Search

Introduction: International guidelines recommend genetic testing for women with familial breast cancer at an expected prevalence of pathogenic germline variants (PVs) of at least 10%. In a study sample of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC), we have previously shown that women with TNBC diagnosed before the age of 50 years but without a family history of breast or ovarian cancer (sTNBC) meet this criterion. The present study investigates the PV prevalence in BRCA1, BRCA2, and nine additional cancer predisposition genes in an extended sTNBC study sample including a cohort of women with a later age at sTNBC diagnosis. Patients and Methods: In 1,600 women with sTNBC (median age at diagnosis: 41 years, range 19–78 years), we investigated the association between age at diagnosis and PV occurrence in cancer predisposition genes using logistic regression. Results: 260 sTNBC patients (16.2%) were found to have a PV in cancer predisposition genes (BRCA1: n = 170 [10.6%]; BRCA2: n = 46 [2.9%], other: n = 44 [2.8%]). The PV prevalence in women diagnosed between 50 and 59 years (n = 194) was 11.3% (22/194). Logistic regression showed a significant increase in PV prevalence with decreasing age at diagnosis (OR 1.41 per 10 years younger age at diagnosis; 95% confidence interval: 1.21–1.65; p < 0.001). The PV prevalence predicted by the model was above 10% for diagnoses before the age of 56.8 years. Conclusion: Based on the data presented, we recommend genetic testing by gene panel analysis for sTNBC patients diagnosed before the age of 60 years. Due to the still uncertain estimate for women with sTNBC diagnosed above the age of 60 years, further studies are needed.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the role of different specific types of germline breast cancer susceptibilityBRCAmutations on the age of onset of high grade serous ovarian cancer.MethodsThis was a multicenter, international, retrospective cohort of 474 patients diagnosed with recurrent or newly diagnosed high grade serous ovarian cancer, with known germline mutations inBRCA1/2genes, treated between January 2011 and December 2020 in three academic centers in Europe. Patients were classified into four groups related to the type ofBRCA1/2genes mutation: frameshift, missense, nonsense, and splicing. Data from patients with splicing mutations were removed from the analysis because of the small numbers. The other three groups were compared.ResultsExcluding the 29 patients with a splicing mutation, 474 patients were enrolled: 309 (65.2%) with frameshift mutations, 102 (21.5%) with nonsense mutations, and 63 (13.3%) with missense mutations. TheBRCA1gene was affected in 324 (68.4%) cases, whileBRCA2was involved in 150 (31.6%) women (p=0.06). We found a difference of more than 5 years in the age of onset of high grade serous ovarian cancer betweenBRCA1andBRCA2patients (mean 53.3 years vs 58.4 years; p=0.001), with a mean age of 55.1 years. Patients with nonsense germline mutations had the youngest age of onset, while women with frameshift mutations had the oldest age of onset of high grade serous ovarian cancer (mean 52.2 years vs mean 55.9 years), both in theBRCA1andBRCA2subgroups. There was no statistically significant difference in age of onset between early and advanced groups (mean 55.8 years vs 55.0 years; p=0.55).ConclusionDifferent types of germlineBRCAmutations could determine different ages for onset of high grade serous ovarian cancer. If confirmed in larger series, this finding might have a clinical impact, potentially leading to a more tailored approach for risk reducing surgery for the prevention of high grade serous ovarian cancer.

