Search

Background: Germline genetic testing, previously restricted to familial and young-onset breast cancer, is now offered increasingly broadly to patients with 'population-type' breast cancer in mainstream oncology clinics, with wide variation in the genes included., Patients and Methods: Weighted meta-analysis was carried out for three population-based case-control studies (BRIDGES, CARRIERS and UK Biobank) comprising in total 101 397 women with breast cancer and 312 944 women without breast cancer, to quantify 37 putative breast cancer susceptibility genes (BCSGs) for the frequency of pathogenic variants (PVs) in unselected, 'population-type' breast cancer cases and their association with breast cancer and its subtypes., Results: Meta-analysed odds ratios (ORs) and frequencies of PVs in 'population-type' breast cancer cases were generated for BRCA1 (OR 8.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.47-10.20; 1 in 101), BRCA2 (OR 5.68, 95% CI 5.13-6.30; 1 in 68) and PALB2 (OR 4.30, 95% CI 3.68-5.03; 1 in 187). For both CHEK2 (OR 2.40, 95% CI 2.21-2.62; 1 in 73) and ATM (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.93-2.41; 1 in 132) subgroup analysis showed a stronger association with oestrogen receptor-positive disease. The magnitude of association and frequency of PVs were low for RAD51C (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.29-2.04; 1 in 913), RAD51D (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.29-2.41; 1 in 1079) and BARD1 (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.85-2.97; 1 in 672); frequencies and associations were higher when the analysis was restricted to triple-negative breast cancers. The PV frequency in 'population-type' breast cancer cases was very low for 'syndromic' BCSGs TP53 (1 in 1844), STK11 (1 in 11 525), CDH1 (1 in 2668), PTEN (1 in 3755) and NF1 (1 in 1470), with metrics of association also modest ranging from OR 3.62 (95% CI 1.98-6.61) for TP53 down to OR 1.60 (95% CI 0.48-5.30) for STK11., Conclusions: These metrics reflecting 'population-type' breast cancer will be informative in defining the appropriate gene set as we continue to expand to germline testing to an increasingly unselected group of breast cancer cases., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Elevated levels of the cell cycle protein cyclin E, and low levels of its inhibitor, p27(Kip1), have been associated with a poor prognosis following breast cancer. Some studies have found that germline mutations in the breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA1, are also associated with an inferior survival rate. The relationship between cyclin E/p27(Kip1) levels, BRCA1 status and outcome has not been studied in detail., Patients and Methods: We analyzed a historical cohort of 288 Ashkenazi Jewish women who were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1980 and 1995 and were previously tested for BRCA1/2 mutations. Protein levels of cyclin E and p27(Kip1) were assessed by immunohistochemistry. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was the main outcome measured., Results: The median follow-up was 8 years. Thirty tumors carried germline BRCA1 mutations. These tumors were more likely to have high cyclin E protein levels [odds ratio (OR) 9.5; P <0.001] and low p27(Kip1) protein levels (OR 2.8; P=0.03) than tumors from patients without BRCA1/2 mutations. High cyclin E expression level was the strongest predictor of BRCA1 germline mutations (multivariate OR 4.7; P=0.004). On univariate analysis, high cyclin E protein levels [relative risk (RR) 2.6; P <0.001] and low p27(Kip1) protein levels (RR 2.3; P=0.006) were significant prognostic factors for a poorer BCSS. In Cox multivariate models, high cyclin E levels remained an independent indicator of poor outcome only in the subgroup of patients who did not receive chemotherapy (P=0.002)., Conclusions: In this ethnically restricted cohort, a high level of cyclin E is a characteristic of BRCA1-related breast cancer, and is a marker of poor prognosis following breast cancer, particularly in the absence of adjuvant chemotherapy.

This review aims to explore the genetic mechanisms involved in the development of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). The epidemiology of SCCHN is complex due to the multiple molecular events that occur and the number of environmental agents to which individuals may have been exposed. It is clear that the major aetiological agents are tobacco and alcohol but it is also becoming apparent that other factors such as an underlying genetic susceptibility may also be important. An inherited predisposition may occur as a consequence of increased mutagen sensitivity, inability to metabolize carcinogens or pro-carcinogens or repair DNA damage. The current advances in understanding of the roles of somatic mutations, viral infection and angiogenesis are discussed. The final part of this review focuses on the way in which molecular changes may be used for prevention, early diagnosis and treatment of SCCHN.

Background: The association between BRCA1 germ-line mutations and breast cancer prognosis is controversial. A historical cohort study was designed to determine the prognosis for women with axillary lymph node negative hereditary breast cancer., Patients and Methods: We tested pathology blocks from 118 Ashkenazi Jewish women with axillary lymph node negative breast cancer for the presence of the two common BRCA1 founder mutations, 185delAG and 5382insC. Patients were followed up for a median of 76 months. Somatic TP53 mutations were screened for by immunohistochemistry, and direct sequencing was performed in the BRCA1-positive tumours., Results: Sixteen breast cancer blocks (13.6%) carried a BRCA1 mutation. Young age of onset, high nuclear grade, negative estrogen receptor status and over-expression of p53 were highly associated with BRCA1-positive status (P-values all <0.01). BRCA1 mutation carriers had a higher mortality than non-carriers (five-year overall survival, 50% and 89.6%, respectively, P = 0.0001). Young age of onset, estrogen receptor negative status, nuclear grade 3, and over-expression of p53 also predicted a poor outcome. Cox multivariate analyses showed that only germ-line BRCA1 mutation status was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P = 0.01). Among nuclear grade 3 tumours, the BRCA1 mutation carrier status was a significant prognostic factor of death (risk ratio 5.8, 95% confidence interval: 1.5-22, P = 0.009). Sequencing of BRCA1-related breast cancers revealed one TP53 missense mutation not previously reported in breast cancer., Conclusions: Using a historical cohort approach, we have identified BRCA1 mutation status as an independent prognostic factor for node negative breast cancer among the Ashkenazi Jewish women. Those managing women carrying a BRCA1 mutation may need take these findings into consideration. Additionally, our preliminary results, taken together with the work of others suggest a different carcinogenic pathway in BRCA1-related breast cancer, compared to non-hereditary cases.

