Search

Knowledge of ectopic Cushing’s syndrome (CS) due to thymic neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) comes from short series or single cases. Our aim is to perform a systematic review using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Ovid Medline and Biosis Previews of all cases with ectopic CS due to thymic NETs reported in the last 40 years and describe one illustrative patient attended in our institution. Search of literature: From 162 patients, 58.6% were male and mean age was 34.6 ± 13.9 years-old. Median of symptoms until diagnosis was 6 [2–24] months and 62% had aggressive CS. Imaging was positive in 93.7% (chest X-ray), 97.8% (computed tomography), 80.7% (somatostatin receptor scintigraphy) and median tumour size was 47 [25–68.5] mm. At presentation, 18% had localized disease, 26.2% locally invasive and 55.7% advanced. Eighty-eight present underwent surgery and histological subtypes were atypical (46.7%), typical (30.4%) and carcinoma (21.7%). Tumour persisted or recurred in 70.1%, 63% received radiotherapy and 45.2% chemotherapy. Follow-up median was 26.6 [14.5–57.5] months and mortality was reported in 35.8% with median survival of 38 [19–60] months. MEN-1 mutation was referred in 3.1%. Comparatively, carcinomas had aggressive CS more frequently while atypical showed advanced disease more often. In conclusion, thymic NETs causing ectopic CS are presented as aggressive hypercortisolism in the middle aged population. The disease is commonly extended at diagnosis and persists or recurs after surgery in most patients with a short term high mortality.

RNA analyses are a potent tool to identify spliceogenic effects of DNA variants, although they are time-consuming and cannot always be performed. We present splicing assays of 20 variants that represent a variety of mutation types in 10 hereditary cancer genes and attempt to incorporate these results into American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) classification guidelines. Sixteen single-nucleotide variants, 3 exon duplications, and 1 single-exon deletion were selected and prioritized by in silico algorithms. RNA was extracted from short-term lymphocyte cultures to perform RT-PCR and Sanger sequencing, and allele-specific expression was assessed whenever possible. Aberrant transcripts were detected in 14 variants (70%). Variant interpretation was difficult, especially comparing old classification standards to generic ACMG guidelines and a proposal was devised to weigh functional analyses at RNA level. According to the ACMG guidelines, only 12 variants were reclassified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic because the other two variants did not gather enough evidence. This study highlights the importance of RNA studies to improve variant classification. However, it also indicates the challenge of incorporating these results into generic ACMG guidelines and the need to refine these criteria gene specifically. Nevertheless, 60% of variants were reclassified, thus improving genetic counseling and surveillance for carriers of these variants.

Breast and prostate cancer risks; Pathogenic variant Riscos de càncer de mama i pròstata; Variants patogèniques Riesgos de cáncer de mama y próstata; Variantes patogénicas Background Recent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Methods 483 BRCA1 and 1318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were 3 versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen receptor (ER)–negative (PRSER-), or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk. Results PRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07 to 1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28 to 2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer odds ratios were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions. Conclusions Population-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and informing clinical management. The CIMBA data management and data analysis were supported by Cancer Research UK grants C12292/A20861 and PPRPGM-Nov20\100002. The research leading to these results has received funding from the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) under IG 2018 - ID. 21389 and the Italian League for the Fight Against Cancer (LILT) under IG 2019 projects, P.I. Ottini Laura and Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research-Dipartimenti di Eccellenza-L. 232/2016. CIMBA: GCT is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Research Fellow. iCOGS and OncoArray data: 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 (NIH) (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 Personalized Risk Stratification for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer (PERSPECTIVE) and PERSPECTIVE I&I projects were supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Ministry of Economy and Innovation through Genome Québec, and The Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation and the Ontario Research Fund. Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR): UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Baltic Familial Breast Ovarian Cancer Consortium (BFBOCC): Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT): Research Council of Lithuania grant SEN-18/2015. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC): Breast Cancer Research Foundation. BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA): Cancer Association of South Africa (PI Elizabeth J. van Rensburg). Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO): Spanish Ministry of Health PI16/00440 supported by Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) funds, the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) SAF2014-57680-R and the Spanish Research Network on Rare diseases (CIBERER). City of Hope - Clinical Cancer Genomics Community Research Network (COH-CCGCRN): Research reported in this publication was supported by the NCI of the NIH under grant No. R25CA112486, and RC4CA153828 (PI: J. Weitzel) from the NCI and the Office of the Director, NIH. CONsorzio Studi ITaliani sui Tumori Ereditari Alla Mammella (CONSIT TEAM): Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; IG2014 No.15547) to P. Radice. 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’) to S. Manoukian. Associazione CAOS Varese to M.G. Tibiletti. AIRC (IG2015 No.16732) to P. Peterlongo. National Centre for Scientific Research Demokritos (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. German Cancer Research Center (DFKZ): German Cancer Research Center. Epidemiological Study of Familial Breast Cancer (EMBRACE): Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden National Health Service (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. Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC): The University of Kansas Cancer Center (P30 CA168524) and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. AKG was in part funded by the NCI (R01 CA214545 and R01 CA140323), The Kansas Institute for Precision Medicine (P20 GM130423), and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. A.K.G. is the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professor. Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica (FPGMX): FISPI05/2275 and Mutua Madrileña Foundation (FMMA). German Familial Breast Group (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 No. 713-241202, No. 713-241202, No. 14505/2470, and No. 14575/2470). Genetic Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (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 University (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. Ghent University Hospital (G-FAST): Bruce Poppe is a senior clinical investigator of FWO. Mattias Van Heetvelde obtained funding from IWT. Hospital Clinico San Carlos (HCSC): Spanish Ministry of Health PI15/00059, PI16/01292, and CB-161200301 CIBERONC from ISCIII (Spain), partially supported by European Regional Development FEDER funds. Helsinki Breast Cancer Study (HEBCS): Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund, the Finnish Cancer Society and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. Hereditary Breast and Ovarian cancer study the Netherlands (HEBON): the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research grant NWO 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grants 110005 and 2014-187.WO76, the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI) grant NWO 184.021.007/CP46 and the Transcan grant JTC 2012 Cancer 12-054. HEBON thanks the registration teams of Dutch Cancer Registry (IKNL; S. Siesling, J. Verloop) and the Dutch Pathology database (PALGA; L. Overbeek) for part of the data collection. Study of Genetic Mutations in Breast and Ovarian Cancer patients in Hong Kong and Asia (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. Molecular Genetic Studies of Breast- and Ovarian Cancer in Hungary (HUNBOCS): Hungarian Research Grants KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and NKFI_OTKA K-112228. Institut Català d’Oncologia (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 “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). International Hereditary Cancer Centre (IHCC): PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. Iceland Landspitali – University Hospital (ILUH): Icelandic Association “Walking for Breast Cancer Research” and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INterdisciplinary HEalth Research Internal Team BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT): Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program—grant No. CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade—grant No. PSR-SIIRI-701. Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOVHBOCS): Ministero della Salute and “5x1000” Istituto Oncologico Veneto grant. Portuguese Oncology Institute-Porto Breast Cancer Study (IPOBCS): Liga Portuguesa Contra o Cancro. Kathleen Cuningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (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. Korean Hereditary Breast Cancer Study (KOHBRA): the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), and the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI16C1127; 1020350; 1420190). Mayo Clinic (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 University (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). Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease (MODSQUAD): MH CZ—DRO (MMCI, 00209805), MEYS—NPS I—LO1413 to LF, and by Charles University in Prague project UNCE204024 (MZ). Memorial Sloane Kettering Cancer Center (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). Women’s College Research Institute Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study (NAROD): 1R01 CA149429-01. National Cancer Institute (NCI): the Intramural Research Program of the US NCI, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50, N02-CP-21013-63 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Inc, Rockville, MD. National Israeli Cancer Control Center (NICCC): Clalit Health Services in Israel, the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology (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. The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center (OSUCCG): Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Università di Pisa (PBCS): AIRC [IG 2013 N.14477] and Tuscany Institute for Tumors (ITT) grant 2014-2015-2016. South East Asian Breast Cancer Association Study (SEABASS): Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. Sheba Medical Centre (SMC): the Israeli Cancer Association. Swedish Breast Cancer Study (SWE-BRCA): the Swedish Cancer Society. University of Chicago (UCHICAGO): NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA125183), R01 CA142996, 1U01CA161032 and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women’s Cancer Research Alliance and the Breast Cancer research Foundation. OIO is an American Cancer Society (ACS) Clinical Research Professor. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA): Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation; Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California San Francisco (UCSF): UCSF Cancer Risk Program and Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry (UKFOCR): Cancer Research UK. University of Pennsylvania (UPENN): NIH (R01-CA102776 and R01-CA083855); Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Susan G. Komen Foundation for the cure, Basser Research Center for BRCA. Cancer Family Registry University of Pittsburg (UPITT/MWH): Hackers for Hope Pittsburgh. Victorian Familial Cancer Trials Group (VFCTG): Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, National Breast Cancer Foundation. Women’s Cancer Program at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (WCP): Dr Karlan is funded by the ACS Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), Grant UL1TR000124. TN-D is a recipient of a Career Development Fellow from the National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia, ECF-17-001).