Background: The GeparOLA study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of paclitaxel (P) plus olaparib (O) as part of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, either hormone receptor (HR)-positive or HR-negative and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) defined as having a g/tBRCA mutation and/or a high HRD score. Primary analysis showed a pCR rate of 55.1% (90% CI 44.5%-65.3%) with PO and 48.6% (90% CI 34.3%-63.2%) with P plus carboplatinum (Cb). The PO combination could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm but was significantly better tolerated. Analysis on the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients < 40 years and HR-positive tumors (Fasching Ann Oncol 2020). Here, we report long-term data. Methods: GeparOLA (NCT02789332) was a non-comparative, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, phase II trial. Patients with primary HER2-negative breast cancer, HRD and indication for chemotherapy (cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c and cN+ or cT1c and pNSLN+ or cT1c and TNBC or cT1c and Ki-67 >20%) were randomly assigned to receive either P 80 mg/m2 weekly plus O 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus Cb area under the curve 2 (AUC2) weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by four cycles of either 2-weekly or 3-weekly epirubicin 90 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2. Primary endpoint was pCR (ypT0/is ypN0) rate after NACT with PO followed by EC. Long-term efficacy endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). The time-to-event endpoints analysis is planned with median follow-up of at least 4 years and a follow-up completeness of at least 80%. Results: Between September 2016 and July 2018, 274 patients were screened, of whom 107 were randomized and 106 (PO N=69; PCb N=37) started treatment. The median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 32 patients were aged < 40 years; 36.2% of patients had cT1 tumors and 31.8% were cN-positive; the majority (86.8%) had grade 3 tumors and a Ki-67>20% (89.6%). Seventy-seven patients (72.6%) had TNBC. After a median follow-up of 49.8 months (range 0.1-69.1), 18 (15 in PO; 3 in PCb) iDFS events and 7 (6 in PO; 1 in PCb) deaths were reported. The 4-year survival rates are shown in the table below. iDFS (HR PO to PCb=2.86 [95%CI 0.83-9.9], log-rank p=0.081), DDFS (HR =3.03 [95%CI 0.67-13.67], log-rank p=0.129), and OS (HR=3.27 [95%CI 0.39-27.2], log-rank p=0.244) tended to be inferior with olaparib. Patients without g/tBRCA mutation seem to benefit from the use of carboplatinum (7/30 iDFS/DDFS events in PO; 0/16 in PCb, log-rank p=0.037, HR n.a.). Conclusions: In patients with HER2-negative and HRD breast cancer the use of olaparib instead of carboplatinum although showing comparable pCR rates, tended to result in an overall inferior outcome. This was mainly driven by the patients without a g/tBRCA mutation. In patients with a g/t BRCA mutation no difference between olaparib and carboplatinum was seen. Key words: Olaparib, HER2-negative breast cancer, HRD, survival Funding: The study was financially supported by AstraZeneca Citation Format: Peter A. Fasching, Sabine Schmatloch, Jan Hauke, Julia Rey, Christian Jackisch, Peter Klare, Theresa Link, Claus Hanusch, Jens Huober, Andrea Stefek, Sabine Seiler, Wolfgang D. Schmitt, Christoph Uleer, Gabriele Doering, Kerstin Rhiem, Andreas Schneeweiss, Carsten Denkert, Rita K. Schmutzler, Eric Hahnen, Michael Untch, Valentina Nekljudova, Jens-Uwe Blohmer, Sibylle Loibl. Neoadjuvant paclitaxel/olaparib in comparison to paclitaxel/carboplatinum in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and homologous recombination deficiency – long-term survival of the GeparOLA study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-06-13.

Data on deleterious variants in genes other than BRCA1/2 remain limited. A retrospective cohort study was performed, including primary OC cases with TruRisk® germline gene panel testing between 2011 and 2020. Patients with testing after relapse were excluded. The cohort was divided into three groups: (A) no mutations, (B) deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations, and (C) deleterious mutations in other genes. A total of 702 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these 17.4% (n = 122) showed BRCA1/2 mutations and a further 6.0% (n = 42) in other genes. Three-year overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was significantly longer in patients with germline mutations (85%/82.8% for cohort B/C vs. 70.2% for cohort A, p < 0.001) and 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) only for cohort B (58.1% vs. 36.9%/41.6% in cohort A/C, p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis for the subgroup of advanced-stages of high-grade serous OC, both cohorts B/C were found to be independent factors for significantly better outcome, cohort C for OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.25–0.84), and cohort B for both OS and PFS (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.27–0.61 and HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.37–0.66, respectively). Germline mutations were detected in a quarter of OC patients, and a quarter of those in genes other than BRCA1/2. Germline mutations demonstrate in our cohort a prognostic factor and predict better prognosis for OC patients.

