protective effect for ovarian cancer risk and the increased potential risk of breast cancer must be considered.     

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

High breast density as measured on mammograms is a strong risk factor for breast cancer in the general population, but its effect in carriers of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is unclear. We obtained mammograms from 206 female carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, 96 of whom were subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer and 136 relatives of carriers who were themselves noncarriers. We compared the mammographic densities of affected carriers (cases) and unaffected carriers (controls), and of mutation carriers and noncarriers, using a computer-assisted method of measurement and visual assessment by two observers. Analyses were adjusted for age, parity, body mass index, menopausal status, and hormone replacement therapy use. There was no difference in the mean percent density between noncarriers and carriers. Among carriers, increasing mammographic density was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (P(trend) = 0.024). The odds ratio (OR; 95% confidence interval) for breast cancer associated with a density of > or =50% was 2.29 (1.23-4.26; P = 0.009). The OR did not differ between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers or between premenopausal and postmenopausal carriers. The results suggest that the distribution of breast density in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers is similar to that in non-carriers. High breast density in carriers is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, with the relative risk being similar to that observed in the general population. Use of mammographic density could improve individual risk prediction in carriers.     

Perception accuracy of BRCA1/2 mutation predisposition in breast cancer women and associated factors

This study aims to determine accuracy between perceived risk of genetic predisposition and objective estimation of this risk, and its associated factors in women, probands affected with breast cancer. Perception of this risk, absolute and comparative, was confronted with objective estimation. Emotional distress and knowledge postcounseling were measured, respectively by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Impact of Event Scale (IES) and the Breast Genetic Counseling Knowledge Questionnaire (BGKQ). On 213 eligible consultants, the 173 questionnaires (81.2%) analyzed revealed an inaccuracy of perception of absolute and comparative risks in 50 and 55.3%, respectively. An unsignificant tendency to overestimate the absolute risk (p=0,08) and a significant underestimation of comparative risk (p<0.001) appear. The inaccuracy of the perception of absolute risk is associated with greater distress (β=0.150) and a lower educational level (β=-0.164), while the comparative risk is associated with higher knowledge (β=0.208), higher level of education (β=0.176) and a younger age (β=-0.151). Living in couple is a factor of inaccuracy of both form of risk assessment (β=0.189, β=0.147). While the adequacy of the perceived risk of carrying a mutation in a BRCA1 /2 should promote an informed decision about genetic testing and anticipation of its outcome, a large number of consultants does not apprehend this risk correctly when they have emotional distress and despite knowledge of the risk of breast cancer.