BRCA1/2 somatic mutation detection in formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue by next-generation sequencing in Korean ovarian cancer patients

IntroductionThe detection of BRCA1/2 mutations is important because PARP1 inhibitors are approved for germline and/or somatic BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly used in clinical practice for BRCA1/2 mutations. The purpose of this study was to consider several conditions of NGS BRCA1/2 assay applicable to clinical laboratory tests, in particular for using formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) ovarian tissues.Materials and methodsWe selected 64 ovarian cancer patients and performed Oncomine™ BRCA assay using FFPE tissue. Effect of FFPE sample quality was analyzed by NGS quality parameters including deamination metric. Somatic variants were selected by removing germline variants of peripheral blood and interpreted as pathogenic, variants of unknown significance, and false positive.ResultsWe found a positive relationship between the number of variants over the deamination metric and FFPE age (P < 0.001) with a cutoff values of approximately 0.7 and 60 months, respectively. When comparing NGS results with Sanger sequencing, NGS misreported 3 of 15 variants using default parameters which were corrected after changing parameters. We detected somatic variants in eight patients and classified them into pathogenic (n = 3), VUS (n = 3) and false positive (n = 2).ConclusionsThis study is important for improving BRCA1/2 mutation detection capabilities of NGS analytical pipelines and strategy to overcome their limitations using FFPE tissue in ovarian cancer patients.     

Prevalence of pathogenic germline cancer risk variants in high-risk urothelial carcinoma

PurposeTo date, there has not been a large, systematic evaluation of the prevalence of germline risk variants in urothelial carcinoma (UC).MethodsWe evaluated the frequency of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants in 1038 patients with high-risk UC who underwent targeted clinical germline testing. Case–control enrichment analysis was performed to screen for pathogenic variant enrichment in 17 DNA repair genes in 1038 UC patients relative to cancer-free individuals.ResultsAmong 1038 patients with UC, the cumulative frequency of patients with pathogenic variants was 24%; 18.6% of patients harbored ≥1 actionable germline variant with preventive or therapeutic utility. MSH2 (34/969, 3.5%) and BRCA1/2 (38/867, 4.4%) germline variants had the highest frequency. Germline variants in DNA damage repair genes accounted for 78% of pathogenic germline variants. Compared to the cancer-free cohort, UC patients had significant variant enrichment in MSH2 (odds ratio [OR]: 15.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.1–32.7, p < 0.0001), MLH1 (OR: 15.9, 95% CI: 4.4–67.7, p < 0.0001), BRCA2 (OR: 5.7, 95% CI: 3.2–9.6, p < 0.0001), and ATM (OR: 3.8, 95% CI: 1.8–8.3, p = 0.02).ConclusionIn this study, 24% of UC patients harbored pathogenic germline variants and 18.6% had clinically actionable variants. MLH1 and MSH2 were validated as UC risk genes while ATM and BRCA2 were highlighted as potential UC predisposition genes. This work emphasizes the utility of germline testing in selected high-risk UC cohorts.     

Prevalence of germ-line mutations in cancer genes among pancreatic cancer patients with a positive family history

PurposePanel-based genetic testing has identified increasing numbers of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who carry germ-line mutations. However, small sample sizes or number of genes evaluated limit prevalence estimates of these mutations. We estimated prevalence of mutations in PDAC patients with positive family history.MethodsWe sequenced 25 cancer susceptibility genes in lymphocyte DNA from 302 PDAC patients in the Mayo Clinic Biospecimen Resource for Pancreatic Research Registry. Kindreds containing at least two first-degree relatives with PDAC met criteria for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC), while the remaining were familial, but not FPC.ResultsThirty-six patients (12%) carried at least one deleterious mutation in one of 11 genes. Of FPC patients, 25/185 (14%) were carriers, while 11/117 (9%) non-FPC patients with family history were carriers. Deleterious mutations (n) identified in PDAC patients were BRCA2 (11), ATM (8), CDKN2A (4), CHEK2 (4), MUTYH/MYH (3 heterozygotes, not biallelic), BRCA1 (2), and 1 each in BARD1, MSH2, NBN, PALB2, and PMS2. Novel mutations were found in ATM, BARD1, and PMS2.ConclusionMultiple susceptibility gene testing in PDAC patients with family history of pancreatic cancer is warranted regardless of FPC status and will inform genetic risk counseling for families.     