Background: Early age at first full-term pregnancy and increasing parity are associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer. However, whether pregnancy decreases the risk of early-onset hereditary breast cancer is unknown. There is concern that pregnancy may increase breast-cancer risk in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations. We aimed to establish whether pregnancy is a risk factor for hereditary breast cancer., Methods: We did a matched case-control study of breast cancer in women who carry deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Cases were carriers who developed breast cancer by age 40 years, and controls were carriers of the same age without breast cancer, or who were diagnosed with breast cancer after age 40 years. Women who had undergone preventive mastectomy, hysterectomy, or oophorectomy, or who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer before the age at which breast cancer was diagnosed in the matched case were excluded. Information about pregnancies and pregnancy outcome was derived from a questionnaire completed by women in the course of genetic counselling., Findings: A higher proportion of cases than controls had had a full term pregnancy (173/236 vs 146/236; odds ratio 1.71 [95% CI 1.13-2.62], p=0.01). The mean number of births was also greater for cases than for controls (1.62 vs 1.38, p=0.04). The risk increased with the number of births and did not diminish with time since last pregnancy. There were no significant differences in age at first birth or age at last birth between cases and controls., Interpretation: Carriers of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations who have children are significantly more likely to develop breast cancer by age 40 than carriers who are nulliparous. Each pregnancy is associated with an increased cancer risk. An early first pregnancy does not confer protection for carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

Background: Family history is a well recognized risk factor for breast cancer, but its impact in terms of breast cancer survival is uncertain. The recent identification of breast cancer predisposing genes has provided new clinical insights in this field., Design: English literature identified through Medline between 1976 and February 1999 was reviewed including search terms: breast cancer, survival, prognosis, family history, genetics, BRCA1, BRCA2, and related articles., Results: Publications were divided into three categories. Family history-based studies: eighteen articles were reviewed. Four studies showed a statistically significant better survival in patients with a family history of breast cancer, and two studies demonstrated a significantly worse prognosis in this context. The remaining articles showed no significant difference. LINKAGE STUDIES: Two studies based on linkage to BRCA1 found that overall survival was better in linked families. A third one concluded to a worse outcome in BRCA2-linked tumors. MUTATION-BASED STUDIES: 10 studies looking at the association between germ-line mutations in BRCA1/BRCA2 and clinical outcomes were reviewed. Eight articles reported no significant difference in outcome, whereas two studies showed a worse outcome in patients with mutations., Conclusions: Conflicting data exist as to whether the prognosis of familial or hereditary breast cancer differs from that of sporadic cases. Some of the discrepancies may be explained by methodological differences or biases. However, no studies showed a survival advantage for BRCA1 mutation carriers. This seems to indicate that BRCA1-related breast cancer is not associated with a survival advantage, and that in fact, certain BRCA1 germline mutations confer a worse prognosis. However, to adequately answer this question, more efficient molecular tools to identify all the genetic changes responsible for breast cancer predisposition, and large cohort studies to evaluate their clinical consequences, are needed.

Aims: Awareness of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in both the general public and the medical profession is increasing. Individuals who may be at risk on the basis of a family history are requesting risk determination and appropriate management in a variety of settings. Risk determination relies largely on pedigree analysis and epidemiological data., Methods: We describe five individuals presenting in the family cancer or genetic counselling clinic where a factitious family or personal history led to erroneous risk estimation. Common factors in these families are a history of benign breast disease, poor communication within families, long survival with early onset or bilateral disease, a lack of detailed knowledge of the illness and treatment in close relatives and inconsistencies in the history in repeated consultations.

Objective: The objective was to compare risk factors between familial and sporadic ovarian cancer by means of a case-control approach., Study Design: We conducted a case-control study among French Canadian women in Montreal during 1995-1996. One hundred seventy women 20 to 84 years old with histologically confirmed diagnoses of primary ovarian carcinomas or borderline tumors were interviewed concerning their reproductive, family, and medical histories. During the same period 170 randomly selected population control subjects, frequency-matched to the case patients according to age and ethnic group, were also interviewed. Unconditional logistic regression methods were used for data analysis., Results: The major factors influencing the risk of development of ovarian cancer were as follows: (1) family history of breast or ovarian cancer, (2) a late age at use of oral contraceptives (a protective effect), and (3) a late age at last childbirth (a protective effect for familial case patients only)., Conclusion: These factors had equally great impacts in familial and sporadic cases, implying that the underlying mechanisms of carcinogenesis in sporadic and familial ovarian cancer may be similar and that hereditary ovarian cancer may be preventable.