IntroductionThe clinical impact on fertility in carriers ofBRCA1andBRCA2mutations remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess ovarian reserve as measured by anti-mullerian hormone levels inBRCA1orBRCA2mutation carriers, as well as to investigate the impact of anti-mullerian hormone levels on reproductive outcomes.MethodsThe study involved a cohort of women who tested positive forBRCA1andBRCA2screening or were tested for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 family mutation. Blood samples were collected for anti-mullerian hormone analysis and the reproductive outcomes were analyzed after a mean follow-up of 9 years. Participants were classified intoBRCAmutation-positive versusBRCAmutation-negative. Controls were healthy relatives who tested negative for the family mutation. All patients were contacted by telephone to collect data on reproductive outcomes. Linear regression was used to predict anti-mullerian hormone levels byBRCAstatus adjusted for a polynomial form of age.ResultsResults of anti-mullerian hormone analysis and reproductive outcomes were available for 135 women (BRCAmutation-negative, n=66;BRCA1mutation-positive, n=32;BRCA2mutation-positive, n=37). Anti-mullerian hormone curves according to BRCA status and adjusted by age showed thatBRCA2mutation-positive patients have lower levels of anti-mullerian hormone as compared withBRCA-negative and BRCA1 mutation-positive. Among the women who tried to conceive, infertility was observed in 18.7% ofBRCAmutation-negative women, in 22.2% ofBRCA1mutation-positive women, and in 30.8% ofBRCA2mutation-positive women (p=0.499). In the multivariable analysis, there were no factors independently associated with infertility.DiscussionBRCA2mutation-positive carriers showed more diminished anti-mullerian hormone levels thanBRCA1mutation-positive andBRCAmutation-negative women. However, these differences do not appear to have a negative impact on reproductive outcome. This is important to consider at the time of reproductive counseling in women withBRCA1orBRCA2mutations.

Multigene panels provide a powerful tool for analyzing several genes simultaneously. We evaluated the frequency of pathogenic variants (PV) in customized predefined panels according to clinical suspicion by phenotype and compared it to the yield obtained in the analysis of our clinical research gene panel. We also investigated mutational yield of opportunistic testing of BRCA1/2 and mismatch repair (MMR) genes in all patients. A total of 1,205 unrelated probands with clinical suspicion of hereditary cancer were screened for germline mutations using panel testing. Overall, 1,048 females and 157 males were analyzed, mean age at cancer diagnosis was 48; 883 had hereditary breast/ovarian cancer-suspicion, 205 hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)-suspicion, 73 adenomatous-polyposis-suspicion and 44 with other/multiple clinical criteria. At least one PV was found in 150 probands (12%) analyzed by our customized phenotype-driven panel. Tumoral MMR deficiency predicted for the presence of germline MMR gene mutations in patients with HNPCC-suspicion (46/136 vs. 0/56 in patients with and without MMR deficiency, respectively). Opportunistic testing additionally identified five MSH6, one BRCA1 and one BRCA2 carriers (0.6%). The analysis of the extended 24-gene panel provided 25 additional PVs (2%), including in 4 out of 51 individuals harboring MMR-proficient colorectal tumors (2 CHEK2 and 2 ATM). Phenotype-based panels provide a notable rate of PVs with clinical actionability. Opportunistic testing of MMR and BRCA genes leads to a significant straightforward identification of MSH6, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, and endorses the model of opportunistic testing of genes with clinical utility within a standard genetic counseling framework.

Knowledge of ectopic Cushing's syndrome (CS) due to thymic neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) comes from short series or single cases. Our aim is to perform a systematic review using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Ovid Medline and Biosis Previews of all cases with ectopic CS due to thymic NETs reported in the last 40 years and describe one illustrative patient attended in our institution. Search of literature: From 162 patients, 58.6% were male and mean age was 34.6 ± 13.9 years-old. Median of symptoms until diagnosis was 6 [2-24] months and 62% had aggressive CS. Imaging was positive in 93.7% (chest X-ray), 97.8% (computed tomography), 80.7% (somatostatin receptor scintigraphy) and median tumour size was 47 [25-68.5] mm. At presentation, 18% had localized disease, 26.2% locally invasive and 55.7% advanced. Eighty-eight present underwent surgery and histological subtypes were atypical (46.7%), typical (30.4%) and carcinoma (21.7%). Tumour persisted or recurred in 70.1%, 63% received radiotherapy and 45.2% chemotherapy. Follow-up median was 26.6 [14.5-57.5] months and mortality was reported in 35.8% with median survival of 38 [19-60] months. MEN-1 mutation was referred in 3.1%. Comparatively, carcinomas had aggressive CS more frequently while atypical showed advanced disease more often. In conclusion, thymic NETs causing ectopic CS are presented as aggressive hypercortisolism in the middle aged population. The disease is commonly extended at diagnosis and persists or recurs after surgery in most patients with a short term high mortality.

Colorectal (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC) are the most common types of cancer in Lynch syndrome (LS). Risk reducing surgeries (RRS) might impact cancer incidence and mortality. Our objectives were to evaluate cumulative incidences of CRC, gynecological cancer and all-cause mortality after RRS in LS individuals.Retrospective analysis of 976 LS carriers from a single-institution registry. Primary endpoints were cumulative incidence at 75 years of cancer (metachronous CRC in 425 individuals; EC and ovarian cancer (OC) in 531 individuals) and all-cause mortality cumulative incidence, comparing extended (ES) vs. segmental surgery (SS) in the CRC cohort and risk reducing gynecological surgery (RRGS) vs. surveillance in the gynecological cohort.Cumulative incidence at 75 years of metachronous CRC was 12.5% vs. 44.7% (RRS in LS reduces the incidence of metachronous CRC and gynecological neoplasms, also indicating a reduction in all-cause mortality cumulative incidence in females undergoing RRGS.

Author(s): Coignard, Juliette; Lush, Michael; Beesley, Jonathan; O'Mara, Tracy A; Dennis, Joe; Tyrer, Jonathan P; Barnes, Daniel R; McGuffog, Lesley; Leslie, Goska; Bolla, Manjeet K; Adank, Muriel A; Agata, Simona; Ahearn, Thomas; Aittomaki, Kristiina; Andrulis, Irene L; Anton-Culver, Hoda; Arndt, Volker; Arnold, Norbert; Aronson, Kristan J; Arun, Banu K; Augustinsson, Annelie; Azzollini, Jacopo; Barrowdale, Daniel; Baynes, Caroline; Becher, Heko; Bermisheva, Marina; Bernstein, Leslie; Bialkowska, Katarzyna; Blomqvist, Carl; Bojesen, Stig E; Bonanni, Bernardo; Borg, Ake; Brauch, Hiltrud; Brenner, Hermann; Burwinkel, Barbara; Buys, Saundra S; Caldes, Trinidad; Caligo, Maria A; Campa, Daniele; Carter, Brian D; Castelao, Jose E; Chang-Claude, Jenny; Chanock, Stephen J; Chung, Wendy K; Claes, Kathleen BM; Clarke, Christine L; GEMO Study Collaborators; EMBRACE Collaborators; Collee, J Margriet; Conroy, Don M; Czene, Kamila; Daly, Mary B; Devilee, Peter; Diez, Orland; Ding, Yuan Chun; Domchek, Susan M; Dork, Thilo; Dos-Santos-Silva, Isabel; Dunning, Alison M; Dwek, Miriam; Eccles, Diana M; Eliassen, A Heather; Engel, Christoph; Eriksson, Mikael; Evans, D Gareth; Fasching, Peter A; Flyger, Henrik; Fostira, Florentia; Friedman, Eitan; Fritschi, Lin; Frost, Debra; Gago-Dominguez, Manuela; Gapstur, Susan M; Garber, Judy; Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa; Garcia-Closas, Montserrat; Garcia-Saenz, Jose A; Gaudet, Mia M; Gayther, Simon A; Gehrig, Andrea; Georgoulias, Vassilios; Giles, Graham G; Godwin, Andrew K; Goldberg, Mark S; Goldgar, David E | Abstract: A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23162-4.