Next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes

To optimize the molecular diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), we developed a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based screening based on the capture of a panel of genes involved, or suspected to be involved in HBOC, on pooling of indexed DNA and on paired-end sequencing in an Illumina GAIIx platform, followed by confirmation by Sanger sequencing or MLPA/QMPSF. The bioinformatic pipeline included CASAVA, NextGENe, CNVseq and Alamut-HT. We validated this procedure by the analysis of 59 patients'' DNAs harbouring SNVs, indels or large genomic rearrangements of BRCA1 or BRCA2. We also conducted a blind study in 168 patients comparing NGS versus Sanger sequencing or MLPA analyses of BRCA1 and BRCA2. All mutations detected by conventional procedures were detected by NGS. We then screened, using three different versions of the capture set, a large series of 708 consecutive patients. We detected in these patients 69 germline deleterious alterations within BRCA1 and BRCA2, and 4 TP53 mutations in 468 patients also tested for this gene. We also found 36 variations inducing either a premature codon stop or a splicing defect among other genes: 5/708 in CHEK2, 3/708 in RAD51C, 1/708 in RAD50, 7/708 in PALB2, 3/708 in MRE11A, 5/708 in ATM, 3/708 in NBS1, 1/708 in CDH1, 3/468 in MSH2, 2/468 in PMS2, 1/708 in BARD1, 1/468 in PMS1 and 1/468 in MLH3. These results demonstrate the efficiency of NGS in performing molecular diagnosis of HBOC. Detection of mutations within other genes than BRCA1 and BRCA2 highlights the genetic heterogeneity of HBOC.     

Evaluating breast cancer predisposition genes in women of African ancestry

PurposeStudies conducted primarily among European ancestry women reported 12 breast cancer predisposition genes. However, etiologic roles of these genes in breast cancer among African ancestry women have been less well-investigated.MethodsWe conducted a case-control study in African American women, which included 1117 breast cancer cases and 2169 cancer-free controls, and a pooled analysis, which included 7096 cases and 8040 controls of African descent. Odds ratios of associations with breast cancer risk were estimated.ResultsUsing sequence data, we identified 61 pathogenic variants in 12 breast cancer predisposition genes, including 11 pathogenic variants not yet reported in previous studies. Pooled analysis showed statistically significant associations of breast cancer risk with pathogenic variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, TP53, NF1, RAD51C, and RAD51D (all P < .05). The associations with BRCA1, PALB2, and RAD51D were stronger for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative than for ER-positive breast cancer (P heterogeneity < .05), whereas the association with CHEK2 was stronger for ER-positive than for ER-negative breast cancer.ConclusionOur study confirmed previously identified associations of breast cancer risk with BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, TP53, NF1, and CHEK2 and provided new evidence to extend the associations of breast cancer risk with RAD51C and RAD51D, which was identified previously in European ancestry populations, to African ancestry women.     

Concurrent pathogenic variations in patients with hereditary cancer syndromes

Cancer is a multifactorial disorder; however, 5–10% of all cancers show hereditary background. In recent years many targeted next generation sequencing panels comprising cancer predisposition genes have been developed and used for diagnostic purposes in patients with increased cancer risk. Screening multiple genes at a time allows multiple variants in different genes to be detected as well. This study aims to determine the cases with concurrent mutations in different hereditary cancer predisposition genes and how they are clinically affected. Here, we screened 1090 index cases by next generation sequencing based hereditary cancer panels and evaluated the reflection of multiple variations on the phenotype. We detected 11 (1%) cases with pathogenic variants in more than one gene. These concurrent variations occurred mostly in BRCA1/2 (7/11) accompanied with MUTYH, ATM, CHECK2, NBN, and RAD50. In addition, MUTYH&ATM, NBN&MSH6, MUTYH&CHEK2 double heterozygous cases were detected. Moreover, we identified a case with three heterozygous variations in CDH1, MUTYH, and CHEK2. These patients presented malignancies that were mostly related to pathogenic variations they carried. Although they are rare, defining double heterozygous cases is important for managing appropriate therapy and accurate genetic consulting for the patients and family members.     

