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.     

BRCA1 tumours correlate with a HIF-1�� phenotype and have a poor prognosis through modulation of hydroxylase enzyme profile expression

Background:

There are limited data regarding the hypoxia pathway in familial breast cancers. We therefore performed a study of hypoxic factors in BRCA1, BRCA2 and BRCAX breast cancers.

Methods:

Immunoperoxidase staining for HIF-1α, PHD1, PHD2, PHD3, VEGF and FIH was carried out in 125 (38 BRCA1, 33 BRCA2 and 54 BRCAX) breast carcinomas. These were correlated with clinicopathological parameters and the intrinsic breast cancer phenotypes.

Results:

BRCA1 tumours correlated with positivity for HIF-1α (P=0.008) and negativity for PHD3 (P=0.037). HIF-1α positivity (P=0.001), PHD3 negativity (P=0.037) and nuclear FIH negativity (P=0.011) was associated with basal phenotype. HIF-1α expression correlated with high tumour grade (P=0.009), negative oestrogen receptor (ER) status (P=0.001) and the absence of lymph node metastasis (P=0.028). Nuclear FIH expression and PHD3 correlated with positive ER expression (P=0.024 and P=0.035, respectively). BRCA1 cancers with positive HIF-1α or cytoplasmic FIH had a significantly shorter relapse-free survival (P=0.007 and P=0.049, respectively).

Conclusions:

The aggressive nature of BRCA1 and basal-type tumours may be partly explained by an enhanced hypoxic drive and hypoxia driven ER degradation because of suppressed PHD and aberrantly located FIH expression. This may have important implications, as these tumours may respond to compounds directed against HIF-1α or its downstream targets.     

PIK3CA mutations are frequently observed in BRCAX but not BRCA2 -associated male breast cancer

Introduction

Although a substantial proportion of male breast cancers (MBCs) are hereditary, the molecular pathways that are activated are unknown. We therefore examined the frequency and clinicopathological associations of the PIK3CA/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways and their regulatory genes in familial MBC.

Methods

High resolution melting analysis and confirmatory sequencing was used to determine the presence of somatic mutations in PIK3CA (exon 9 and 20), AKT1 (exon 4), KRAS (exon 2) and BRAF (exon 15) genes in 57 familial MBCs. Further analysis of the PIK3CA/mTOR pathway was performed using immunohistochemistry for the pAKT1, pS6 and p4EBP1 biomarkers.

Results

PIK3CA somatic mutations were identified in 10.5% (6 of 57) of cases; there were no AKT1, KRAS or BRAF somatic mutations. PIK3CA mutations were significantly more frequent in cancers from BRCAX patients (17.2%, 5/29) than BRCA2 (0%, 0/25) carriers (P = 0.030). Two BRCAX patients had an E547K mutation which has only been reported in one female breast cancer previously. PIK3CA mutation was significantly correlated with positive pS6 (83.3% vs. 32.0%, P = 0.024) and negative p4EBP1 (100% vs. 38.0%, P = 0.006) expression, but not pAKT expression. Expression of nuclear p4EBP1 correlated with BRCA2 mutation carrier status (68.0% vs. 38.7%, P = 0.035).

Conclusions

Somatic PIK3CA mutation is present in familial male breast cancer but absent in BRCA2 carriers. The presence of two of the extremely rare E547K PIK3CA mutations in our cohort may have specific relevance in MBCs. Further study of PIK3CA in MBCs, and in particular BRCAX patients, may contribute to further establishing the relevance of specific PIK3CA mutations in MBC aetiology and in the identification of particular patient groups most likely to benefit from therapeutic targeting with the novel PIK3CA inhibitors that are currently in development.     

Prevalence and predictors of loss of wild type BRCA1 in estrogen receptor positive and negative BRCA1-associated breast cancers

Introduction

The majority of breast cancers that occur in BRCA1 mutation carriers (BRCA1 carriers) are estrogen receptor-negative (ER-). Therefore, it has been suggested that ER negativity is intrinsic to BRCA1 cancers and reflects the cell of origin of these tumors. However, approximately 20% of breast cancers that develop in BRCA1 carriers are ER-positive (ER+); these cancers are more likely to develop as BRCA1 carriers age, suggesting that they may be incidental and unrelated to BRCA1 deficiency. The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of loss of heterozygosity due to loss of wild type (wt) BRCA1 in ER+ and ER- breast cancers that have occurred in BRCA1 carriers and to determine whether age at diagnosis or any pathologic features or biomarkers predict for loss of wt BRCA1 in these breast cancers.