Background: CHEK2 variants are associated with intermediate breast cancer risk among other cancers. We aimed to comprehensively describe CHEK2 variants in a Spanish hereditary cancer (HC) cohort and adjust American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines for their classification. Methods: First, three CHEK2 frequent variants were screened in a retrospective Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer cohort of 516 patients. After, the whole CHEK2 coding region was analyzed by next-generation sequencing in 1,848 prospective patients with HC suspicion. We refined ACMGAMP criteria and applied different combinatorial rules to classify CHEK2 variants and define risk alleles. Results: We identified 10 CHEK2 null variants, 6 missense variants with discordant interpretation in ClinVar database, and 35 additional variants of unknown significance. Twelve variants were classified as (likely)-pathogenic; 2 can also be considered “established risk-alleles” and one as “likely risk-allele”. The prevalence of (likely)-pathogenic variants in the HC cohort was 0.8% (1.3% in breast cancer patients and 1.0% in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer patients). Conclusions: Here we provide ACMG adjustment guidelines to classify CHEK2 variants. We hope that this work would be useful for variant classification of other genes with low effect variants

Background CHEK2 variants are associated with intermediate breast cancer risk among other cancers. We aimed to comprehensively describe CHEK2 variants in a Spanish hereditary cancer (HC) cohort and adjust American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines for their classification. Methods First, three CHEK2 frequent variants were screened in a retrospective Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer cohort of 516 patients. After, the whole CHEK2 coding region was analyzed by next-generation sequencing in 1,848 prospective patients with HC suspicion. We refined ACMG-AMP criteria and applied different combined rules to classify CHEK2 variants and define risk alleles. Results We identified 10 CHEK2 null variants, 6 missense variants with discordant interpretation in ClinVar database, and 35 additional variants of unknown significance. Twelve variants were classified as (likely)-pathogenic; two can also be considered "established risk-alleles" and one as "likely risk-allele". The prevalence of (likely)-pathogenic variants in the HC cohort was 0.8% (1.3% in breast cancer patients and 1.0% in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer patients). Conclusions Here we provide ACMG adjustment guidelines to classify CHEK2 variants. We hope that this work would be useful for variant classification of other genes with low effect variants. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

RNA analyses are a potent tool to identify spliceogenic effects of DNA variants, although they are time-consuming and cannot always be performed. We present splicing assays of 20 variants that represent a variety of mutation types in 10 hereditary cancer genes and attempt to incorporate these results into American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) classification guidelines. Sixteen single-nucleotide variants, 3 exon duplications, and 1 single-exon deletion were selected and prioritized by in silico algorithms. RNA was extracted from short-term lymphocyte cultures to perform RT-PCR and Sanger sequencing, and allele-specific expression was assessed whenever possible. Aberrant transcripts were detected in 14 variants (70%). Variant interpretation was difficult, especially comparing old classification standards to generic ACMG guidelines and a proposal was devised to weigh functional analyses at RNA level. According to the ACMG guidelines, only 12 variants were reclassified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic because the other two variants did not gather enough evidence. This study highlights the importance of RNA studies to improve variant classification. However, it also indicates the challenge of incorporating these results into generic ACMG guidelines and the need to refine these criteria gene specifically. Nevertheless, 60% of variants were reclassified, thus improving genetic counseling and surveillance for carriers of these variants.

Fanconi anemia (FA) is caused by biallelic mutations in FA genes. Monoallelic mutations in five of these genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, BRIP1 and RAD51C) increase the susceptibility to breast/ovarian cancer and are used in clinical diagnostics as bona-fide hereditary cancer genes. Increasing evidence suggests that monoallelic mutations in other FA genes could predispose to tumor development, especially breast cancer. The objective of this study is to assess the mutational spectrum of 14 additional FA genes (FANCA, FANCB, FANCC, FANCD2, FANCE, FANCF, FANCG, FANCI, FANCL, FANCM, FANCP, FANCQ, FANCR and FANCU) in a cohort of hereditary cancer patients, to compare with local cancer-free controls as well as GnomAD. A total of 1021 hereditary cancer patients and 194 controls were analyzed using our next generation custom sequencing panel. We identified 35 pathogenic variants in eight genes. A significant association with the risk of breast cancer/breast and ovarian cancer was found for carriers of FANCA mutations (odds ratio (OR) = 3.14 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4&ndash, 6.17, p = 0.003). Two patients with early-onset cancer showed a pathogenic FA variant in addition to another germline mutation, suggesting a modifier role for FA variants. Our results encourage a comprehensive analysis of FA genes in larger studies to better assess their role in cancer risk.

[Lessons Learned] - Palbociclib demonstrated no detectable activity in molecularly unselected and heavily pretreated patients with advanced grade 1/2 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. - Predictive biomarkers that improve patient selection should be investigated in future studies of palbociclib., [Background] Palbociclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, has shown in vitro activity in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (pNET) cell lines. Here we prospectively assessed the activity and safety of palbociclib in monotherapy in metastatic refractory pNETs., [Methods] This was a nonrandomized, open‐label, phase II study of patients with metastatic grade (G)1/2 pNETs recruited from 10 centers in Spain. Palbociclib 125 mg was orally administered once daily for 21 of 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity., [Results] Twenty‐one patients were included; 52.4% were men, and median age was 57.4 years (range, 37.4–73.4). Patients had previously received a median of three prior lines of systemic therapy (range, 1–10) for advanced disease (somatostatin analogues, 71.4%; sunitinib, 81.0%; everolimus, 47.6%; chemotherapy, 47.6%). Nineteen patients were evaluated for objective response rate (ORR), with a median follow‐up of 12.4 months (range, 7.53–19.33). No objective and confirmed responses were observed (0%); 11 (57.9%) patients had stable disease, and 6 of them lasted more than 6 months; 8 (42.1%) patients had disease progression as best response. Median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 0–14.4) and median overall survival (OS) was 18.7 months (95% CI, 7.4–29.9; Fig. 1). Most frequent toxicities of any grade were asthenia (76.2%), neutropenia (42.9%), diarrhea (33.3%), and nausea (33.3%). Five (23.8%) patients developed G3–4 neutropenia and two (9.5%) patients developed G3–4 thrombocytopenia., [Conclusion] Lack of activity was observed with palbociclib as a single agent in molecularly unselected and heavily pretreated patients with advanced G1/2 pNETs., This work was supported by Pfizer Oncology.

1580 Background: HLRCC is a hereditary condition with autosomal dominant inheritance due to germline mutations in the fumarate-hydratase gene ( FH). It is characterized by skin leiomyomas (SLM) in 48-84% of individuals, uterine leiomyomas (ULM) in 30-72%, renal cysts (RCy) and renal cell cancer (RCC) in 15-34%. We aimed to describe the genetics, the clinical features and the potential genotype-phenotype associations in the largest cohort of FH mutation carriers from Spain. Methods: We performed a multicenter, observational, retrospective study of individuals with genetic or clinical diagnosis of HLRCC. We collected clinical information from medical records. We analyzed genetic variants and looked for genotype-phenotype associations. Statistical analyses were performed by IBM-SPSS Statistics-v.22. Results: We included 197 individuals (113 women, 84 men), 74 index cases and 123 relatives. Twenty-seven different variants were detected, 26 pathogenic (12 missense, 5 frameshift, 4 large-deletions, 3 splice-site and 2 nonsense) and 1 variant of unknown significance (missense). Of 182 patients with full skin examination, 64.8% presented SLM (median age 36 years; range 8-85). ULM were diagnosed in 90.3% of 103 women with gynecologic exam (median age 30 years; range 17- 55). Hysterectomy was performed in 62.9% (median age 34 years; range 21-54). Of 153 patients with radiological records, 37.3 % presented RCy. Nineteen patients (10.9%) presented RCC, 11 males and 8 females (median age 37 years; range 10-67). The histological diagnoses were: 14 papillary, of which 10 were type 2; 3 clear cell carcinoma and 2 unclassified carcinoma. Six tumors had stage I, 2 stage II, 3 stage III, 4 stage IV, and 4 not available. The median overall survival among patients at stages 3-4 was 2.9 years [1.3-4.5]. Patients with missense pathogenic variants showed higher risk of developing SLM (p = 0.043) and ULM (p = 0.002) than those with loss of function variants. Conclusions: In our cohort, the frequency of RCC (10.9%) is lower than that published in cohorts of similar sample size. The most frequent histology was the papillary type-2; however, other histological patterns do not exclude HLRCC. Individuals with missense pathogenic variants show higher incidence of SLM and ULM.

