Search

Melioidosis is a seasonal infectious disease in tropical and subtropical areas caused by the soil bacterium Burkholderia pseudomallei. In many parts of the world, including South West India, most cases of human infections are reported during times of heavy rainfall, but the underlying causes of this phenomenon are not fully understood. India is among the countries with the highest predicted melioidosis burden globally, but there is very little information on the environmental distribution of B. pseudomallei and its determining factors. The present study aimed (i) to investigate the prevalence of B. pseudomallei in soil in South West India, (ii) determine geochemical factors associated with B. pseudomallei presence and (iii) look for potential seasonal patterns of B. pseudomallei soil abundance. Environmental samplings were performed in two regions during the monsoon and post-monsoon season and summer from July 2016 to November 2018. We applied direct quantitative real time PCR (qPCR) together with culture protocols to overcome the insufficient sensitivity of solely culture-based B. pseudomallei detection from soil. A total of 1,704 soil samples from 20 different agricultural sites were screened for the presence of B. pseudomallei. Direct qPCR detected B. pseudomallei in all 20 sites and in 30.2% (517/1,704) of all soil samples, whereas only two samples from two sites were culture-positive. B. pseudomallei DNA-positive samples were negatively associated with the concentration of iron, manganese and nitrogen in a binomial logistic regression model. The highest number of B. pseudomallei-positive samples (42.6%, p < 0.0001) and the highest B. pseudomallei loads in positive samples [median 4.45 × 103 genome equivalents (GE)/g, p < 0.0001] were observed during the monsoon season and eventually declined to 18.9% and a median of 1.47 × 103 GE/g in summer. In conclusion, our study from South West India shows a wide environmental distribution of B. pseudomallei, but also considerable differences in the abundance between sites and within single sites. Our results support the hypothesis that nutrient-depleted habitats promote the presence of B. pseudomallei. Most importantly, the highest B. pseudomallei abundance in soil is seen during the rainy season, when melioidosis cases occur.

Many peptides and proteins are attached to or immersed in a biological membrane. In order to understand their function not only the structure but also their topology in the membrane is important. Solution NMR spectroscopy is one of the most often used approaches to determine the orientation and localization of membrane-bound peptides and proteins. Here we give an application-oriented overview on the use of paramagnetic probes for the investigation of membrane-bound peptides and proteins. The examples discussed range from the large pool of antimicrobial peptides, bacterial toxins, cell penetrating peptides to domains of larger proteins or the calcium regulating protein phospholamban. Topological information is obtained in all these examples by the use of either attached or freely mobile paramagnetic tags. For some examples information obtained from the paramagnetic probes was included in the structure determination.

Previous studies reported a relatively low prevalence of transmitted drug resistance (TDR) in South Korea (

BackgroundHuman immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) dual infection (DI) has been associated with decreased CD4 T-cell counts and increased viral loads; however, the frequency of intrasubtype DI is poorly understood. We used ultradeep sequencing (UDS) to estimate the frequency of DI in a primary infection cohort of predominantly men who have sex with men (MSM).Methods HIV-1 genomes from longitudinal blood samples of recently infected, therapy-naive participants were interrogated with UDS. DI was confirmed when maximum sequence divergence was excessive and supported by phylogenetic analysis. Coinfection was defined as DI at baseline; superinfection was monoinfection at baseline and DI at a later time point.Results Of 118 participants, 7 were coinfected and 10 acquired superinfection. Superinfection incidence rate was 4.96 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.67-9.22); 6 occurred in the first year and 4 in the second. Overall cumulative prevalence of intrasubtype B DI was 14.4% (95% CI, 8.6%-22.1%). Primary HIV-1 incidence was 4.37 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 3.56-5.36).Conclusions Intrasubtype DI was frequent and comparable to primary infection rates among MSM in San Diego; however, superinfection rates declined over time. DI is likely an important component of the HIV epidemic dynamics, and development of stronger immune responses to the initial infection may protect from superinfection.