Methods

Relative amounts of mutated and wt BRCA1 DNA were measured by quantitative polymerase chain reaction performed on laser capture microdissected cancer cells from 42 ER+ and 35 ER- invasive breast cancers that developed in BRCA1 carriers. BRCA1 gene methylation was determined on all cancers in which sufficient DNA was available. Immunostains for cytokeratins (CK) 5/6, 14, 8 and 18, epidermal growth factor receptor and p53 were performed on paraffin sections from tissue microarrays containing these cancers.

Results

Loss of wt BRCA1 was equally frequent in ER+ and ER- BRCA1-associated cancers (81.0% vs 88.6%, respectively; P = 0.53). One of nine cancers tested that retained wt BRCA1 demonstrated BRCA1 gene methylation. Age at diagnosis was not significantly different between first invasive ER+ BRCA1 breast cancers with and without loss of wt BRCA1 (mean age 45.2 years vs 50.1 years, respectively; P = 0.51). ER+ BRCA1 cancers that retained wt BRCA1 were significantly more likely than those that lost wt BRCA1 to have a low mitotic rate (odds ratio (OR), 5.16; 95% CI, 1.91 to ∞). BRCA1 cancers with loss of wt BRCA1 were more likely to express basal cytokeratins CK 5/6 or 14 (OR 4.7; 95% CI, 1.85 to ∞).

Conclusions

We found no difference in the prevalence of loss of wt BRCA1 between ER+ and ER- invasive BRCA1-associated breast cancers. Our findings suggest that many of the newer therapies for BRCA1 breast cancers designed to exploit the BRCA1 deficiency in these cancers may also be effective in ER+ cancers that develop in this population.     

Expression of the stem cell marker ALDH1 in BRCA1 related breast cancer

Introduction

The BRCA1 protein makes mammary stem cells differentiate into mature luminal and myoepithelial cells. If a BRCA1 mutation results in a differentiation block, an enlarged stem cell component might be present in the benign tissue of BRCA1 mutation carriers, and these mammary stem cells could be the origin of BRCA1 related breast cancer. Since ALDH1 is a marker of both mammary stem cells and breast cancer stem cells, we compared ALDH1 expression in malignant tissue of BRCA1 mutation carriers to non-carriers.

Methods

Forty-one BRCA1 related breast cancers and 41 age-matched sporadic breast cancers were immunohistochemically stained for ALDH1. Expression in epithelium and stroma was scored and compared.

Results

Epithelial (P?=?0.001) and peritumoral (P?=?0.001) ALDH1 expression was significantly higher in invasive BRCA1 related carcinomas compared to sporadic carcinomas. Intratumoral stromal ALDH1 expression was similarly high in both groups. ALDH1 tumor cell expression was an independent predictor of BRCA1 mutation status.

Conclusion

BRCA1 related breast cancers showed significantly more frequent epithelial ALDH1 expression, indicating that these hereditary tumors have an enlarged cancer stem cell component. Besides, (peritumoral) stromal ALDH1 expression was also more frequent in BRCA1 mutation carriers. ALDH1 may therefore be a diagnostic marker and a therapeutic target of BRCA1 related breast cancer.     

Etiology of familial breast cancer with undetected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: clinical implications

Background

Familial breast cancer accounts for 20–30 % of all breast cancer cases. Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes account for the majority of high risk families with both early onset breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Most of the families with less than six breast cancer cases and no ovarian cancer do not carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations that can be detected using routine sequencing protocols. Here, we aimed to review the etiology of familial breast cancer in cases without BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

Results

After excluding BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, factors proposed to contribute to familial breast cancer include: chance clustering of apparently sporadic cases, shared lifestyle, monogenic inheritance, i.e., dominant gene mutations associated with a high risk (TP53, PTEN, STK11), dominant gene mutations associated with a relatively low risk (ATM, BRIP1, RLB2), recessive gene mutations associated with horizontal inheritance patterns (sister-sister), and polygenic inheritance where susceptibility to familial breast cancer is thought to be conferred by a large number of low risk alleles.