The clinical spectrum of germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene variants continues increasing, encompassing Lynch syndrome, Constitutional MMR Deficiency (CMMRD), and the recently reported MSH3-associated polyposis. Genetic diagnosis of these hereditary cancer syndromes is often hampered by the presence of variants of unknown significance (VUS) and overlapping phenotypes. Two PMS2 VUS, c.2149G>A (p.V717M) and c.2444C>T (p.S815L), were identified in trans in one individual diagnosed with early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) who belonged to a family fulfilling clinical criteria for hereditary cancer. Clinico-pathological data, multifactorial likelihood calculations and functional analyses were used to refine their clinical significance. Likelihood analysis based on cosegregation and tumor data classified the c.2444C>T variant as pathogenic, which was supported by impaired MMR activity associated with diminished protein expression in functional assays. Conversely, the c.2149G>A variant displayed MMR proficiency and protein stability. These results, in addition to the conserved PMS2 expression in normal tissues and the absence of germline microsatellite instability (gMSI) in the biallelic carrier ruled out a CMMRD diagnosis. The use of comprehensive strategies, including functional and clinico-pathological information, is mandatory to improve the clinical interpretation of naturally occurring MMR variants. This is critical for appropriate clinical management of cancer syndromes associated to MMR gene mutations.

The clinical impact on fertility in carriers ofThe study involved a cohort of women who tested positive forResults of anti-mullerian hormone analysis and reproductive outcomes were available for 135 women (

The multifactorial likelihood analysis method has demonstrated utility for quantitative assessment of variant pathogenicity for multiple cancer syndrome genes. Independent data types currently incorporated in the model for assessing BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants include clinically calibrated prior probability of pathogenicity based on variant location and bioinformatic prediction of variant effect, co-segregation, family cancer history profile, co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant in the same gene, breast tumor pathology, and case-control information. Research and clinical data for multifactorial likelihood analysis were collated for 1,395 BRCA1/2 predominantly intronic and missense variants, enabling classification based on posterior probability of pathogenicity for 734 variants: 447 variants were classified as (likely) benign, and 94 as (likely) pathogenic; and 248 classifications were new or considerably altered relative to ClinVar submissions. Classifications were compared with information not yet included in the likelihood model, and evidence strengths aligned to those recommended for ACMG/AMP classification codes. Altered mRNA splicing or function relative to known nonpathogenic variant controls were moderately to strongly predictive of variant pathogenicity. Variant absence in population datasets provided supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. These findings have direct relevance for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant evaluation, and justify the need for gene-specific calibration of evidence types used for variant classification., Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center Barretos Cancer Hospital. Grant Number: FINEP ‐ CT‐INFRA (02/2010) Breast Cancer Foundation of New Zealand Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Grant Number: PSR‐SIIRI‐701 Cancer Research UK. Grant Numbers: C8197/A16565, C5047/A8384, C1281/A12014, C12292/A11174, C1287/A10710, C1287/A10118, C1287/A16563, C5047/A10692, C5047/A15007 Department of Defence, USA. Grant Number: W81XWH‐10‐1‐0341 Helsinki University Hospital Research fund Scientific Foundation Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer Leiden University Medical Centre. Grant Number: Grant 30.925 Generalitat de Catalunya. Grant Numbers: PERIS_MedPerCan, URDCat, 2017SGR1282, 2017SGR496 Royal Society of New Zealand Cancer Council Victoria Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Grant Number: Grant 017.008.022 Breast Cancer Research Foundation Cancer Foundation of Western Australia EU H2020. Grant Number: 634935 Fundación Mutua Madrileña Seventh Framework Programme. Grant Numbers: 634935, 223175, 633784 Cancer Council South Australia Government of Galicia. Grant Number: Consolidation and structuring program: IN607B Cancer Council Tasmania Italian Association of Cancer Research. Grant Number: 15547 Queensland Cancer Fund AstraZeneca National Institute of Health (USA). Grant Numbers: 1U19 CA148065‐01, CA128978, CA192393, 1U19 CA148537, P50 CA1162091, CA116167, 1U19 CA148112 Newcastle University Dutch Cancer Society KWF. Grant Numbers: KWF/Pink Ribbon‐11704, UL2012‐5649 National Institute for Health Research. Grant Number: Manchester Biomedical Research centre (IS‐BRC‐1215 National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) Instituto de Salud Carlos III. Grant Numbers: FIS PI15/00355, FIS PI13/01711, CIBERONC, FIS PI16/01218, PI16/00563 French National Institute of Cancer National Breast Cancer Foundation National Health and Medical Research Council. Grant Numbers: ID1061778, ID1104808 Carlos III National Health Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enferemdades Raras. Grant Number: ACCI 2016: ER17P1AC7112/2018 Cancer Council NSW Deutsche Krebshilfe. Grant Numbers: (#110837, #70111850 Fondazione Pisa. Grant Number: Grant “Clinical characterization of BRCA 1/2 Mis

Background Mutations in the POT 1 gene explain abnormally long telomeres and multiple tumors including cardiac angiosarcomas ( CAS ). However, the link between long telomeres and tumorigenesis is poorly understood. Methods and Results Here, we have studied the somatic landscape of 3 different angiosarcoma patients with mutations in the POT 1 gene to further investigate this tumorigenesis process. In addition, the genetic landscape of 7 CAS patients without mutations in the POT 1 gene has been studied. Patients with CAS and nonfunctional POT 1 did not repress ATR (ataxia telangiectasia RAD3‐related)–dependent DNA damage signaling and showed a constitutive increase of cell cycle arrest and somatic activating mutations in the VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor)/angiogenesis pathway ( KDR gene). The same observation was made in POT 1 mutation carriers with tumors different from CAS and also in CAS patients without mutations in the POT 1 gene but with mutations in other genes involved in DNA damage signaling. Conclusions Inhibition of POT 1 function and damage‐response malfunction activated DNA damage signaling and increased cell cycle arrest as well as interfered with apoptosis, which would permit acquisition of somatic mutations in the VEGF /angiogenesis pathway that drives tumor formation. Therapies based on the inhibition of damage signaling in asymptomatic carriers may diminish defects on cell cycle arrest and thus prevent the apoptosis deregulation that leads to the acquisition of driver mutations.

4113 Background: Predictive biomarkers of response to antiangiogenics currently remain elusive, with several molecules discovered but not fully validated nor clinically applied. TALENT trial is a multicenter prospective phase II study of lenvatinib, a VEGFR1-3 and FGFR1-4 multikinase inhibitor (MKI), in advanced G1/G2 neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) from pancreatic (panNETs) and gastrointestinal (giNETs) origins, which has reported the highest overall response rate (ORR) by central radiology assessment with a MKI in this setting. Here we report the plasma biomarker study. Methods: Proangiogenic profiling of plasma samples from patients included in the trial were analyzed by multiplex ELISA (custom made Quantibody Array, RayBiotech). Quantitative determinations of VEGF-A, FGF2, FGF4, Ang2, IL8, PlGF, VEGF-C, VEGF-D and VEGFR2 were obtained from 85 samples of sufficient quality (out of 111 patients included in the study). Association and prediction of response were evaluated for each biomarker and correlated with PFS, OS and ORR in all patients and the different subgroups included in the trial. Results: While none of the factors were able to discriminate PFS or OS in the whole population, a significant association of high-Ang2 and low-FGF2 to ORR was observed. Subgroup analysis confirmed this association in the two cohorts of patients, giNETs (p = 0.003) and panNETs (p = 0.024). In the panNET cohort, prior targeted therapy was mandatory. Prior sunitinib exposure was observed in 8 patients. Of the factors studied, Ang2 and VEGFR2 were significantly decreased in plasma from sunitinib-pretreated patients (-73% p = 0.022 and -62% p = 0.042 respectively). Furthermore, in these sunitinib-pretreated patients Ang-2 and VEGFR2 levels associated to ORR (p = 0.029 and p = 0.029 respectively) and were able to discriminate PFS (log rank p = 0.027 and 0.007 respectively). ROC curve analysis defined Ang2 and VEGFR2 plasma levels with optimal predictive power to be 415pg/ml and 1770pg/ml respectively (p = 0.021). Conclusions: Plasma proangiogenic profiling of TALENT patient samples unraveled high-Ang2 and low-FGF2 as predictive biomarkers of response to lenvatinib in both cohorts. In antiangiogenic-pretreated patients, Ang2 and VEGFR2 levels significantly predict response to treatment in panNETs. Importantly, current studies with MKIs should confirm the value of these markers for advanced NETs not only to predict response, but also to stablish sequential treatment options for these patients.