Investigating the incidence and prevalence of HIV-1 superinfection is challenging due to the complex dynamics of two infecting strains. The superinfecting strain can replace the initial strain, be transiently expressed, or persist along with the initial strain in distinct or in recombined forms. Various selective pressures influence these alternative scenarios in different HIV-1 coding regions. We hypothesized that the potency of the neutralizing antibody (NAb) response to autologous viruses would modulate viral dynamics in env following superinfection in a limited set of superinfection cases. HIV-1 env pyrosequencing data were generated from blood plasma collected from 7 individuals with evidence of superinfection. Viral variants within each patient were screened for recombination, and viral dynamics were evaluated using nucleotide diversity. NAb responses to autologous viruses were evaluated before and after superinfection. In 4 individuals, the superinfecting strain replaced the original strain. In 2 individuals, both initial and superinfecting strains continued to cocirculate. In the final individual, the surviving lineage was the product of interstrain recombination. NAb responses to autologous viruses that were detected within the first 2 years of HIV-1 infection were weak or absent for 6 of the 7 recently infected individuals at the time of and shortly following superinfection. These 6 individuals had detectable on-going viral replication of distinct superinfecting virus in the env coding region. In the remaining case, there was an early and strong autologous NAb response, which was associated with extensive recombination in env between initial and superinfecting strains. This extensive recombination made superinfection more difficult to identify and may explain why the detection of superinfection has typically been associated with low autologous NAb titers.

Diese Diplomarbeit beschäfftigt sich mit dem Protein TAF 15. Es gehört zu den TATA binding associated factors und ist somit ein Teil des Transkriptionsfaktors TFIID. Darüberhinaus erfüllt es noch eine Vielzahl anderer Funktionen als Mitglied der einzigartigen TET Familie. TAF 15 wurde in einem Tandem Affinity Purification Assay gefunden, als ein Interaktionspartner von ISG 12. Bei ISG 12 handelt es sich um ein kleines Interferon induziertes Gen. Das Protein hat eine Größe von ca. 12kDa und befindet sich in der Kernmembran. Weiters wird spekuliert, dass ISG 12 ein induzierbarer Teil der Kernpore sein könnte. In atherosklerotischen Lesionen wurde ISG 12 in überexpremierten Mengen gefunden, wo es proinflammatorisch wirkt indem es die Produktion von antiinflammatorischen Faktoren vermindert. Die Ursache für diesen Effekt liegt in einem ISG 12 abhängigen Export von nuklearen Rezeptoren aus dem Kern ins Zytoplasma. Aufgrund dessen untersuchte ich die Komplexbildung zwischen ISG 12, TAF 15 und nuklearen Rezeptoren, wobei mein Hauptaugenmerk NR4A1 galt. Die Ergebnisse zeigten eine Interaktion zwischen TAF 15 und ISG 12, sowie mit den nuklearen Rezeptoren NR4A1, PPARa und RXRa. Desweiteren wurde der Transkriptionsfaktor p65 als Interaktionspartner von TAF 15 identifiziert. Diese Proteine wurden in früheren Experimenten bereits als Interaktionspartner von ISG 12 bestättigt. Zusätzlich hatte ISG 12 den gleichen negativ regulierenden Effekt auf die Transkriptionsaktivität dieser Faktoren. Die Herunterregulierung von TAF 15 mittels siRNA führte zu einer verminderten Komplexbildung zwischen ISG 12 und den vorher genannten Proteinen. Weiters verhinderte die Herunterregulierung von TAF 15 den iSG 12 abhängigen Export von NR4A1 ins Zytoplasma. In einem fluorescence resonance energy transfer Experiment führte es überraschenderweise zu einer verstärkten Interaktion zwischen ISG 12 und NR4A1. Dies weist darauf hin, dass TAF 15 für die Interaktion möglicherweise nicht notwendig ist, es aber bereits entstandene Komplexe stabilisieren könnte.