Conclusions

Current evidence suggests that in the majority of cases with BRCA1 and BRCA2 negative familial breast cancer the etiology is due to interactions of intermediate or low risk alleles with environmental and lifestyle factors. Thus, a careful selection of patients submitted to genetic testing is needed. Clearly, further research is required to fully elucidate the etiology of non-BRCA familial breast cancer.     

A combined analysis of outcome following breast cancer: differences in survival based on BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation status and administration of adjuvant treatment

Background

The prognostic significance of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in women with breast cancer remains unclear. A combined analysis was performed to address this uncertainty.

Methods

Two retrospective cohorts of Ashkenazi Jewish women undergoing breast-conserving treatment for invasive cancer between 1980 and 1995 (n = 584) were established. Archived tissue blocks were used as the source of DNA for Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutation analysis. Paraffin-embedded tissue and follow-up information was available for 505 women.

Results

Genotyping was successful in 496 women, of whom 56 (11.3%) were found to carry a BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutation. After a median follow-up period of 116 months, breast cancer specific survival was worse in women with BRCA1 mutations than in those without (62% at 10 years versus 86%; P < 0.0001), but not in women with the BRCA2 mutation (84% versus 86% at 10 years; P = 0.76). Germline BRCA1 mutations were an independent predictor of breast cancer mortality in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2–4.8; P = 0.01). BRCA1 status predicted breast cancer mortality only among women who did not receive chemotherapy (hazard ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 2.0–11.7; P = 0.001). The risk for metachronous ipsilateral cancer was not greater in women with germline BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutations than in those without mutations (P = 0.68).

Conclusion

BRCA1 mutations, but not BRCA2 mutations, are associated with reduced survival in Ashkenazi women undergoing breast-conserving treatment for invasive breast cancer, but the poor prognosis associated with germline BRCA1 mutations is mitigated by adjuvant chemotherapy. The risk for metachronous ipsilateral disease does not appear to be increased for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, at least up to 10 years of follow up.     

Autoimmune response to PARP and BRCA1/BRCA2 in cancer

Purpose

To determine the role of autoantibodies to PARP1 and BRCA1/BRCA2 which were involved in the synthetic lethal interaction in cancer.

Methods

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) was used to detect autoantibodies to PARP1 and BRCA1/BRCA2 in 618 serum samples including 131 from breast cancer, 94 from lung cancer, 34 from ovarian cancer, 107 from prostate cancer, 76 from liver cancer, 41 from pancreatic cancer and 135 from normal individuals. The positive sera with ELISA were confirmed by Western blot. Immunohistochemistry was used to examine the expression of PARP1 and BRCA1/BRCA2 in breast cancer.

Results

Autoantibody frequency to PARP1, BRCA1, and BRCA2 in cancer varied from 0% to 50%. When the sera from cancer patients were tested for the presence of autoantibodies to PARP1 and BRCA1/BRCA2, the autoantibody responses slightly decreased and the positive autoantibody reactions varied from 0% to 50.0%. This was significantly higher autoantibody responses to PARP1 and BRCA1/BRCA2 (especially to PARP1 and BRCA1) in ovarian cancer and breast cancer compared to normal control sera (P < 0.001 and P < 0.01). Immunohistochemistry indicated that Pathology Grade at diagnosis to PARP1 expression in breast cancer was different (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Different cancers have different profiles of autoantibodies. The autoantibodies to proteins involving the synthetic lethal interactions would be novel serological biomarker in some selective cancers.     

Germline DNA copy number variation in familial and early-onset breast cancer

Introduction

Genetic factors predisposing individuals to cancer remain elusive in the majority of patients with a familial or clinical history suggestive of hereditary breast cancer. Germline DNA copy number variation (CNV) has recently been implicated in predisposition to cancers such as neuroblastomas as well as prostate and colorectal cancer. We evaluated the role of germline CNVs in breast cancer susceptibility, in particular those with low population frequencies (rare CNVs), which are more likely to cause disease."