360 Background: Angiogenesis plays an important role in NET development and progression. Axitinib is a potent and selective VEGFR-1,2,3 inhibitor, with proven activity against several vascular-dependent solid tumors. The aim of this randomized, double-blind phase II/III study was to assess the efficacy of axitinib in patients with advanced G1-2 extra-pancreatic NETs. Methods: Eligible pts were randomized (1:1) to receive octreotide LAR (30 mg IM q4w) with axitinib (5 mg BID) or placebo BID until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pteswere stratified by time from diagnosis to study entry ( > or < 12m), primary tumor site (GI tract vs non-GI) and Ki-67 index (< 5% vs > 5%). Prior therapy with SSA, IFN and up to 2 lines of systemic treatment was allowed, but not prior VEGF- or VEGFR-targeted drugs. Clinical and/or radiological disease progression within 12 months prior to study entry was required. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), time to progression, overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, biochemical response and safety. Results: 256 pts were randomized (106 in the Phase II part, and 150 additional pts in the Phase III part), 126 to axitinib and 130 to placebo. The main characteristics of the study population were: median age 61 years (range: 21-85), 52% male, PS 0-1 (64-35%), G1-2 (29%-71%), primary tumor site GI (40%)-Lung (17%)-Other (32%). Prior therapies included: SSA (46%), everolimus (13%), chemotherapy (13%), TACE (5%) and PRRT (2%). ORR was significantly higher in axitinib- vs placebo-treated patients (17.5% vs 3.8%, p = 0.0004). PFS per investigator assessment also favored axitinib vs placebo-treated patients, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (median PFS 17.2 vs 12.3 months, respectively, HR 0.816, p = 0.169). Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs occurred more frequently in the axitinib vs placebo arm (52% vs 13.8%), and included hypertension (21% vs 6 %), cardiac disorders (3.2% vs 0.7%), diarrhoea (13% vs 1.5 %), asthenia (9% vs 3%) and nausea&vomiting (2% vs 0.7%). There were 3 treatment-related deaths, 1 in the axitinib arm (cardiac failure) and 2 in the placebo arm (myocardial infarction and hepatorenal syndrome). Conclusions: Although the study failed to demonstrate a significant PFS benefit per investigator assessment, axitinib in combination with octreotide LAR demonstrated activity and had a tolerable safety profile in patients with advanced G1-2 extra-pancreatic NETs. Data base cleaning and central blinded radiological PFS assessment are currently ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01744249.

Female BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and/or ovarian cancer, and are offered enhanced surveillance including screening from a young age and risk-reducing surgery (RRS)-mastectomy (RRM) and/or salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). While there are established guidelines for early detection of breast cancer in high-risk women who have not undergone RRM, there are less developed guidelines after RRM. We evaluated the schemes offered before and after RRS in internationally diverse high-risk clinics. An e-mailed survey was distributed to high-risk clinics affiliated with CIMBA. Overall, 22 centers from 16 countries responded. Pre RRS surveillance schemes overwhelmingly included breast imaging (primarily MRI) from 18 to 30 years and clinical breast exam (CBE) at 6-12 month intervals. For ovarian cancer, all but 6 centers offered semiannual/annual gynecological exam, transvaginal ultrasound, and CA 125 measurements. Post RRM, most centers offered only annual CBE while 4 centers offered annual MRI, primarily for substantial residual breast tissue. After RRSO only 4 centers offered specific gynecological surveillance. Existing guidelines for breast/ovarian cancer detection in BRCA carriers are being applied pre RRS but are not globally harmonized, and most centers offer no specific surveillance post RRS. From this comprehensive multinational study it is clear that evidence-based, long-term prospective data on the most effective scheme for BRCA carriers post RRS is needed.

Background: Colorectal (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC) are the most common types of cancer in Lynch syndrome (LS). Risk reducing surgeries (RRS) might impact cancer incidence and mortality. Our objectives were to evaluate cumulative incidences of CRC, gynecological cancer and all-cause mortality after RRS in LS individuals. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 976 LS carriers from a single-institution registry. Primary endpoints were cumulative incidence at 75 years of cancer (metachronous CRC in 425 individuals, EC and ovarian cancer (OC) in 531 individuals) and all-cause mortality cumulative incidence, comparing extended (ES) vs. segmental surgery (SS) in the CRC cohort and risk reducing gynecological surgery (RRGS) vs. surveillance in the gynecological cohort. Results: Cumulative incidence at 75 years of metachronous CRC was 12.5% vs. 44.7% (p = 0.04) and all-cause mortality cumulative incidence was 38.6% vs. 55.3% (p = 0.31), for ES and SS, respectively. Cumulative, incidence at 75 years was 11.2% vs. 46.3% for EC (p = 0.001) and 0% vs. 12.7% for OC (p N/A) and all-cause mortality cumulative incidence was 0% vs. 52.7% (p N/A), for RRGS vs. surveillance, respectively. Conclusions: RRS in LS reduces the incidence of metachronous CRC and gynecological neoplasms, also indicating a reduction in all-cause mortality cumulative incidence in females undergoing RRGS.

e16706 Background: MEN1, DAXX, ATRX, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway genes are frequently mutated in pNETs. Sunitinib is approved and widely used in the metastatic setting but unfortunately, no validated predictive biomarker has been identified to guide therapy yet. The SUNEVO phase II trial of the Spanish Task Force Group for Neuroendocrine and Endocrine Tumours (GETNE) trial combined the pro-drug of EVO under SUN-induced hypoxic conditions. Methods: We performed an exploratory analysis aimed to identify somatic mutations associated with the clinical benefit of pNET patients treated with SUN+EVO combination. Seventeen treatment-naïve pts with pNETS were included in the SUNEVO trial, and 4 (23.5%) achieved a partial response (by RECIST 1.1). Tumor DNA from 10 FFPE tumor samples were successfully sequenced with an enrichment panel (Nimblegen, Roche) including 42 cancer-related genes and TERT promoter region. Median coverage was 793x. Coding non-synonymous and loss-of-function variants were considered for the analysis. Final analysis included tumor samples from the 10 patients with NGS results. Results: Somatic mutations were found in MEN1 (70%), DAXX (30%), ATRX (20%), SETD2 (20%) and PTEN (10%). Mutations in the telomere maintenance genes DAXX and ATRX were concordant with mutual exclusivity. The loss of MEN1 was associated with a greater number of mutations (p = 0.019). Patients with complete and partial response showed heterogeneous genetic profiles. Conclusions: The molecular alterations of the patients in the SUNEVO trial were consistent with those previously described for metastatic pNETs. No clear association between molecular defects and treatment response was found. Clinical trial information: NCT02402062 .

The prevalence and spectrum of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in single populations, with the majority of reports focused on White in Europe and North America. The Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) has assembled data on 18,435 families with BRCA1 mutations and 11,351 families with BRCA2 mutations ascertained from 69 centers in 49 countries on six continents. This study comprehensively describes the characteristics of the 1,650 unique BRCA1 and 1,731 unique BRCA2 deleterious (disease-associated) mutations identified in the CIMBA database. We observed substantial variation in mutation type and frequency by geographical region and race/ethnicity. In addition to known founder mutations, mutations of relatively high frequency were identified in specific racial/ethnic or geographic groups that may reflect founder mutations and which could be used in targeted (panel) first pass genotyping for specific populations. Knowledge of the population-specific mutational spectrum in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could inform efficient strategies for genetic testing and may justify a more broad-based oncogenetic testing in some populations.

Plexiform neurofibromas (PNFs) are benign peripheral nerve sheath tumors involving large nerves present in 30%-50% Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) patients. Atypical neurofibromas (ANF) are distinct nodular lesions with atypical features on histology that arise from PNFs. The risk and timeline of malignant transformation in ANF is difficult to assess. A recent NIH workshop has stratified ANFs and separated a subgroup with multiple atypical features and higher risk of malignant transformation termed atypical neurofibromatous neoplasms with uncertain biological potential (ANNUBP). We performed an analysis of intratumor heterogeneity on eight PNFs to link histological and genomic findings. Tumors were homogeneous although histological and molecular heterogeneity was identified. All tumors were 2n, almost mutation-free and had a clonal NF1(-/-) origin. Two ANFs from the same patient showed atypical features on histology and deletions of CDKN2A/B. One of the ANFs exhibited different areas in which the degree of histological atypia correlated with the heterozygous or homozygous loss of the CDKN2A/B loci. CDKN2A/B deletions in different areas originated independently. Results may indicate that loss of a single CDKN2A/B copy in NF1(-/-) cells is sufficient to start ANF development and that total inactivation of both copies of CDKN2A/B is necessary to form an ANNUBP.