Purpose:BRCA1-deficient breast cancers carry a specific DNA copy-number signature (“BRCA1-like”) and are hypersensitive to DNA double-strand break (DSB) inducing compounds. Here, we explored whether (i) EZH2 is overexpressed in human BRCA1-deficient breast tumors and might predict sensitivity to DSB-inducing drugs; (ii) EZH2 inhibition potentiates cisplatin efficacy in Brca1-deficient murine mammary tumors.Experimental Design:EZH2 expression was analyzed in 497 breast cancers using IHC or RNA sequencing. We classified 370 tumors by copy-number profiles as BRCA1-like or non-BRCA1–like and examined its association with EZH2 expression. Additionally, we assessed BRCA1 loss through mutation or promoter methylation status and investigated the predictive value of EZH2 expression in a study population of breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant high-dose platinum-based chemotherapy compared with standard anthracycline-based chemotherapy. To explore whether EZH2 inhibition by GSK126 enhances sensitivity to platinum drugs in EZH2-overexpressing breast cancers we used a Brca1-deficient mouse model.Results:The highest EZH2 expression was found in BRCA1-associated tumors harboring a BRCA1 mutation, BRCA1-promoter methylation or were classified as BRCA1 like. We observed a greater benefit from high-dose platinum-based chemotherapy in BRCA1-like and non-BRCA1–like patients with high EZH2 expression. Combined treatment with the EZH2 inhibitor GSK126 and cisplatin decreased cell proliferation and improved survival in Brca1-deficient mice in comparison with single agents.Conclusions:Our findings demonstrate that EZH2 is expressed at significantly higher levels in BRCA1-deficient breast cancers. EZH2 overexpression can identify patients with breast cancer who benefit significantly from intensified DSB-inducing platinum-based chemotherapy independent of BRCA1-like status. EZH2 inhibition improves the antitumor effect of platinum drugs in Brca1-deficient breast tumors in vivo.

Immunohistological stainings of breast tumors for EZH2 (representative examples of used antibodies)

Background: In high-risk hormone-receptor (HR)+/HER2- BC patients germline (g) mutations can be found in approximately 14% in BRCA1/2 and in BRCA1/2 and other BC predisposition genes in 20% (Pohl-Rescigno E, et al. JAMA Oncol 2020). In metastatic BC CDK4/6 inhibitors may have greater activity in patients with a BRCA mutation detected in ctDNA (André F, et al. J Clin Oncol 2020). The PENELOPE-B trial did not to show an improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) by adding palbociclib to ET in high-risk HR+/HER2- BC (Loibl S, et al. J Clin Oncol 2021). Methods: Blood samples from 898 of 1250 PENELOPE-B patients were available. 445 patients were sampled following a case-cohort design (220 cases defined as patients with any event during follow-up and 225 randomly selected patients without any event [non-cases]) and analyzed for germline variants in BRCA1/2 and 16 non-BRCA1/2 cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, FANCM, MRE11A, NBN, PALB2, PTEN, RAD50, RAD51C, RAD51D, STK11, TP53, XRCC2) by targeted next generation sequencing (NGS). The primary definition of mutational status was the prevalence of a pathogenic mutation (mt) in one or more analyzed BC predisposition genes. Statistical analyses for time-to-event endpoints (iDFS, distant disease-free survival [DDFS], and overall survival [OS]) were based on inverse probability weighting: weighted Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used. Results: 442 of 445 patients (placebo arm: 104 cases and 105 non-cases; palbociclib arm: 114 cases and 119 non-cases) were successfully analyzed for mutational status. A total of 42 (9.5%) patients (placebo arm: 9.1%; palbociclib arm: 9.9%) carried any mutation. 15 (3.4%) patients had a gBRCA1/2 mt (one of whom carried a gATM mt and one a gCHEK2 mt in addition to gBRCA2 mt) and 29 (6.6%) had mutations in one of the other BC predisposition genes (n=8 CHEK2, n=7 PALB2, n=5 ATM, n=2 RAD50, n=1 for BARD1, FANCM, MRE11A, RAD51C, RAD51D, TP53 and n=1 both RAD51D and BRIP1). The mutational status with respect to all genes analyzed showed no significant correlation to clinical baseline variables. With regard to gBRCA1 and gBRCA2 genes only, the mutational status significantly correlated with age but not with other clinical variables: all 15 (100%) gBRCA mt carriers were younger than 50 years compared to 238 (56%) wildtype (wt) patients (p=0.002). The iDFS rate after 3 years was 80.9% in patients with any mutation and 79.5% in patients without. Mutational status (mt vs. wt) based on all genes analyzed was not prognostic (iDFS: hazard ratio 1.015, 95%CI 0.558-1.784; DDFS: 0.970, 95%CI 0.521-1.758; OS: 0.768, 95%CI 0.274-1.615). Neither the mutated patients had a benefit from palbociclib treatment (palbociclib vs placebo; iDFS: hazard ratio 0.766, 95%CI 0.263-3.022; DDFS: 0.897, 95%CI 0.275-3.489; OS: 0.666, 95%CI 0.063-5.671) nor the wt patients (iDFS: hazard ratio 0.918, 95%CI 0.650-1.303; DDFS: 0.966, 95%CI 0.679-1.393; OS: 0.901, 95%CI 0.573-1.433); interaction tests for treatment arm/mutational status for all time-to-event endpoints were not statistically significant. Analysis in the subgroups of patients by gBRCA1/2 showed similar results but had less statistical power. Conclusions: In this case-cohort analysis of 442 patients enrolled in the PENELOPE-B trial, the detection of BC predisposition genes was lower than expected with 10%. This is probably due to the low rate of gBRCA1/2 carriers (3.4%), which could be influenced by the selection criteria of the trial. Patients with gBRCA1/2 or other BC disposition genes had a comparable outcome to non-carriers in the PENELOPE-B trial. Citation Format: Sibylle Loibl, Jan Hauke, Karen Gelmon, Frederik Marmé, Corinna Ernst, Miguel Martin, Michael Untch, Hervé Bonnefoi, Erik Knudsen, Seock-Ah Im, Angela DeMichele, Laura Van’t Veer, Sung-Bae Kim, Harry Bear, Nicole McCarthy, Nicholas Turner, Agnieszka Witkiewicz, Federico Rojo, Peter A Fasching, José A García-Sáenz, Catherine M Kelly, Toralf Reimer, Masakazu Toi, Hope S Rugo, Carsten Denkert, Michael Gnant, Andreas Makris, Yuan Liu, Olga Valota, Bärbel Felder, Karsten Weber, Valentina Nekljudova, Eric Hahnen. Germline BRCA1/2 and other predisposition genes in high-risk early-stage HR+/HER2- breast cancer (BC) patients treated with endocrine therapy (ET) with or without palbociclib: A secondary analysis from the PENELOPE-B study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-13-36.