Risk of cancer in heterozygous relatives of patients with Fanconi anemia

PurposeFanconi anemia (FA) is a cancer-prone inherited bone marrow failure syndrome caused by biallelic pathogenic variants in one of >22 genes in the FA/BRCA DNA repair pathway. A major concern is whether the risk of cancer is increased in individuals with a single pathogenic FA gene variant.MethodsWe evaluated the risk of cancer in the relatives of patients with FA in the National Cancer Institute Inherited Bone Marrow Failure Syndrome cohort. We genotyped all available relatives and determined the rates, types of cancer and the age of patients at cancer diagnosis. We calculated the observed-to-expected (O/E) cancer ratios using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program adjusted for age, sex, and birth cohort.ResultsThe risk of cancer was not increased among all FA relatives and FA heterozygotes (O/E ratios of 0.78 and 0.79, respectively). In particular, the risk of cancer was not increased among FANCA or FANCC heterozygotes (O/E ratios of 0.92 and 0.71, respectively). Relatives did not have typical FA cancers, and age at cancer diagnosis was not younger than expected.ConclusionUnderstanding the risk of cancer in individuals with single pathogenic FA variants is critical for counseling and management. We did not find increased risk of cancer in these individuals. These findings do not extend to the known cancer predisposition autosomal dominant FA genes, namely BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, BRIP1, and RAD51C.     

Pathogenic and likely pathogenic variant prevalence among the first 10,000 patients referred for next-generation cancer panel testing

PurposeGerm-line testing for panels of cancer genes using next-generation sequencing is becoming more common in clinical care. We report our experience as a clinical laboratory testing both well-established, high-risk cancer genes (e.g., BRCA1/2, MLH1, MSH2) as well as more recently identified cancer genes (e.g., PALB2, BRIP1), many of which have increased but less well-defined penetrance.MethodsClinical genetic testing was performed on over 10,000 consecutive cases referred for evaluation of germ-line cancer genes, and results were analyzed for frequency of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, and were stratified by testing panel, gene, and clinical history.ResultsOverall, a molecular diagnosis was made in 9.0% of patients tested, with the highest yield in the Lynch syndrome/colorectal cancer panel. In patients with breast, ovarian, or colon/stomach cancer, positive yields were 9.7, 13.4, and 14.8%, respectively. Approximately half of the pathogenic variants identified in patients with breast or ovarian cancer were in genes other than BRCA1/2.ConclusionThe high frequency of positive results in a wide range of cancer genes, including those of high penetrance and with clinical care guidelines, underscores both the genetic heterogeneity of hereditary cancer and the usefulness of multigene panels over genetic tests of one or two genes.     

Whole-exome sequencing identifies rare pathogenic variants in new predisposition genes for familial colorectal cancer

PurposeColorectal cancer is an important cause of mortality in the developed world. Hereditary forms are due to germ-line mutations in APC, MUTYH, and the mismatch repair genes, but many cases present familial aggregation but an unknown inherited cause. The hypothesis of rare high-penetrance mutations in new genes is a likely explanation for the underlying predisposition in some of these familial cases.MethodsExome sequencing was performed in 43 patients with colorectal cancer from 29 families with strong disease aggregation without mutations in known hereditary colorectal cancer genes. Data analysis selected only very rare variants (0–0.1%), producing a putative loss of function and located in genes with a role compatible with cancer. Variants in genes previously involved in hereditary colorectal cancer or nearby previous colorectal cancer genome-wide association study hits were also chosen.ResultsTwenty-eight final candidate variants were selected and validated by Sanger sequencing. Correct family segregation and somatic studies were used to categorize the most interesting variants in CDKN1B, XRCC4, EPHX1, NFKBIZ, SMARCA4, and BARD1.ConclusionWe identified new potential colorectal cancer predisposition variants in genes that have a role in cancer predisposition and are involved in DNA repair and the cell cycle, which supports their putative involvement in germ-line predisposition to this neoplasm.     

