Search

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

Background: Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) can alleviate menopausal symptoms but has been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. MHT prescription should be preceded by individualised risk/benefit evaluation; however, data outlining the impact of family history alongside different MHT therapeutic approaches are lacking., Aim: To quantify the risks associated with MHT use in women with varying breast cancer family histories of developing and dying from breast cancer., Design and Setting: An epidemiological modelling study for women in England using the BOADICEA breast cancer prediction model and data relating to MHT use and breast cancer risk taken from research by the Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer., Method: The risk of developing and dying from breast cancer between the ages of 50 and 80 years was modelled in women with four different breast cancer family history profiles: 'average', 'modest', 'intermediate', and 'strong' by using 1) background risks of breast cancer by age and family history, 2) relative risks for breast cancer associated with MHT use, and 3) 10-year breast cancer-specific net mortality rates. This study modelled use of combined oestrogen-progestogen MHT (cyclical or continuous) and oestrogen-only MHT., Results: For a woman of 'average' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative breast cancer risk (age 50-80 years) is 9.8%, and the risk of dying from the breast cancer is 1.7%. In this model, 5 years' exposure to combined-cyclical MHT (age 50-55 years) was calculated to increase these risks to 11.0% and 1.8%, respectively. For a woman with a 'strong' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative breast cancer risk is 19.6% (age 50-80 years), and the risk of dying from the breast cancer is 3.2%. With 5 years' exposure to MHT (age 50-55 years), this model showed that these risks increase to 22.4% and 3.5%, respectively., Conclusion: In this model, both family history and MHT are associated with increased risk of breast cancer. Estimates of the risks of breast cancer associated with MHT for women with different family histories can be used to support decision making around MHT prescription for women experiencing menopausal symptoms., (© The Authors.)

Background: No validation has been conducted for the BOADICEA multifactorial breast cancer risk prediction model specifically in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers to date. Here, we evaluated the performance of BOADICEA in predicting 5-year breast cancer risks in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers ascertained through clinical genetic centres., Methods: We evaluated the model calibration and discriminatory ability in the prospective TRANsIBCCS cohort study comprising 1614 BRCA1 and 1365 BRCA2 PV carriers (209 incident cases). Study participants had lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, anthropometric risk factor information, a polygenic risk score based on 313 SNPs and family history information., Results: The full multifactorial model considering family history together with all other risk factors was well calibrated overall (E/O=1.07, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.24) and in quintiles of predicted risk. Discrimination was maximised when all risk factors were considered (Harrell's C-index=0.70, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.74; area under the curve=0.79, 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.82). The model performance was similar when evaluated separately in BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV carriers. The full model identified 5.8%, 12.9% and 24.0% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers with 5-year breast cancer risks of <1.65%, <3% and <5%, respectively, risk thresholds commonly used for different management and risk-reduction options., Conclusion: BOADICEA may be used to aid personalised cancer risk management and decision-making for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers. It is implemented in the free-access CanRisk tool (https://www.canrisk.org/)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ACA and DFE are named creators of the BOADICEA model which has been licensed by Cambridge Enterprise (University of Cambridge). All the other authors declare no conflict of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The CanRisk tool, which operationalises the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) is used by Clinical Geneticists, Genetic Counsellors, Breast Oncologists, Surgeons and Family History Nurses for breast cancer risk assessments both nationally and internationally. There are currently no guidelines with respect to the day-to-day clinical application of CanRisk and differing inputs to the model can result in different recommendations for practice., Methods: To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group in collaboration with the Association of Breast Surgery and the CanGene-CanVar programme held a workshop on 16 th of May 2023, with the aim of establishing best practice guidelines., Results: Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in use of CanRisk in making recommendations for breast cancer surveillance, eligibility for genetic testing and the input of available information to undertake an individualised risk assessment., Conclusions: Whilst consensus recommendations were achieved, the meeting highlighted some of the barriers limiting the use of CanRisk in clinical practice and identified areas that require further work and collaboration with relevant national bodies and policy makers to incorporate wider use of CanRisk into routine breast cancer risk assessments., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer., Methods: An ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process., Results: Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations., Recommendations: BRCA1 / 2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1 / 2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1 / 2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1 / 2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Background: Radiation-induced secondary breast cancer (BC) may be a concern after radiation therapy (RT) for primary breast cancer (PBC), especially in young patients with germline (g)BRCA-associated BC who already have high contralateral BC (CBC) risk and potentially increased genetic susceptibility to radiation. We sought to investigate whether adjuvant RT for PBC increases the risk of CBC in patients with gBRCA1/2-associated BC., Methods: The gBRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers diagnosed with PBC were selected from the prospective International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the association between RT (yes vs no) and CBC risk. We further stratified for BRCA status and age at PBC diagnosis (<40 and >40 years). Statistical significance tests were 2-sided., Results: Of 3602 eligible patients, 2297 (64%) received adjuvant RT. Median follow-up was 9.6 years. The RT group had more patients with stage III PBC than the non-RT group (15% vs 3%, P < .001), received chemotherapy more often (81% vs 70%, P < .001), and received endocrine therapy more often (50% vs 35%, P < .001). The RT group had an increased CBC risk compared with the non-RT group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12 to 1.86). Statistical significance was observed in gBRCA2 (HR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.13 to 2.77) but not in gBRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers (HR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.77; P = .39 for interaction). In the combined gBRCA1/2 group, patients irradiated when they were younger than or older than 40 years of age at PBC diagnosis showed similar risks (HR = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.93 to 2.04 and HR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.19, respectively)., Conclusions: RT regimens minimizing contralateral breast dose should be considered in gBRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose: Although the role of CHEK2 germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition is well known, resources for managing CHEK2 heterozygotes in clinical practice are limited., Methods: An international workgroup developed guidance on clinical management of CHEK2 heterozygotes informed by peer-reviewed publications from PubMed., Results: Although CHEK2 is considered a moderate penetrance gene, cancer risks may be considered as a continuous variable, which are influenced by family history and other modifiers. Consequently, early cancer detection and prevention for CHEK2 heterozygotes should be guided by personalized risk estimates. Such estimates may result in both downgrading lifetime breast cancer risks to those similar to the general population or upgrading lifetime risk to a level at which CHEK2 heterozygotes are offered high-risk breast surveillance according to country-specific guidelines. Risk-reducing mastectomy should be guided by personalized risk estimates and shared decision making. Colorectal and prostate cancer surveillance should be considered based on assessment of family history. For CHEK2 heterozygotes who develop cancer, no specific targeted medical treatment is recommended at this time., Conclusion: Systematic prospective data collection is needed to establish the spectrum of CHEK2-associated cancer risks and to determine yet-unanswered questions, such as the outcomes of surveillance, response to cancer treatment, and survival after cancer diagnosis., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Funding and support listed here did not support development of this document unless included in the acknowledgments section. H.H. is supported by the Cancer Research CRUK Catalyst Award, CanGene-CanVar, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca. R.S. is supported by the German Cancer Aid and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Germany. M.T. is supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre. D.R.S. is supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), Rockville, Maryland, and also performs contract clinical telehealth services for Genome Medical, Inc., in accordance with relevant NCI ethics policies. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Identifying healthy carriers of germline pathogenic variants in high penetrance cancer susceptibility genes offers the potential for risk-reducing surgery. The NHS England National Genomic Test Directory offers germline and somatic testing to patients with certain cancers or rare and inherited diseases, or, in some cases, to their relatives. This review summarises current UK guidelines for risk-reducing surgical interventions available for individuals with no personal history of cancer, who are determined to carry germline pathogenic variants. An electronic literature search of NICE guidelines and PubMed citable articles was performed. NICE guidelines are available for bilateral mastectomy and are currently in development for risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Guidelines developed with affiliation to, or through relevant British Surgical Societies or international consensus, are available for risk-reducing hysterectomy, polypectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy. There is a disparity in the development and distribution of national guidelines for interventions amongst tumour types. Whilst we are focusing on UK guidelines, we anticipate they will be relevant much more generally and so of interest to a wider audience including where