The chemotherapy backbone for patients with high-grade advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (HG-AOC) is carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by a maintenance therapy either with bevacizumab, with a PARP inhibitor, or with a combination of both, which is defined by the presence of a homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and by the BRCA1/2 status. This study included patients with a primary diagnosis of HG-AOC treated between December 2019 and December 2021. The HRD status was measured using the Myriad myChoice® test on all the patients with an indication for tumor HRD testing. Germline testing was conducted on all the patients using the TruRisk® panel as recommended by the national guidelines. HRD testing was requested for 190 patients, and, for 163 patients (85.8%), an HRD test result was available. An HRD test result could not be reported in 27 patients due to an insufficient tumor yield. The median time that it took to receive the HRD test results was 37 days (range of 8–97). In total, an HRD was present in 44.7% (73/163) of the patients based on a GIS ≥ 42 in 42.9% of the patients and based on a tumor BRCA1/2 mutation in 3 cases (all with a GIS < 42). The germline testing results were available for 148 patients, and, in 18 patients (12.2%), a deleterious germline mutation was detected. Of the 27 patients without sufficient HRD testing, BRCA1/2 germline testing results were available for 19 patients (70.4%), and a deleterious germline mutation was detected in 2 patients (7.4%). The implementation of HRD testing is feasible, and the results become available for treatment decisions in a timely manner for most patients. The prerequisite for HRD testing with the Myriad myChoice® test is a sufficient amount of tumor tissue. The cotesting of HRD and BRCA1/2 germline testing should be aimed for in order to enable optimal and timely treatment decisions on maintenance therapy as well as to test patients on whom the HRD test will not be evaluable.