Hereditary cancer predispositions: Comparison of multigene panel sequencing on fresh-frozen breast/ovarian tumor versus blood

In breast or ovarian cancer (BC/OC) patients with evocative personal and/or family history, multigene panel sequencing is performed on blood to diagnose hereditary predispositions. Additionally, BRCA1/BRCA2 testing can be performed on tumor sample for therapeutic purpose. The accuracy of multigene panel tumor analysis on BC/OC to detect predisposing germline pathogenic variants (gPV) has not been precisely assessed. By comparing sequencing data from blood and fresh-frozen tumor we show that tumor genomic instability causes pitfalls to consider when performing tumor testing to detect gPV. Even if loss of heterozygosity increases germline signal in most cases, somatic copy number variants (CNV) can mask germline CNV and collapse point gPV variant allele frequency (VAF). Moreover, VAF does not allow an accurate distinction between germline and somatic pathogenic variants.     

Mutation screening of 10 cancer susceptibility genes in unselected breast cancer patients

Variants of cancer susceptibility genes other than BRCA1/2 have been proved to be associated with increased risks of breast cancer. This study was performed to investigate the spectrum and prevalence of mutations in 10 cancer susceptibility genes in paired tumor/normal tissues of 292 unselected Chinese breast cancer patients. We performed an analysis of germline and somatic variants in ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, ESR1, GATA3, MAP3K1, MSH2, PALB2, RB1 and STK11 genes by integrating microfluidic PCR‐based target enrichment and next‐generation sequencing technologies. In total, 3 germline and 25 somatic deleterious mutations were found among 27 patients (9.25%), and 17 of them were novel mutations. Most deleterious mutations were prevalent in luminal A invasive breast cancer (P = .014). We also observed 83 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in 100 patients (34.25%), 23 of which were predicted to be deleterious by in silico prediction programs (MetaSVM and MetaLR). VUS carriers had higher positive rate of lymph node metastasis than non‐carriers (P = .008) and were predominantly present in ER+ tumors (P = .018). Our findings would enhance the understanding of the molecular mechanisms of breast cancer in Chinese population.     

Prevalence of mutations in a panel of breast cancer susceptibility genes in BRCA1/2-negative patients with early-onset breast cancer

PurposeClinical testing for germ-line variation in multiple cancer susceptibility genes is available using massively parallel sequencing. Limited information is available for pretest genetic counseling regarding the spectrum of mutations and variants of uncertain significance in defined patient populations.MethodsWe performed massively parallel sequencing using targeted capture of 22 cancer susceptibility genes in 278 BRCA1/2-negative patients with early-onset breast cancer (diagnosed at younger than 40 years of age).ResultsThirty-one patients (11%) were found to have at least one deleterious or likely deleterious variant. Seven patients (2.5% overall) were found to have deleterious or likely deleterious variants in genes for which clinical guidelines exist for management, namely TP53 (4), CDKN2A (1), MSH2 (1), and MUTYH (double heterozygote). Twenty-four patients (8.6%) had deleterious or likely deleterious variants in a cancer susceptibility gene for which clinical guidelines are lacking, such as CHEK2 and ATM. Fifty-four patients (19%) had at least one variant of uncertain significance, and six patients were heterozygous for a variant in MUTYH.ConclusionThese data demonstrate that massively parallel sequencing identifies reportable variants in known cancer susceptibility genes in more than 30% of patients with early-onset breast cancer. However, only few patients (2.5%) have definitively actionable mutations given current clinical management guidelines.Genet Med17 8, 630–638.     