Methods

Using whole-genome comparative genomic hybridization on microarrays, we screened a cohort of women fulfilling criteria for hereditary breast cancer who did not carry BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations.

Results

The median numbers of total and rare CNVs per genome were not different between controls and patients. A total of 26 rare germline CNVs were identified in 68 cancer patients, however, a proportion that was significantly different (P = 0.0311) from the control group (23 rare CNVs in 100 individuals). Several of the genes affected by CNV in patients and controls had already been implicated in cancer.

Conclusions

This study is the first to explore the contribution of germline CNVs to BRCA1/2-negative familial and early-onset breast cancer. The data suggest that rare CNVs may contribute to cancer predisposition in this small cohort of patients, and this trend needs to be confirmed in larger population samples.     

Association of BRCA1 promoter methylation with rs11655505 (c.2265C>T) variants and decreased gene expression in sporadic breast cancer

Objective

Breast cancer is the most common cancer and the main cause of cancer morbidity for women worldwide and is manifestation of abnormal genetic as well as epigenetic changes. Therefore, our aim was to study the association of BRCA1 promoter methylation with rs11655505 (c.?2265C/T) variants and gene expression in sporadic breast cancer.

Methods

Twenty-nine sporadic breast cancer tissues and 26 normal biopsies were used for this study. Genomic DNA and total RNA were extracted from paraffin-embedded tissue and SNP analysis performed. Methylation status of the BRCA1 promoter region was determined by methylation-specific PCR after sodium bisulfite modification of DNA.

Results

Among all clinical–pathological parameters only estrogen receptor –ve and +ve samples were significantly different for methylation status (P = 0.04). The genotypic (CC, CT and TT), allelic frequencies and methylation status had not been found to be significantly different from that of healthy controls (P = 0.67, 0.71 and 0.17, respectively). Similarly, methylated BRCA1 promoter was not found to be significantly different in different genotypes from unmethylated promoters between patients and controls. Interestingly, only heterozygous (CT) genotypes with low and normal expression of BRCA1 were significantly different for the differential expression of BRCA1 compared to controls (P = 0.004). However, in tumor samples decreased expression of gene is associated with methylated state of BRCA1 promoter [OR (95 % CI) = 25.09 (2.17–29.75); P = 0.01].

Conclusions

Our data suggest that both single nucleotide variations rs11655505 (c.–2265C/T) and the methylation status of BRCA1 are not associated significantly with the occurrence of sporadic breast cancer in studied population. However, decreased expression of gene is associated with the CT genotypes and the disease. But, in case of tumor samples, an association of methylation of the promoter to the decreased expression of BRCA1 gene suggests the possible role of methylation in gene silencing.     

Parity and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Introduction

Increasing parity and age at first full-term pregnancy are established risk factors for breast cancer in the general population. However, their effects among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is still under debate. We used retrospective data on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from the UK to assess the effects of parity-related variables on breast cancer risk.

Methods

The data set included 457 mutation carriers who developed breast cancer (cases) and 332 healthy mutation carriers (controls), ascertained through families seen in genetic clinics. Hazard ratios were estimated by using a weighted cohort approach.

Results

Parous BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers were at a significantly lower risk of developing breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.81; p = 0.002). The protective effect was observed only among carriers who were older than 40 years. Increasing age at first live birth was associated with an increased breast cancer risk among BRCA2 mutation carriers (p trend = 0.002) but not BRCA1 carriers. However, the analysis by age at first live birth was based on small numbers.

Conclusion

The results suggest that the relative risks of breast cancer associated with parity among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers may be similar to those in the general population and that reproductive history may be used to improve risk prediction in carriers.     

Mutational profiling of familial male breast cancers reveals similarities with luminal A female breast cancer with rare TP53 mutations

Background:

Male breast cancer (MBC) is still poorly understood with a large proportion arising in families with a history of breast cancer. Genomic studies have focused on germline determinants of MBC risk, with minimal knowledge of somatic changes in these cancers.