Common variants in 94 loci have been associated with breast cancer including 15 loci with genome-wide significant associations (P, B.C.A.C. was funded through a European Community Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement no 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175; COGS); Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692); the National Institutes of Health Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), R01 grants (CA128978, CA176785, CA192393), and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAME-ON initiative); the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, the Breast Cancer Res. Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. CIMBA genotyping was supported by National Institutes of Health grant (CA128978); the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341); and the Breast Cancer Res. Foundation. CIMBA data management and data analysis were supported by Cancer Research UK grants C12292/A11174 and C1287/A10118. This study made use of data generated by the Wellcome Trust Case Control consortium. Functional studies were supported by the Florida Breast Cancer Foundation. A full description of funding and acknowledgments is provided in Supplementary Note 1.

BackgroundGastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are a complex family of tumors of widely variable clinical behavior. The World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 classification provided a valuable tool to stratify neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) in three prognostic subgroups based on the proliferation index. However, substantial heterogeneity remains within these subgroups, and simplicity sometimes entails an ambiguous and imprecise prognostic stratification. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of histological differentiation within the WHO 2010 grade (G) 1/G2/G3 categories, and explore additional Ki-67 cutoff values in GEP-NENs.Subjects, Materials, and MethodsA total of 2,813 patients from the Spanish National Tumor Registry (RGETNE) were analyzed. Cases were classified by histological differentiation as NETs (neuroendocrine tumors [well differentiated]) or NECs (neuroendocrine carcinomas [poorly differentiated]), and by Ki-67 index as G1 (Ki-67 20%). Patients were stratified into five cohorts: NET-G1, NET-G2, NET-G3, NEC-G2, and NEC-G3.ResultsFive-year survival was 72%. Age, gender, tumor site, grade, differentiation, and stage were all independent prognostic factors for survival. Further subdivision of the WHO 2010 grading improved prognostic stratification, both within G2 (5-year survival: 81% [Ki-67 3%–5%], 72% [Ki-67 6%–10%], 52% [Ki-67 11%–20%]) and G3 NENs (5-year survival: 35% [Ki-67 21%–50%], 22% [Ki-67 51%–100%]). Five-year survival was significantly greater for NET-G2 versus NEC-G2 (75.5% vs. 58.2%) and NET-G3 versus NEC-G3 (43.7% vs. 25.4%).ConclusionSubstantial clinical heterogeneity is observed within G2 and G3 GEP-NENs. The WHO 2010 classification can be improved by including the additive effect of histological differentiation and the proliferation index.Implications for PracticeGastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms are tumors of widely variable clinical behavior, roughly stratified by the World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 classification into three subgroups based on proliferation index. Real-world data from 2,813 patients of the Spanish Registry RGETNE demonstrated substantial clinical heterogeneity within grade (G) 2 and G3 neuroendocrine neoplasms. Tumor morphology and further subdivision of grading substantially improves prognostic stratification of these patients and may help individualize therapy. This combined, additive effect shall be considered in future classifications of neuroendocrine tumors and incorporated for stratification purposes in clinical trials.

Acknowledgements: We thank all patients who contributed to this study. The work was supported by grants from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII, MINECO) (operating grants: PI13/00285 and RD12/0036/0008 awarded to C.L. and PIE13/00022 and RD12/0036/0031 awarded to G.C.) and confunded by FEDER funds/European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - a way to Build Europe-"// FONDOS FEDER "una manera de hacer Europa", the Generalitat de Catalunya (Government of Catalonia) (operating grant 2014SGR338, awarded to G.C.) and the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (operating grants, 2010 Grupos Estables, awarded to G.C.). J.B. received a Spanish Society of Medical Oncology grant. This activity is sponsored by the ISCIII Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (PT13/0001/0044). Next generation sequencing panels have been developed for hereditary cancer, although there is some debate about their cost-effectiveness compared to exome sequencing. The performance of two panels is compared to exome sequencing. Twenty-four patients were selected: ten with identified mutations (control set) and fourteen suspicious of hereditary cancer but with no mutation (discovery set). TruSight Cancer (94 genes) and a custom panel (122 genes) were assessed alongside exome sequencing. Eightythree genes were targeted by the two panels and exome sequencing. More than 99% of bases had a read depth of over 30x in the panels, whereas exome sequencing covered 94%. Variant calling with standard settings identified the 10 mutations in the control set, with the exception of MSH6 c.255dupC using TruSight Cancer. In the discovery set, 240 unique non-silent coding and canonic splice-site variants were identified in the panel genes, 7 of them putatively pathogenic (in ATM, BARD1, CHEK2, ERCC3, FANCL, FANCM, MSH2). The three approaches identified a similar number of variants in the shared genes. Exomes were more expensive than panels but provided additional data. In terms of cost and depth, panels are a suitable option for genetic diagnostics, although exomes also identify variants in non-targeted genes.

The POT1 protein binds and protects telomeres. Germline variants in the POT1 gene have recently been shown to be associated with risk of developing tumors in different tissues such as familial chronic lymphocytic leukemia, colorectal, glioma and melanoma tumors. Recently, we uncovered a variant in the POT1 gene (p.R117C) as causative of familial cardiac angiosarcomas (CAS) in Li-Fraumeni-like (LFL) syndrome families. Our in silico studies predicted that this protein had lost the ability to interact with TPP1 and single-stranded DNA. In vitro studies corroborated this prediction and showed that this lack of function leads to abnormally long telomeres. To better understand the POT1 gene and its role with tumorigenesis, we extended the study to LFL (with and without members affected with angiosarcomas (AS)) and sporadic AS and cardiac sarcomas. We found POT1 variants in the 20% of the families with members affected with AS and 10% of sporadic AS and sarcomas. In silico studies predicted that these new variants were damaging in the same manner as previously described for the POT1 p.R117C variants. The wide spectrum of variants in the POT1 gene leading to tumorigenesis in different tissues demonstrates its general importance. Study of the POT1 gene should be considered as routine diagnostic in these cancers.