Germline RAD51C mutations in ovarian cancer susceptibility

Several genes might explain BRCA1/2 negative breast and ovarian family cases. Deleterious mutations in few genes involved in the Fanconi complex are responsible for Fanconi anemia at the homozygous state and breast cancer (BC) susceptibility at the heterozygous state (BRCA2, PALB2, BRIP1). RAD51C plays an important role in the double‐strand break repair pathway and a biallelic missense mutation in the RAD51C gene was found in a Fanconi anemia‐like disorder. Subsequently, six monoallelic pathogenic mutations were identified after screening 480 BRCA1/2 negative breast and ovarian cancer (BC/OC) pedigrees. Several reports were unsuccessful to replicate these results. To investigate whether germline mutations in RAD51C are associated with an increased risk of developing BC/OC, we screened, by Sanger sequencing of the coding sequence, 117 index cases of breast and ovarian families from French or European origin, and negative for BRCA1/2 mutations. In our study, we found 3 pathogenic mutations among 117 families screened which corresponds to a 2.6% frequency. Our results confirm that RAD51C is a susceptibility gene for ovarian and BC and that this gene should be screened for mutations in families with multiple BC/OC.     

Landscape of pathogenic variations in a panel of 34 genes and cancer risk estimation from 5131 HBOC families

PurposeIntegration of gene panels in the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) requires a careful evaluation of the risk associated with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs) detected in each gene. Here we analyzed 34 genes in 5131 suspected HBOC index cases by next-generation sequencing.MethodsUsing the Exome Aggregation Consortium data sets plus 571 individuals from the French Exome Project, we simulated the probability that an individual from the Exome Aggregation Consortium carries a PV and compared it to the estimated frequency within the HBOC population.ResultsOdds ratio conferred by PVs within BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, ATM, BRIP1, CHEK2, and MSH6 were estimated at 13.22 [10.01–17.22], 8.61 [6.78–10.82], 8.22 [4.91–13.05], 4.54 [2.55–7.48], 5.23 [1.46–13.17], 3.20 [2.14–4.53], 2.49 [1.42–3.97], 1.67 [1.18–2.27], and 2.50 [1.12–4.67], respectively. PVs within RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 were associated with ovarian cancer family history (OR = 11.36 [5.78–19.59], 12.44 [2.94–33.30] and 3.82 [1.66–7.11]). PALB2 PVs were associated with bilateral breast cancer (OR = 16.17 [5.48–34.10]) and BARD1 PVs with triple-negative breast cancer (OR = 11.27 [3.37–25.01]). Burden tests performed in both patients and the French Exome Project population confirmed the association of PVs of BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51C with HBOC.ConclusionOur results validate the integration of PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D in the diagnosis of HBOC and suggest that the other genes are involved in an oligogenic determinism.     

Mutational analysis of RAD51C and RAD51D genes in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families from Murcia (southeastern Spain)

RAD51C and RAD51D have been defined as susceptibility genes for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome in several studies. In the present study, a mutation analysis of these genes was performed on non BRCA1/2 families. RAD51C and RAD51D genes were analyzed in 141 and 77 families, respectively. The analysis included direct sequencing and multiple ligation probe analysis. The RAD51C pathogenic variant c.404G?>?A was identified in a breast and ovarian cancer family (0.7%), while the RAD51D pathogenic variant c.694C?>?T was described in an ovarian cancer family (1.3%). Moreover, three unknown clinical significance variants were detected: c.307T?>?G in RAD51C, and c.413A?>?G and c.715C?>?T in RAD51D. No large genomic rearrangements (LGRs) were found. RAD51D carriers suffered from premenopausal ovarian tumors. These results increase our knowledge about the RAD51C and RAD51D mutation spectrum and support the notion that these genes should be included in the gene panel testing performed on patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome.     

Genetic drivers of Cushing’s disease: Frequency and associated phenotypes

PurposeCushing’s disease (CD) is often explained by a single somatic sequence change. Germline defects, however, often go unrecognized. We aimed to determine the frequency and associated phenotypes of genetic drivers of CD in a large cohort.MethodsWe studied 245 unrelated patients with CD (139 female, 56.7%), including 230 (93.9%) pediatric and 15 (6.1%) adult patients. Germline exome sequencing was performed in 184 patients; tumor exome sequencing was also done in 27 of them. A total of 43 germline samples and 92 tumor samples underwent Sanger sequencing of specific genes. Rare variants of uncertain significance, likely pathogenic (LP), or pathogenic variants in CD-associated genes, were identified.ResultsGermline variants (13 variants of uncertain significance, 8 LP, and 11 pathogenic) were found in 8 of 19 patients (42.1%) with positive family history and in 23 of 226 sporadic patients (10.2%). Somatic variants (1 LP and 7 pathogenic) were found in 20 of 119 tested individuals (16.8%); one of them had a coexistent germline defect. Altogether, variants of interest were identified at the germline level in 12.2% of patients, at the somatic level in 7.8%, and coexisting germline and somatic variants in 0.4%, accounting for one-fifth of the cohort.ConclusionWe report an estimate of the contribution of multiple germline and somatic genetic defects underlying CD in a single cohort.     