Methods:

Using a TruSeq amplicon cancer panel, this study evaluated 48 familial MBCs (3 BRCA1 germline mutant, 17 BRCA2 germline mutant and 28 BRCAX) for hotspot somatic mutations and copy number changes in 48 common cancer genes.

Results:

Twelve missense mutations included nine PIK3CA mutations (seven in BRCAX patients), two TP53 mutations (both in BRCA2 patients) and one PTEN mutation. Common gains were seen in GNAS (34.1%) and losses were seen in GNAQ (36.4%), ABL1 (47.7%) and ATM (34.1%). Gains of HRAS (37.5% vs 3%, P=0.006), STK11 (25.0% vs 0%, P=0.01) and SMARCB1 (18.8% vs 0%, P=0.04) and the loss of RB1 (43.8% vs 13%, P=0.03) were specific to BRCA2 tumours.

Conclusions:

This study is the first to perform high-throughput somatic sequencing on familial MBCs. Overall, PIK3CA mutations are most commonly seen, with fewer TP53 and PTEN mutations, similar to the profile seen in luminal A female breast cancers. Differences in mutation profiles and patterns of gene gains/losses are seen between BRCA2 (associated with TP53/PTEN mutations, loss of RB1 and gain of HRAS, STK11 and SMARCB1) and BRCAX (associated with PIK3CA mutations) tumours, suggesting that BRCA2 and BRCAX MBCs may be distinct and arise from different tumour pathways. This has implications on potential therapies, depending on the BRCA status of MBC patients.     

Changes in body weight and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background

Several anthropometric measures have been found to be associated with the risk of breast cancer. Current weight, body mass index, and adult weight gain appear to be predictors of postmenopausal breast cancer. These factors have been associated with a reduced risk of premenopausal breast cancer. We asked whether there is an association between changes in body weight and the risk of breast cancer in women who carry a mutation in either breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA1 or BRCA2.

Methods

A matched case–control study was conducted in 1,073 pairs of women carrying a deleterious mutation in either BRCA1 (n = 797 pairs) or BRCA2 (n = 276 pairs). Women diagnosed with breast cancer were matched to control subjects by year of birth, mutation, country of residence, and history of ovarian cancer. Information about weight was derived from a questionnaire routinely administered to women who were carriers of a mutation in either gene. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the association between weight gain or loss and the risk of breast cancer, stratified by age at diagnosis or menopausal status.

Results

A loss of at least 10 pounds in the period from age 18 to 30 years was associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer between age 30 and 49 (odds ratio (OR) = 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28–0.79); weight gain during the same interval did not influence the overall risk. Among the subgroup of BRCA1 mutation carriers who had at least two children, weight gain of more than 10 pounds between age 18 and 30 was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer diagnosed between age 30 and 40 (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.01–2.04). Change in body weight later in life (at age 30 to 40) did not influence the risk of either premenopausal or postmenopausal breast cancer.

Conclusion

The results from this study suggest that weight loss in early adult life (age 18 to 30) protects against early-onset BRCA-associated breast cancers. Weight gain should also be avoided, particularly among BRCA1 mutation carriers who elect to have at least two pregnancies.     

Pathology of hereditary breast cancer

Background

Hereditary breast cancer runs in families where several members in different generations are affected. Most of these breast cancers are caused by mutations in the high penetrance genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 accounting for about 5% of all breast cancers. Other genes that include CHEK2, PTEN, TP53, ATM, STK11/LKB1, CDH1, NBS1, RAD50, BRIP1 and PALB2 have been described to be high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, all contributing to the hereditary breast cancer spectrum. However, in still a part of familial hereditary breast cancers no relationship to any of these breast cancer susceptibility genes can be found. Research on new susceptibility genes is therefore ongoing.

Design

In this review we will describe the function of the today known high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes and the consequences of their mutated status. Furthermore, we will focus on the histology, the immunophenotype and genotype of breast cancers caused by mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and the other high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Finally, an overview of the clinical implications of hereditary breast cancer patients will be provided.

Conclusion

This information leads to a better understanding of the morphological, immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics of different types of hereditary breast cancers. Further, these characteristics offer clues for diagnosis and new therapeutic approaches.     