Evidence linking coding germline variants in breast cancer (BC)-susceptibility genes other than BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2 with contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the association of protein-truncating variants (PTVs) and rare missense variants (MSVs) in nine known (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) and 25 suspected BC-susceptibility genes with CBC risk and BCSS. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox regression models. Analyses included 34,401 women of European ancestry diagnosed with BC, including 676 CBCs and 3,449 BC deaths; the median follow-up was 10.9 years. Subtype analyses were based on estrogen receptor (ER) status of the first BC. Combined PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 and PALB2 were associated with increased CBC risk [HRs (95% CIs): 2.88 (1.70-4.87), 2.31 (1.39-3.85), 8.29 (2.53-27.21), 2.25 (1.55-3.27), and 2.67 (1.33-5.35), respectively]. The strongest evidence of association with BCSS was for PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA2 (ER-positive BC) and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 [HRs (95% CIs): 1.53 (1.13-2.07), 2.08 (0.95-4.57), and 1.39 (1.13-1.72), respectively, after adjusting for tumor characteristics and treatment]. HRs were essentially unchanged when censoring for CBC, suggesting that these associations are not completely explained by increased CBC risk, tumor characteristics, or treatment. There was limited evidence of associations of PTVs and/or rare MSVs with CBC risk or BCSS for the 25 suspected BC genes. The CBC findings are relevant to treatment decisions, follow-up, and screening after BC diagnosis.

Background Cancer patients are at risk of secondary therapy–related myeloid neoplasms (t-MNs). Acquired blood-specific mutations in clonal hematopoiesis (CH)–associated genes are t-MN risk factors, and their occurrence associated with cancer therapy and age. Patients with ovarian cancer (OC) showed a particularly high prevalence of CH–associated gene mutations, which may additionally be explained by the high proportion of a hereditary disease cause in this cancer entity. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of 448 OC patients enrolled in the AGO-TR1 study; 249 were enrolled at primary diagnosis and 199 at platinum-sensitive recurrence. Analyses included the most frequently altered CH–associated genes (ASXL1, DNMT3A, GNAS, JAK2, PPM1D, SF3B1, SH2B3, SRSF2, TET2, TP53). Results were analyzed according to the BRCA1/2 germline (gBRCA1/2) mutation status. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Advanced age at blood draw and a high number of prior platinum-based chemotherapy lines were risk factors to acquire CH–associated gene mutations, with gene-specific effects observed. Binomial logistic regression suggested increased probabilities for gBRCA1/2 mutation carriers to acquire CH-associated PPM1D and TP53 gene mutations (PPM1D: odds ratio = 4.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.48 to 12.46, P = .007; TP53: odds ratio = 6.20, 95% confidence interval = 0.98 to 53.9, P = .06). This observation was due to a statistically significantly increased number of platinum-based chemotherapy lines in gBRCA1/2 mutation carriers vs noncarriers (PPM1D: mean [SD] = 2.04 [1.27] vs 1.04 [0.99], P Conclusions A positive gBRCA1/2 mutation status is not a risk factor to acquire CH–associated gene mutations. OC patients may benefit from monitoring CH–associated gene mutations, especially following carboplatin exposure. Future clinical studies are required to assess whether treatment regimen should be adapted according to individual t-MN risks.

ZusammenfassungDas nationale Register „HerediCaRe“ für die Evaluation und Verbesserung der risiko-adjustierten Prävention bei erblichem Brust- und Eierstockkrebs ist eines von sechs vom BMBF geförderten „modellhaften Registern in der Versorgungsforschung“. In diesem Beitrag beschreiben und diskutieren wir die zur standardisierten Datenerfassung gewählte Dokumentations- und IT-Lösung auf der Basis der zuvor definierten speziellen funktionalen Anforderungen. Die Dokumentation gliedert sich in verschiedene patientenindividuell einzusetzende Module, die auf einem zuvor festgelegten Merkmalskatalog beruhen. Aufgrund spezieller funktionaler Anforderungen wurde eine eigene Datenerfassungsanwendung auf der Basis von ORACLE und ORACLE Forms entwickelt und implementiert. Die speziellen Anforderungen umfassten u. a. die Einbindung grafischer Stammbaumdarstellungen, den strukturierten Upload von Stammbaumdaten und molekulargenetischen Informationen, die automatisierte Altdatenübernahme aus dem Vorgängersystem, sowie die freie Programmierbarkeit von beliebig komplexen Datenbankabfragen zur zentralen Datenqualitätsprüfung. In die Anwendung ist eine Datenbank zur patienten-unabhängigen Verwaltung genetischer Risikovarianten nahtlos integriert und mit den patientenbezogenen Daten verknüpft. Die Vor- und Nachteile der gewählten IT-Lösung werden kritisch diskutiert. Insgesamt kommen wir zu der Schlussfolgerung, dass es angesichts der komplexen Dokumentation und der speziellen Funktionsanforderungen alternativ keine fertigen Softwareprodukte zu der von uns gewählten Eigenentwicklung existieren.