Funder: CIMBA: The CIMBA data management and data analysis were supported by Cancer Research – UK grants C12292/A20861, C12292/A11174. ACA is a Cancer Research -UK Senior Cancer Research Fellow. GCT and ABS are NHMRC Research Fellows. iCOGS: the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement No. 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer (CRN-87521), and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade (PSR-SIIRI-701), Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The PERSPECTIVE project was supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Ministry of Economy, Science and Innovation through Genome Québec, and The Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation. BCFR: UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government or the BCFR. BFBOCC: Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT): Research Council of Lithuania grant SEN-18/2015. BIDMC: Breast Cancer Research Foundation. BMBSA: Cancer Association of South Africa (PI Elizabeth J. van Rensburg). CNIO: Spanish Ministry of Health PI16/00440 supported by FEDER funds, the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) SAF2014-57680-R and the Spanish Research Network on Rare diseases (CIBERER). COH-CCGCRN: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under grant number R25CA112486, and RC4CA153828 (PI: J. Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. CONSIT: Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; IG2014 no.15547) to P. Radice. Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC; grant no.16933) to L. Ottini. Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; IG2015 no.16732) to P. Peterlongo. Jacopo Azzollini is supported by funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5x1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects ‘5x1000’). DEMOKRITOS: European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program "Education and Lifelong Learning" of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) - Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research & Technology: SYN11_10_19 NBCA. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund. DFKZ: German Cancer Research Center. EMBRACE: Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Ros Eeles and Elizabeth Bancroft are supported by Cancer Research UK Grant C5047/A8385. Ros Eeles is also supported by NIHR support to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. FCCC: The University of Kansas Cancer Center (P30 CA168524) and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. A.K.G. was funded by R0 1CA140323, R01 CA214545, and by the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professorship. FPGMX: FISPI05/2275 and Mutua Madrileña Foundation (FMMA). GC-HBOC: German Cancer Aid (grant no 110837, Rita K. Schmutzler) and the European Regional Development Fund and Free State of Saxony, Germany (LIFE - Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases, project numbers 713-241202, 713-241202, 14505/2470, 14575/2470). GEMO: Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Association “Le cancer du sein, parlons-en!” Award, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the "CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer" program and the French National Institute of Cancer (INCa grants 2013-1-BCB-01-ICH-1 and SHS-E-SP 18-015). GEORGETOWN: the Non-Therapeutic Subject Registry Shared Resource at Georgetown University (NIH/NCI grant P30-CA051008), the Fisher Center for Hereditary Cancer and Clinical Genomics Research, and Swing Fore the Cure. G-FAST: Bruce Poppe is a senior clinical investigator of FWO. Mattias Van Heetvelde obtained funding from IWT. HCSC: Spanish Ministry of Health PI15/00059, PI16/01292, and CB-161200301 CIBERONC from ISCIII (Spain), partially supported by European Regional Development FEDER funds. HEBCS: Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (266528), the Finnish Cancer Society and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. HEBON: the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organisation of Scientific Research grant NWO 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grants 110005 and 2014-187.WO76, the BBMRI grant NWO 184.021.007/CP46 and the Transcan grant JTC 2012 Cancer 12-054. HRBCP: Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Dr Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, The Kerry Group Kuok Foundation, National Institute of Health1R 03CA130065, and North California Cancer Center. HUNBOCS: Hungarian Research Grants KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and OTKA K-112228. ICO: The authors would like to particularly acknowledge the support of the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (organismo adscrito al Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad) and “Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), una manera de hacer Europa” (PI10/01422, PI13/00285, PIE13/00022, PI15/00854, PI16/00563 and CIBERONC) and the Institut Català de la Salut and Autonomous Government of Catalonia (2009SGR290, 2014SGR338 and PERIS Project