PURPOSE: Cis-acting regulatory SNPs resulting in differential allelic expression (DAE) may, in part, explain the underlying phenotypic variation associated with many complex diseases. To investigate whether common variants associated with DAE were involved in breast cancer susceptibility among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, a list of 175 genes was developed based of their involvement in cancer-related pathways. METHODS: Using data from a genome-wide map of SNPs associated with allelic expression, we assessed the association of ~320 SNPs located in the vicinity of these genes with breast and ovarian cancer risks in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained from 54 studies participating in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2. RESULTS: We identified a region on 11q22.3 that is significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (most significant SNP rs228595 p = 7 × 10-6). This association was absent in BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.57). The 11q22.3 region notably encompasses genes such as ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. Expression quantitative trait loci associations were observed in both normal breast and tumors across this region, namely for ACAT1, ATM, and other genes. In silico analysis revealed some overlap between top risk-associated SNPs and relevant biological features in mammary cell data, which suggests potential functional significance. CONCLUSION: We identified 11q22.3 as a new modifier locus in BRCA1 carriers. Replication in larger studies using estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk. Funding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from 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, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. BCFR: this work was supported by Grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute. BFBOCC was supported by Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT): Research Council of Lithuania Grant SEN-18/2015. BIDMC was supported by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA) was supported by Grants from the Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA) to Elizabeth J. van Rensburg. BRICOH: SLN was partially supported by the Morris and Horowitz Families Endowed Professorship. CNIO: this work was partially supported by Spanish Association Against Cancer (AECC08), RTICC 06/0020/1060, FISPI08/1120, Mutua Madrilena Foundation (FMMA), and SAF2010-20493. COH-CCGCRN: patients were recruited for this study from the City of Hope Clinical Cancer Genomics Community Research Network, supported in part by Award Number RC4CA153828 (PI: J. Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. CONSIT Team: Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) to P. Peterlongo (IG 2012 Id. 12821) and P. Radice (IG 2014 Id. 15547). Funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5 9 1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional Strategic Projects '5x1000') to S. Manoukian. FiorGen Foundation for Pharmacogenomics to L. Papi. CORE: 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 is an NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellow. J. Lecarpentier has been financially supported by the Fondation ARC (FONDATION ARC, 9 rue Guy Moquet 94803 Villejuif: France), Grant Number SAE20131200623. This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the "CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer" Program: Grant No. CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade: Grant No. PSR-SIIRI-701. The PERSPECTIVE Project was supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Ministere de l'Economie, Innovation et Exportation du Quebec through Genome Quebec, and The Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation. This work was also supported by the Ministere de l'Economie, Innovation et Exportation du Quebec: Grant No. PSR-SIIRI-701. DEMOKRITOS: this research has been co-financed by the 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 and Technology: SYN11_10_19 NBCA. Investing in Knowledge Society through the European Social Fund. The DKFZ Study was supported by the DKFZ. EMBRACE was supported by Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo were 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 were 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 were supported by Cancer Research UK Grant C5047/A8385. Ros Eeles was 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 authors acknowledge the support from The University of Kansas Cancer Center (P30 CA168524) and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. A.K.G. was funded by 5U01CA113916, R01CA140323, and by the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professorship. The German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) was supported by the German Cancer Aid (Grant No. 110837, Rita K. Schmutzler). This work was supported by 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: the study was supported by the 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). GEORGETOWN: CI received support from the Non-therapeutic Subject Registry Shared Resource at Georgetown University (NIH/NCI Grant P30-CA051008), the Fisher Center for Hereditary Cancer and Clinical GenomicsResearch, and Swing Fore the Cure. G-FAST: Bruce Poppe is a Senior Clinical Investigator of FWO. Mattias Van Heetvelde obtained funding from IWT. HCSC was supported by a Grant RD12/0036/0006 and 15/00059 from ISCIII (Spain), partially supported by European Regional Development FEDER Funds. The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (266528), the Finnish Cancer Society and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. HEBON Study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society Grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, and NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organization 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. HEBON thanks the Registration Teams of Dutch Cancer Registry (IKNL; S. Siesling, J. Verloop) and the Dutch Pathology database (PALGA; L. Overbeek) for their help in part of the data collection. HRBCP was supported by the Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Dr. Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, The Kerry Group Kuok Foundation, National Institute of Health 1R 03CA130065, and North California Cancer Center. Hungarian Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study (HUNBOCS) was supported by Hungarian Research Grants KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and OTKA K-112228. ICO: Contract Grant Sponsor: Asociacion Espanola Contra el Cancer, Spanish Health Research Fund; Carlos III Health Institute; Catalan Health Institute and Autonomous Government of Catalonia. Contract Grant Numbers: ISCIIIRETIC RD06/0020/1051, RD12/0036/008, PI10/01422, PI10/00748, PI13/00285, PIE13/00022, 2009SGR290, and 2014SGR364. The IHCC was supported by Grant PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. The ILUH Group was supported by the Icelandic Association "Walking for Breast Cancer Research" and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INHERIT: this work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the "CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer" Program: Grant No. CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade: Grant No. PSR-SIIRI-701. The PERSPECTIVE Project was supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Grant GPH-129344), the Ministere de l'Economie, Science et Innovation du Quebec through Genome Quebec, and the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation. IOVHBOCS was supported by Ministero della Salute and "5x1000" Istituto Oncologico Veneto Grant. IPOBCS: this study was in part supported by Liga Portuguesa Contra o Cancro. kConFab was supported by a Grant from 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. KOHBRA was supported by a Grant from the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs, Republic of Korea (1020350). MAYO was supported by 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. MODSQUAD was supported by MH CZ: DRO (MMCI, 00209805) 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 was supported by Grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, and the Andrew Sabin Research Fund. NAROD: 1R01 CA149429-01. NCI: the research of Drs. MH Greene and PL Mai was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute, NIH, and by Support Services Contracts NO2-CP-11019-50 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Inc., Rockville, MD. NICCC was supported by Clalit Health Services in Israel. Some of its activities were supported by the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. NNPIO: this work has been supported by the Russian Federation for Basic Research (Grants 15-04-01744 and 16-54-00055). NRG Oncology: this study was supported by NRG Oncology Operations Grant Number U10 CA180868 as well as NRG SDMC Grant U10 CA180822, Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Administrative Office and the GOG Tissue Bank (CA 27469), and the GOG Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517). Drs. Greene, Mai, and Savage were supported by Funding from the Intramural Research Program, NCI. OSUCCG was supported by the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. PBCS: this work was supported by the 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. The SMC Team was in part sponsored by a Grant from the Israeli Cancer Association to the Israeli Consortium of Hereditary Breast Cancer. SWE-BRCA Collaborators were supported by the Swedish Cancer Society. UCHICAGO was supported by NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA125183), R01 CA142996, 1U01CA161032, and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women's Cancer Research Alliance, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. OIO is an ACS Clinical Research Professor. UCLA: Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation; Breast Cancer Research Foundation. UCSF: UCSF Cancer Risk Program and Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. UKFOCR was supported by a Project Grant from CRUK to Paul Pharoah. UPENN: National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01-CA102776 and R01-CA083855; Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, Basser Research Center for BRCA. VFCTG: Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, National Breast Cancer Foundation. WCP: Dr. Karlan was 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. Sí

Early-onset diagnosis is an eligibility criterion for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) testing in sporadic breast cancer patients. Limited family structure has been proposed as a predictor of BRCA mutation status in this group of patients. An overwhelming amount of data supports a strong association between BRCA1 mutations and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we analyze the feasibility of using limited family structure and TNBC as predictors of BRCA mutation status in early-onset breast cancer patients attending genetic counseling units. We have conducted the study in a cohort of sporadic early-onset (≤35 years) breast cancer patients (N = 341) previously selected for BRCA genetic testing in Academic Hereditary Cancer Clinics from Spain. A retrospective review of medical records available at the time of risk assessment allowed us classifying patients according to family structure and TNBC. In addition, BRCAPRO score was calculated for all patients. Association between categorical variables was investigated using the Fisher’s exact test. Binary Logistic Regression Analysis was used for multivariate analysis. Limited family structure (OR 3.61, p = 0.013) and TNBC (OR 3.14, p = 0.013) were independent predictors of BRCA mutation status. Mutation prevalence in the subgroup of patients with at least one positive predictor was 14 %, whereas it dropped to 3 % in non-TNBCs with adequate family history (OR 5.31, 95 % CI 1.38–23.89, p = 0.006). BRCAPRO correctly discerned between limited and adequate family structures. Limited family structure and TNBC are feasible predictors of BRCA mutation status in sporadic early-onset (≤35 years) breast cancer patients attending genetic counseling units. The low prevalence of mutations observed in non-TNBCs with adequate family structure suggests that this subgroup of patients might be excluded from genetic testing., This work was supported by research Grants (PI12/00539) to M. de la Hoya, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation & Eurpean Regional Development Fund (ERDF) ‘‘A way to make Europe’’, research grants (RD06/0020/1051 and RD12/0036/008) from Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cáncer (RTICC) to E. Diaz-Rubio, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation & Eurpean Regional Development Fund (ERDF) ‘‘A way to make Europe’’, research Grant (10PXIB 9101297PR), Xunta de Galicia, and research grant FMM Foundation to A. Vega.

4109 Background: Retrospective data in some cancer types suggested a possible different toxicity profile with chemotherapy and targeted therapies according to gender. However, data from prospective studies are still very limited, especially in infrequent tumors such as NETs. Methods: Pts with advanced pancreatic and gastrointestinal NETs treated with pazopanib or lenvatinib in the multicenter open-label phase II studies PAZONET and TALENT respectively, were included in the analysis. Both studies were performed by Spanish Task Force Group for Neuroendocrine Tumors (GETNE). All toxicity grades with an incidence higher than 5% were considered for univariate review. Additionally, all grade 3-4 toxicities were analyzed separately. Results: 155 pts (47.7% female) with 1213 adverse events (AEs) (20% G3-4) divided in 121 categories were included. In female patients, liver toxicity, headache, pyrexia, nausea/vomiting, hair/skin disorders and dizziness were significantly more common (table). The only toxicity with higher incidence in men was dysphonia (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, p 0.02). There were no gender differences in grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusions: We observed significant differences in toxicity AEs by gender in two prospective phase II studies with MKIs in NETs patients. Potential different approach to manage toxicity may be adopted based on gender. [Table: see text]