We assessed the PREDICT v 2.2 for prognosis of breast cancer patients with pathogenic germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants, using follow-up data from 5453 BRCA1/2 carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). PREDICT for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer had modest discrimination for BRCA1 carrier patients overall (Gönen & Heller unbiased concordance 0.65 in CIMBA, 0.64 in BCAC), but it distinguished clearly the high-mortality group from lower risk categories. In an analysis of low to high risk categories by PREDICT score percentiles, the observed mortality was consistently lower than the expected mortality, but the confidence intervals always included the calibration slope. Altogether, our results encourage the use of the PREDICT ER-negative model in management of breast cancer patients with germline BRCA1 variants. For the PREDICT ER-positive model, the discrimination was slightly lower in BRCA2 variant carriers (concordance 0.60 in CIMBA, 0.65 in BCAC). Especially, inclusion of the tumor grade distorted the prognostic estimates. The breast cancer mortality of BRCA2 carriers was under-estimated at the low end of the PREDICT score distribution, whereas at the high end, the mortality was over-estimated. These data suggest that BRCA2 status should also be taken into consideration with tumor characteristics, when estimating the prognosis of ER-positive breast cancer patients.

Background: The GeparOLA study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of paclitaxel (P) plus olaparib (O) as part of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, either hormone receptor (HR)-positive or HR-negative and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) defined as having a g/tBRCA mutation and/or a high HRD score. Primary analysis showed a pCR rate of 55.1% (90% CI 44.5%-65.3%) with PO and 48.6% (90% CI 34.3%-63.2%) with P plus carboplatinum (Cb). The PO combination could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm but was significantly better tolerated. Analysis on the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients < 40 years and HR-positive tumors (Fasching Ann Oncol 2020). Here, we report long-term data. Methods: GeparOLA (NCT02789332) was a non-comparative, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, phase II trial. Patients with primary HER2-negative breast cancer, HRD and indication for chemotherapy (cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c and cN+ or cT1c and pNSLN+ or cT1c and TNBC or cT1c and Ki-67 >20%) were randomly assigned to receive either P 80 mg/m2 weekly plus O 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus Cb area under the curve 2 (AUC2) weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by four cycles of either 2-weekly or 3-weekly epirubicin 90 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2. Primary endpoint was pCR (ypT0/is ypN0) rate after NACT with PO followed by EC. Long-term efficacy endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). The time-to-event endpoints analysis is planned with median follow-up of at least 4 years and a follow-up completeness of at least 80%. Results: Between September 2016 and July 2018, 274 patients were screened, of whom 107 were randomized and 106 (PO N=69; PCb N=37) started treatment. The median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 32 patients were aged < 40 years; 36.2% of patients had cT1 tumors and 31.8% were cN-positive; the majority (86.8%) had grade 3 tumors and a Ki-67>20% (89.6%). Seventy-seven patients (72.6%) had TNBC. After a median follow-up of 49.8 months (range 0.1-69.1), 18 (15 in PO; 3 in PCb) iDFS events and 7 (6 in PO; 1 in PCb) deaths were reported. The 4-year survival rates are shown in the table below. iDFS (HR PO to PCb=2.86 [95%CI 0.83-9.9], log-rank p=0.081), DDFS (HR =3.03 [95%CI 0.67-13.67], log-rank p=0.129), and OS (HR=3.27 [95%CI 0.39-27.2], log-rank p=0.244) tended to be inferior with olaparib. Patients without g/tBRCA mutation seem to benefit from the use of carboplatinum (7/30 iDFS/DDFS events in PO; 0/16 in PCb, log-rank p=0.037, HR n.a.). Conclusions: In patients with HER2-negative and HRD breast cancer the use of olaparib instead of carboplatinum although showing comparable pCR rates, tended to result in an overall inferior outcome. This was mainly driven by the patients without a g/tBRCA mutation. In patients with a g/t BRCA mutation no difference between olaparib and carboplatinum was seen. Key words: Olaparib, HER2-negative breast cancer, HRD, survival Funding: The study was financially supported by AstraZeneca Citation Format: Peter A. Fasching, Sabine Schmatloch, Jan Hauke, Julia Rey, Christian Jackisch, Peter Klare, Theresa Link, Claus Hanusch, Jens Huober, Andrea Stefek, Sabine Seiler, Wolfgang D. Schmitt, Christoph Uleer, Gabriele Doering, Kerstin Rhiem, Andreas Schneeweiss, Carsten Denkert, Rita K. Schmutzler, Eric Hahnen, Michael Untch, Valentina Nekljudova, Jens-Uwe Blohmer, Sibylle Loibl. Neoadjuvant paclitaxel/olaparib in comparison to paclitaxel/carboplatinum in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and homologous recombination deficiency – long-term survival of the GeparOLA study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS5-02.