MedPerCan). IHCC: PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. ILUH: Icelandic Association “Walking for Breast Cancer Research” and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INHERIT: Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program – grant # CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade – grant # PSR-SIIRI-701. IOVHBOCS: Ministero della Salute and “5x1000” Istituto Oncologico Veneto grant. IPOBCS: Liga Portuguesa Contra o Cancro. kConFab: The National Breast Cancer Foundation, and previously by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. MAYO: NIH grants CA116167, CA192393 and CA176785, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201),and a grant from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. MCGILL: Jewish General Hospital Weekend to End Breast Cancer, Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade. Marc Tischkowitz is supported by the funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program (2007Y2013)/European Research Council (Grant No. 310018). MODSQUAD: MH CZ - DRO (MMCI, 00209805), MEYS - NPS I - LO1413 to LF and by the European Regional Development Fund and the State Budget of the Czech Republic (RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101) to LF, and by Charles University in Prague project UNCE204024 (MZ). MSKCC: the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, the Andrew Sabin Research Fund and a Cancer Center Support Grant/Core Grant (P30 CA008748). NAROD: 1R01 CA149429-01. NCI: the Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50, N02-CP-21013-63 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Inc, Rockville, MD. NICCC: Clalit Health Services in Israel, the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. NNPIO: the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 17-54-12007, 17-00-00171 and 18-515-12007). NRG Oncology: U10 CA180868, NRG SDMC grant U10 CA180822, NRG Administrative Office and the NRG Tissue Bank (CA 27469), the NRG Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517) and the Intramural Research Program, NCI. OSUCCG: Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. PBCS: Italian Association of Cancer Research (AIRC) [IG 2013 N.14477] and Tuscany Institute for Tumors (ITT) grant 2014-2015-2016. SEABASS: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. SMC: the Israeli Cancer Association. SWE-BRCA: the Swedish Cancer Society. UCHICAGO: NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA125183), R01 CA142996, 1U01CA161032, P20CA233307, American Cancer Society (MRSG-13-063-01-TBG, CRP-10-119-01-CCE), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Susan G. Komen Foundation (SAC110026), and Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women's Cancer Research Alliance. Mr. Qian was supported by the Alpha Omega Alpha Carolyn L. Cuckein Student Research Fellowship. UCLA: Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation; Breast Cancer Research Foundation. UCSF: UCSF Cancer Risk Program and Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. UKFOCR: Cancer Research UK. UPENN: Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Susan G. Komen Foundation for the cure, Basser Center for BRCA. UPITT/MWH: Hackers for Hope Pittsburgh. VFCTG: Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, National Breast Cancer Foundation. WCP: Dr Karlan is funded by the American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), Grant UL1TR000124., Background: Height and body mass index (BMI) are associated with higher ovarian cancer risk in the general population, but whether such associations exist among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown. Methods: We applied a Mendelian randomisation approach to examine height/BMI with ovarian cancer risk using the Consortium of Investigators for the Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) data set, comprising 14,676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, with 2923 ovarian cancer cases. We created a height genetic score (height-GS) using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score (BMI-GS) using 93 BMI-associated variants. Associations were assessed using weighted Cox models. Results: Observed height was not associated with ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07 per 10-cm increase in height, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94–1.23). Height-GS showed similar results (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85–1.23). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased risk in premenopausal women with HR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.06–1.48) and HR = 1.59 (95% CI: 1.08–2.33) per 5-kg/m2 increase in observed and genetically determined BMI, respectively. No association was found for postmenopausal women. Interaction between menopausal status and BMI was significant (Pinteraction < 0.05). Conclusion: Our observation of a positive association between BMI and ovarian cancer risk in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is consistent with findings in the general population.