4105 Background: Angiogenesis plays an important role in tumorigenesis and progression of pNETs. Evofosfamide (EVO) is a DNA alkylator prodrug that selectively activates under hypoxia. Sunitinib as monotherapy shows a wide range of responses (9-24%) in similar populations. We hypothesized that sunitinib-induced hypoxia might increase the cytotoxic activity of EVO in patients with metastatic pNETS and naïve for systemic treatment other than somatostatin analogues (SSA). Methods: This is a phase-II, single-arm, and multicenter trial of EVO (340mg/m2 on days 8, 15 and 22 every 4 weeks) and sunitinib (37.5mg/day continuously). Primary endpoint was Objective Response Rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1 assessed every 8 weeks. A Simon two-stage optimal design was used, considering a minimum of 3 responses in the first 18 pts in order to start with the second stage (power = 0.80, alpha = 0.05). Results: Between May/2015 and May/2018, 17 pts were included (median age was 62.4 y.o). Prior SSA was reported in 7 (41.2%) pts and 8 (47.1%) had a Ki-67 > 10%. There were 2 responders (11.8%; n = 1 complete and n = 1 partial response); stable disease was observed in 76.5%. Median (range) PFS and duration of response were 10.4 months (m) (2.9-17.9m) and, respectively 24.4m (13.7-35.2m), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 (64.7%) pts, being neutropenia (33.3%), fatigue (16.7%), thrombocytopenia (11.1%), hand-foot syndrome (5.6%), and pancreatitis (5.6%) the most frequent. Toxicity led to treatment discontinuation in 5 (38.5%) pts. Dose reductions were reported in 20% (sunitinib) and 100 % (EVO) of pts. Conclusions: Combination of sunitinib and EVO failed to demonstrate activity in terms of tumor shrinkage as only two patients achieved response, therefore, second stage was not proceeded. While cross trial comparisons are difficult, response rate of 12% with the combination was disappointing. Concerns over toxicity arose; translational analysis are undergoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02402062.

4106 Background: Approved systemic therapies for advanced NETs have showed limited tumor shrinkage and no data of activity after progression to prior targeted agents (TA) is available. Lenvatinib, a potent VEGFR1-3 & FGFR1-4 inhibitor may increase efficacy and revert primary and acquired resistance to TA. We report the final results of the TALENT trial. Methods: Two independent cohorts were included: panNETs and giNETs. All pts had baseline documented progression disease (PD) by RECIST. For panNETs, PD to TA was mandatory, regardless of prior therapy with somatostatin analogs (SSAs) or chemotherapy (CHT); and for giNETs, PD on SSAs. Pts were treated with lenvatinib at 24 mg qd until PD or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by central radiology review. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by investigator. With 55 pts per arm, our study was powered to identify an ORR ≥25% (90% power, 5% α-error). Results: We recruited 111 pts: 55 panNETs and 56 giNETs (78% from small intestine). Prior therapies were CHT 32%, SSAs 87%, everolimus 70% and sunitinib 30% for panNETs. ORR was 29%, 42.3% for panNETs and 16.3% for giNETs. With a median follow-up of 19 m, PFS and OS for panNETs were 15.5 m (95% CI 11.3-not reached (NR)) and 29.2 m (95% CI 23.2-NR); and 15.4 m (95% CI 11.5-19.4) and NR for giNETs, respectively. Pts who obtained a response by RECIST had a significantly better PFS compared with non-responders (NR vs 11.2 m in panNETs (p=0.004); 37.2 m vs 14.9 m in giNETs (p=0.005). In the subgroup analyses, all pts obtained the same benefit in PFS and ORR, including tumor grade, prior therapies, hormone release, primary location and tumor burden. The most frequent G3/4 adverse events were hypertension (22%), fatigue (11%) and diarrhea (11%). Dose reductions/interruptions were needed in 91.8% with a median dose of 20 mg qd. Conclusions: To our knowledge, we report the highest ORR by central radiology assessment with a TA in this setting. Lenvatinib showed a promising PFS and OS in a pretreated population with benefit across subgroups. Further development in advanced NETs is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02678780.

TPS9122 Background: Lung cancer (LC) is a rare disease among young adults. Polymorphisms in genes involved in carcinogenic metabolism of tobacco and/or xenobiotic metabolism have been identified in those patients. The growing use of next generation sequencing (NGS) unravelled germline mutations in genes associated with hereditary cancer in patients with LC. However, germline DNA mutations have not been systematically studied in young adults with LC. Early onset LC patients are likely to harbor actionable somatic mutations. Broad hybrid NGS can identify actionable genomic alterations in LC patients deemed driver negative by routine molecular analysis. Trial Design: This is a multicentre, prospective, single-cohort study to determine whether young patients with LC harbor germline mutations and to evaluate the impact of NGS using Foundation One platform on the therapeutic options and overall survival for this specific patient population. Major inclusion criteria: 1) patients already or newly diagnosed of non-small cell lung cancer at any stage at age < 51; 2) to have sufficient tumor sample to perform standard molecular diagnosis ( EGFR/ALK/ROS1/BRAF); 3) to provide written informed consent for the study. Methods: After signing the informed consent form, family history of cancer and smoking history will be collected and a peripheral blood sample will be obtained. Germline targeted sequencing will be carried out in our centre using a customized hereditary cancer panel (I2HCP) of 136 genes designed to cover the coding exons and intron-exon boundaries of genes associated with moderate or high risk of hereditary cancer. Patients with clinical criteria for hereditary cancer or harboring pathogenic or probably pathogenic germline alteration will be referred to the genetic counselling unit. Patients will follow the usual clinical pathway for biomarker analysis and in case of remaining tumour material it will be used for conducting comprehensive genomic profiling through Foundation One platform. When tumour material available will not be sufficient to perform NGS, a tumour re-biopsy will be considered. Enrolment begun on June 2018 and, to date, a total of 41 patients have been included in the study.

Article, Background Multiple recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), rs10771399, at 12p11 that is associated with breast cancer risk. Method We performed a fine-scale mapping study of a 700 kb region including 441 genotyped and more than 1300 imputed genetic variants in 48,155 cases and 43,612 controls of European descent, 6269 cases and 6624 controls of East Asian descent and 1116 cases and 932 controls of African descent in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC; http://bcac.ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/), and in 15,252 BRCA1 mutation carriers in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Stepwise regression analyses were performed to identify independent association signals. Data from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements project (ENCODE) and the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were used for functional annotation. Results Analysis of data from European descendants found evidence for four independent association signals at 12p11, represented by rs7297051 (odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 1.06–1.12; P = 3 × 10-9), rs805510 (OR = 1.08, 95 % CI = 1.04–1.12, P = 2 × 10-5), and rs1871152 (OR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 1.02–1.06; P = 2 × 10-4) identified in the general populations, and rs113824616 (P = 7 × 10-5) identified in the meta-analysis of BCAC ER-negative cases and BRCA1 mutation carriers. SNPs rs7297051, rs805510 and rs113824616 were also associated with breast cancer risk at P, published version, peerReviewed

Germline inactivating mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are responsible for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOCS). Genetic testing of these genes identifies a significant proportion of variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Elucidation of the clinical impact of these variants is an important challenge in genetic diagnostics and counseling. In this study, we assess the RNA effect of 28 BRCA1 and BRCA2 VUS identified in our set of HBOCS families with the aim of gaining insight into their clinical relevance. mRNA was extracted from VUS carriers and controls lymphocytes cultured for 5-6 days and treated with puromycin. RNA was reverse transcribed to perform transcriptional analysis for the study of splicing aberrations. In silico prediction tools were used to select those variants most likely to affect the RNA splicing process. Six out of the 28 variants analyzed showed an aberrant splicing pattern and could therefore be classified as probably pathogenic mutations. Reclassification of VUS improves the genetic counseling and clinical surveillance of carriers of these mutations and highlights the importance of RNA studies in routine diagnostic laboratories.

Large genomic rearrangements are estimated to account for approximately 5-10% of all disease-causing mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC). We use MRC-Holland Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) to screen for such rearrangements in patients with HBOC and as a first step in our genetic testing workflow. The technique was applied to a set of 310 independent patients and detected eight different copy number alterations, corresponding to 2.6% of the studied samples. MLPA was also found to identify point mutations located in probe sequences. As commercial MLPA tests are not suitable for determining the specific breakpoints or for defining the exact extent of rearrangements, we applied a set of different complementary techniques to characterize these genetic alterations with greater precision. Long-range PCR amplification, RNA analysis, SNP-array chips, non-commercial MLPA probes, and FISH analysis were used to fully define the extent and mechanism of each alteration. In BRCA1, six rearrangements were characterized: deletion of E22, duplication of E9-E24, deletion of E16-E23, deletion of E1-E13, deletion of E1-E2 and duplication of E1-E2. In BRCA2, we studied a deletion of E15-E16 and a deletion of E1-E24. To the best of our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive study of the nature and underlying molecular causes of these mutational events in the BRCA1/2 genes.