Funder: Funding details are provided in the Supplementary Material, Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have the potential to improve risk stratification. Joint estimation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) effects in models could improve predictive performance over standard approaches of PRS construction. Here, we implemented computationally-efficient, penalized, logistic regression models (lasso, elastic net, stepwise) to individual level genotype data and a Bayesian framework with continuous shrinkage, ���select and shrink for summary statistics��� (S4), to summary level data for epithelial non-mucinous ovarian cancer risk prediction. We developed the models in a dataset consisting of 23,564 non-mucinous EOC cases and 40,138 controls participating in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) and validated the best models in three populations of different ancestries: prospective data from 198,101 women of European ancestry; 7,669 women of East Asian ancestry; 1,072 women of African ancestry, and in 18,915 BRCA1 and 12,337 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry. In the external validation data, the model with the strongest association for non-mucinous EOC risk derived from the OCAC model development data was the S4 model (27,240 SNPs) with odds ratios (OR) of 1.38(95%CI:1.28���1.48,AUC:0.588) per unit standard deviation, in women of European ancestry; 1.14(95%CI:1.08���1.19,AUC:0.538) in women of East Asian ancestry; 1.38(95%CI:1.21-1.58,AUC:0.593) in women of African ancestry; hazard ratios of 1.37(95%CI:1.30���1.44,AUC:0.592) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers and 1.51(95%CI:1.36-1.67,AUC:0.624) in BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Incorporation of the S4 PRS in risk prediction models for ovarian cancer may have clinical utility in ovarian cancer prevention programs.

To provide precise age-specific risk estimates of cancers other than female breast and ovarian cancers associated with pathogenic variants (PVs) inWe used data from 3,184In addition to female breast and ovarian cancers

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).

Purpose: Previously, we developed breast cancer BRCA1-like and BRCA2-like copy-number profile shrunken centroid classifiers predictive for mutation status and response to therapy, targeting homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Therefore, we investigated BRCA1- and BRCA2-like classification in ovarian cancer, aiming to acquire classifiers with similar properties as those in breast cancer. Experimental Design: We analyzed DNA copy-number profiles of germline BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutant ovarian cancers and control tumors and observed that existing breast cancer classifiers did not sufficiently predict mutation status. Hence, we trained new shrunken centroid classifiers on this set and validated them in the independent The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset. Subsequently, we assessed BRCA1/2-like classification and obtained germline and tumor mutation and methylation status of cancer predisposition genes, among them several involved in HR repair, of 300 ovarian cancer samples derived from the consecutive cohort trial AGO-TR1 (NCT02222883). Results: The detection rate of the BRCA1-like classifier for BRCA1 mutations and promoter hypermethylation was 95.6%. The BRCA2-like classifier performed less accurately, likely due to a smaller training set. Furthermore, three quarters of the BRCA1/2-like tumors could be explained by (epi)genetic alterations in BRCA1/2, germline RAD51C mutations and alterations in other genes involved in HR. Around half of the non–BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer cases displayed a BRCA-like phenotype. Conclusions: The newly trained classifiers detected most BRCA-mutated and methylated cancers and all tumors harboring a RAD51C germline mutations. Beyond that, we found an additional substantial proportion of ovarian cancers to be BRCA-like.