PURPOSE: We assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. METHODS: Retrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort. RESULTS: The ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25-1.33], P = 3×10-72). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27-1.36], P = 7×10-50). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25-1.40], P = 3×10-22) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30-1.60], P = 4×10-12) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar. CONCLUSION: Population-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.

Germline genetic variation has been suggested to influence the survival of breast cancer patients independently of tumor pathology. We have studied survival associations of genetic variants in two etiologically unique groups of breast cancer patients, the carriers of germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. We found that rs57025206 was significantly associated with the overall survival, predicting higher mortality of BRCA1 carrier patients with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, with a hazard ratio 4.37 (95% confidence interval 3.03–6.30, P = 3.1 × 10−9). Multivariable analysis adjusted for tumor characteristics suggested that rs57025206 was an independent survival marker. In addition, our exploratory analyses suggest that the associations between genetic variants and breast cancer patient survival may depend on tumor biological subgroup and clinical patient characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Height and body mass index (BMI) are associated with higher ovarian cancer risk in the general population, but whether such associations exist among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown. METHODS: We applied a Mendelian randomisation approach to examine height/BMI with ovarian cancer risk using the Consortium of Investigators for the Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) data set, comprising 14,676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, with 2923 ovarian cancer cases. We created a height genetic score (height-GS) using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score (BMI-GS) using 93 BMI-associated variants. Associations were assessed using weighted Cox models. RESULTS: Observed height was not associated with ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07 per 10-cm increase in height, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.23). Height-GS showed similar results (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85-1.23). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased risk in premenopausal women with HR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.06-1.48) and HR = 1.59 (95% CI: 1.08-2.33) per 5-kg/m2 increase in observed and genetically determined BMI, respectively. No association was found for postmenopausal women. Interaction between menopausal status and BMI was significant (Pinteraction < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our observation of a positive association between BMI and ovarian cancer risk in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is consistent with findings in the general population.

Purpose: We assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Methods: Retrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)–negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort. Results: The ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25–1.33], P = 3×10−72). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27–1.36], P = 7×10−50). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25–1.40], P = 3×10−22) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30–1.60], P = 4×10−12) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar. Conclusion: Population-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.

Germline genetic variation has been suggested to influence the survival of breast cancer patients independently of tumor pathology. We have studied survival associations of genetic variants in two etiologically unique groups of breast cancer patients, the carriers of germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. We found that rs57025206 was significantly associated with the overall survival, predicting higher mortality of BRCA1 carrier patients with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, with a hazard ratio 4.37 (95% confidence interval 3.03–6.30, P = 3.1 × 10−9). Multivariable analysis adjusted for tumor characteristics suggested that rs57025206 was an independent survival marker. In addition, our exploratory analyses suggest that the associations between genetic variants and breast cancer patient survival may depend on tumor biological subgroup and clinical patient characteristics.

Germline genetic variation has been suggested to influence the survival of breast cancer patients independently of tumor pathology. We have studied survival associations of genetic variants in two etiologically unique groups of breast cancer patients, the carriers of germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. We found that rs57025206 was significantly associated with the overall survival, predicting higher mortality of BRCA1 carrier patients with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, with a hazard ratio 4.37 (95% confidence interval 3.03-6.30, P = 3.1 × 10-9). Multivariable analysis adjusted for tumor characteristics suggested that rs57025206 was an independent survival marker. In addition, our exploratory analyses suggest that the associations between genetic variants and breast cancer patient survival may depend on tumor biological subgroup and clinical patient characteristics.

Germline genetic variation has been suggested to influence the survival of breast cancer patients independently of tumor pathology. We have studied survival associations of genetic variants in two etiologically unique groups of breast cancer patients, the carriers of germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. We found that rs57025206 was significantly associated with the overall survival, predicting higher mortality of BRCA1 carrier patients with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, with a hazard ratio 4.37 (95% confidence interval 3.03-6.30, P = 3.1 × 10-9). Multivariable analysis adjusted for tumor characteristics suggested that rs57025206 was an independent survival marker. In addition, our exploratory analyses suggest that the associations between genetic variants and breast cancer patient survival may depend on tumor biological subgroup and clinical patient characteristics.

Purpose: We assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Methods: Retrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)–negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort. Results: The ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25–1.33], P = 3×10−72). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27–1.36], P = 7×10−50). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25–1.40], P = 3×10−22) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30–1.60], P = 4×10−12) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar. Conclusion: Population-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.