Genomic patterns resembling BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated breast cancers predict benefit of intensified carboplatin-based chemotherapy

Introduction

BRCA-mutated breast cancer cells lack the DNA-repair mechanism homologous recombination that is required for error-free DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair. Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) may cause hypersensitivity to DNA DSB-inducing agents, such as bifunctional alkylating agents and platinum salts. HRD can be caused by BRCA mutations, and by other mechanisms. To identify HRD, studies have focused on triple-negative (TN) breast cancers as these resemble BRCA1-mutated breast cancer closely and might also share this hypersensitivity. However, ways to identify HRD in non-BRCA-mutated, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers have remained elusive. The current study provides evidence that genomic patterns resembling BRCA1- or BRCA2-mutated breast cancers can identify breast cancer patients with TN as well as ER-positive, HER2-negative tumors that are sensitive to intensified, DSB-inducing chemotherapy.

Methods

Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was used to classify breast cancers. Patients with tumors with similar aCGH patterns as BRCA1- and/or BRCA2-mutated breast cancers were defined as having a BRCA-like^CGH status, others as non-BCRA-like^CGH. Stage-III patients (n = 249) had participated in a randomized controlled trial of adjuvant high-dose (HD) cyclophosphamide-thiotepa-carboplatin (CTC) versus 5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide (FE₉₀C) chemotherapy.

Results

Among patients with BRCA-like^CGH tumors (81/249, 32%), a significant benefit of HD-CTC compared to FE₉₀C was observed regarding overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.48) that was not seen for patients with non-BRCA-like^CGH tumors (adjusted hazard ratio 0.90, 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.54) (P = 0.004). Half of all BRCA-like^CGH tumors were ER-positive.

Conclusions

Distinct aCGH patterns differentiated between HER2-negative patients with a markedly improved outcome after adjuvant treatment with an intensified DNA-DSB-inducing regimen (BRCA-like^CGH patients) and those without benefit (non-BRCA-like^CGH patients).     

BRCA2 mutation carriers,reproductive factors and breast cancer risk

Background

Germline mutations in the BRCA genes dramatically increase the risk of breast cancer. In the general population, breast cancer risk is affected by age at menarche, by age at first birth, by the number of births and by the duration of breast feeding. Whether this is true for mutation carriers is not clear.

Methods

In a case–control study, nested in a population-based cohort of the Icelandic Cancer Detection Clinic, two groups of cases were defined, matched on year of birth, on age at diagnosis and on age when giving information on reproductive factors: 100 carriers of the Icelandic founder BRCA2 mutation 999del5, and 361 BRCA2-negative cases. The mean age at diagnosis was 48 years. There were 1000 women in a matched group of unaffected controls. Conditional logistic regression was used for the analysis.

Results

An increased number of births was associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer in BRCA2-negative cases but not in BRCA2-positive cases. A negative association between risk and duration of breast feeding was observed only in the mutation carriers. These associations were not statistically significant, but the effects of the two variables differed significantly according to mutation status (P = 0.007 and P = 0.045 for interaction with number of births and with duration of breast feeding, respectively). This was maintained when limiting the analysis to women diagnosed older than the age of 40 years.

Conclusion

The association between breast cancer and the number of pregnancies and between breast cancer and the duration of breast feeding was not the same for carriers and noncarriers of a detrimental BRCA2 mutation. In the context of other epidemiological and laboratory studies, this may indicate that the product of the BRCA2 gene has a function relating to the differentiation of epithelial tissue in the breast.     

A predictor based on the somatic genomic changes of the BRCA1/BRCA2 breast cancer tumors identifies the non-BRCA1/BRCA2 tumors with BRCA1 promoter hypermethylation.