The ClinGen Brain Malformation Variant Curation Expert Panel: Rules for somatic variants in AKT3, MTOR,PIK3CA,and PIK3R2

PurposePostzygotic (somatic) variants in the mTOR pathway genes cause a spectrum of distinct developmental abnormalities. Accurate classification of somatic variants in this group of disorders is crucial for affected individuals and their families.MethodsThe ClinGen Brain Malformation Variant Curation Expert Panel was formed to curate somatic variants associated with developmental brain malformations. We selected the genes AKT3, MTOR, PIK3CA, and PIK3R2 as the first set of genes to provide additional specifications to the 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) sequence variant interpretation guidelines, which currently focus solely on germline variants.ResultsA total of 24 of the original 28 ACMG/AMP criteria required modification. Several modifications used could be applied to other genes and disorders in which somatic variants play a role: 1) using variant allele fraction differences as evidence that somatic mutagenesis occurred as a proxy for de novo variation, 2) incorporating both somatic and germline evidence, and 3) delineating phenotype on the basis of variable tissue expression.ConclusionWe have established a framework for rigorous interpretation of somatic mosaic variants, addressing issues unique to somatic variants that will be applicable to many genes and conditions.     

Gene‐panel testing of breast and ovarian cancer patients identifies a recurrent RAD51C duplication

Gene‐panel sequencing allows comprehensive analysis of multiple genes simultaneously and is now routinely used in clinical mutation testing of high‐risk breast and ovarian cancer patients. However, only BRCA1 and BRCA2 are often analyzed also for large genomic changes. Here, we have analyzed 10 clinically relevant susceptibility genes in 95 breast or ovarian cancer patients with gene‐panel sequencing including also copy number variants (CNV) analysis for genomic changes. We identified 12 different pathogenic BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, PTEN, CHEK2, or RAD51C mutations in 18 of 95 patients (19%). BRCA1/2 mutations were observed in 8 patients (8.4%) and CHEK2 protein‐truncating mutations in 7 patients (7.4%). In addition, we identified a novel duplication encompassing most of the RAD51C gene. We further genotyped the duplication in breast or ovarian cancer families (n = 1149), in unselected breast (n = 1729) and ovarian cancer cohorts (n = 553), and in population controls (n = 1273). Seven additional duplication carries were observed among cases but none among controls. The duplication associated with ovarian cancer risk (3/590 of all ovarian cancer patients, 0.5%, P = .032 compared with controls) and was found to represent a large fraction of all identified RAD51C mutations in the Finnish population. Our data emphasizes the importance of comprehensive mutation analysis including CNV detection in all the relevant genes.     

Hereditary breast cancer: syndromes,tumour pathology and molecular testing

Hereditary factors account for a significant proportion of breast cancer risk. Approximately 20% of hereditary breast cancers are attributable to pathogenic variants in the highly penetrant BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. A proportion of the genetic risk is also explained by pathogenic variants in other breast cancer susceptibility genes, including ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D and BARD1, as well as genes associated with breast cancer predisposition syndromes – TP53 (Li–Fraumeni syndrome), PTEN (Cowden syndrome), CDH1 (hereditary diffuse gastric cancer), STK11 (Peutz–Jeghers syndrome) and NF1 (neurofibromatosis type 1). Polygenic risk, the cumulative risk from carrying multiple low-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles, is also a well-recognised contributor to risk. This review provides an overview of the established breast cancer susceptibility genes as well as breast cancer predisposition syndromes, highlights distinct genotype–phenotype correlations associated with germline mutation status and discusses molecular testing and therapeutic implications in the context of hereditary breast cancer.