The genetic changes underlying in the development and progression of familial breast cancer are poorly understood. To identify a somatic genetic signature of tumor progression for each familial group, BRCA1, BRCA2, and non-BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCAX) tumors, by high-resolution comparative genomic hybridization, we have analyzed 77 tumors previously characterized for BRCA1 and BRCA2 germ line mutations. Based on a combination of the somatic genetic changes observed at the six most different chromosomal regions and the status of the estrogen receptor, we developed using random forests a molecular classifier, which assigns to a given tumor a probability to belong either to the BRCA1 or to the BRCA2 class. Because 76.5% (26 of 34) of the BRCAX cases were classified with our predictor to the BRCA1 class with a probability of >50%, we analyzed the BRCA1 promoter region for aberrant methylation in all the BRCAX cases. We found that 15 of the 34 BRCAX analyzed tumors had hypermethylation of the BRCA1 gene. When we considered the predictor, we observed that all the cases with this epigenetic event were assigned to the BRCA1 class with a probability of >50%. Interestingly, 84.6% of the cases (11 of 13) assigned to the BRCA1 class with a probability >80% had an aberrant methylation of the BRCA1 promoter. This fact suggests that somatic BRCA1 inactivation could modify the profile of tumor progression in most of the BRCAX cases.     

Analysis of cancer risk and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation prevalence in the kConFab familial breast cancer resource

Introduction

The Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab) is a multidisciplinary, collaborative framework for the investigation of familial breast cancer. Based in Australia, the primary aim of kConFab is to facilitate high-quality research by amassing a large and comprehensive resource of epidemiological and clinical data with biospecimens from individuals at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer, and from their close relatives.

Methods

Epidemiological, family history and lifestyle data, as well as biospecimens, are collected from multiple-case breast cancer families ascertained through family cancer clinics in Australia and New Zealand. We used the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithms to assess the prospective risk of breast cancer in women in the kConFab cohort who were unaffected with breast cancer at the time of enrolment in the study.

Results

Of kConFab's first 822 families, 518 families had multiple cases of female breast cancer alone, 239 had cases of female breast and ovarian cancer, 37 had cases of female and male breast cancer, and 14 had both ovarian cancer as well as male and female breast cancer. Data are currently held for 11,422 people and germline DNAs for 7,389. Among the 812 families with at least one germline sample collected, the mean number of germline DNA samples collected per family is nine. Of the 747 families that have undergone some form of mutation screening, 229 (31%) carry a pathogenic or splice-site mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Germline DNAs and data are stored from 773 proven carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA1 mutations. kConFab's fresh tissue bank includes 253 specimens of breast or ovarian tissue – both normal and malignant – including 126 from carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

Conclusion

These kConFab resources are available to researchers anywhere in the world, who may apply to kConFab for biospecimens and data for use in ethically approved, peer-reviewed projects. A high calculated risk from the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithms correlated closely with the subsequent occurrence of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation positive families, but this was less evident in families in which no pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation has been detected.     

Common variants at 12p11, 12q24, 9p21, 9q31.2 and in ZNF365 are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers

Introduction

Several common alleles have been shown to be associated with breast and/or ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Recent genome-wide association studies of breast cancer have identified eight additional breast cancer susceptibility loci: rs1011970 (9p21, CDKN2A/B), rs10995190 (ZNF365), rs704010 (ZMIZ1), rs2380205 (10p15), rs614367 (11q13), rs1292011 (12q24), rs10771399 (12p11 near PTHLH) and rs865686 (9q31.2).

Methods

To evaluate whether these single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, we genotyped these SNPs in 12,599 BRCA1 and 7,132 BRCA2 mutation carriers and analysed the associations with breast cancer risk within a retrospective likelihood framework.

Results

Only SNP rs10771399 near PTHLH was associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers (per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.94, P-trend = 3 × 10^-4). The association was restricted to mutations proven or predicted to lead to absence of protein expression (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.90, P-trend = 3.1 × 10^-5, P-difference = 0.03). Four SNPs were associated with the risk of breast cancer for BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs10995190, P-trend = 0.015; rs1011970, P-trend = 0.048; rs865686, 2df-P = 0.007; rs1292011 2df-P = 0.03. rs10771399 (PTHLH) was predominantly associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer for BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.90, P-trend = 4 × 10^-5) and there was marginal evidence of association with ER-negative breast cancer for BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.00, P-trend = 0.049).

Conclusions

The present findings, in combination with previously identified modifiers of risk, will ultimately lead to more accurate risk prediction and an improved understanding of the disease etiology in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.