there are no national guidelines to refer to. We suggest that, as genetic testing becomes rapidly more accessible, guideline development for interventions should be more closely aligned to those for testing., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The CanRisk tool enables the collection of risk factor information and calculation of estimated future breast cancer risks based on the multifactorial Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) model. Despite BOADICEA being recommended in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines and CanRisk being freely available for use, the CanRisk tool has not yet been widely implemented in primary care., Aim: To explore the barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of the CanRisk tool in primary care., Design and Setting: A multi-methods study was conducted with primary care practitioners (PCPs) in the East of England., Method: Participants used the CanRisk tool to complete two vignette-based case studies; semi-structured interviews gained feedback about the tool; and questionnaires collected demographic details and information about the structural characteristics of the practices., Results: Sixteen PCPs (eight GPs and eight nurses) completed the study. The main barriers to implementation included: time needed to complete the tool; competing priorities; IT infrastructure; and PCPs' lack of confidence and knowledge to use the tool. Main facilitators included: easy navigation of the tool; its potential clinical impact; and the increasing availability of and expectation to use risk prediction tools., Conclusion: There is now a greater understanding of the barriers and facilitators that exist when using CanRisk in primary care. The study has highlighted that future implementation activities should focus on reducing the time needed to complete a CanRisk calculation, integrating the CanRisk tool into existing IT infrastructure, and identifying appropriate contexts in which to conduct a CanRisk calculation. PCPs may also benefit from information about cancer risk assessment and CanRisk-specific training., (© The Authors.)

Introduction: Height, body mass index (BMI), and weight gain are associated with breast cancer risk in the general population. It is unclear whether these associations also exist for carriers of pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes., Patients and Methods: An international pooled cohort of 8091 BRCA1/2 variant carriers was used for retrospective and prospective analyses separately for premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cox regression was used to estimate breast cancer risk associations with height, BMI, and weight change., Results: In the retrospective analysis, taller height was associated with risk of premenopausal breast cancer for BRCA2 variant carriers (HR 1.20 per 10 cm increase, 95% CI 1.04-1.38). Higher young-adult BMI was associated with lower premenopausal breast cancer risk for both BRCA1 (HR 0.75 per 5 kg/m 2 , 95% CI 0.66-0.84) and BRCA2 (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.89) variant carriers in the retrospective analysis, with consistent, though not statistically significant, findings from the prospective analysis. In the prospective analysis, higher BMI and adult weight gain were associated with higher postmenopausal breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers (HR 1.20 per 5 kg/m 2 , 95% CI 1.02-1.42; and HR 1.10 per 5 kg weight gain, 95% CI 1.01-1.19, respectively)., Conclusion: Anthropometric measures are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant carriers, with relative risk estimates that are generally consistent with those for women from the general population., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The distribution of ovarian tumour characteristics differs between germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers and non-carriers. In this study, we assessed the utility of ovarian tumour characteristics as predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity, for application using the American College of Medical Genetics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) variant classification system., Methods: Data for 10,373 ovarian cancer cases, including carriers and non-carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants, were collected from unpublished international cohorts and consortia and published studies. Likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated for the association of ovarian cancer histology and other characteristics, with BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity. Estimates were aligned to ACMG/AMP code strengths (supporting, moderate, strong)., Results: No histological subtype provided informative ACMG/AMP evidence in favour of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity. Evidence against variant pathogenicity was estimated for the mucinous and clear cell histologies (supporting) and borderline cases (moderate). Refined associations are provided according to tumour grade, invasion and age at diagnosis., Conclusions: We provide detailed estimates for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant pathogenicity based on ovarian tumour characteristics. This evidence can be combined with other variant information under the ACMG/AMP classification system, to improve classification and carrier clinical management., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1 , BRCA2 , MLH1 , MSH2 , MSH6 , BRIP1 , PALB2 , RAD51D and RAD51C are identified in approximately 15% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC). While there are clear guidelines around clinical management of cancer risk in patients with GPV in BRCA1 , BRCA2 , MLH1 , MSH2 and MSH6 , there are few guidelines on how to manage the more moderate OC risk in patients with GPV in BRIP1 , PALB2 , RAD51D and RAD51C , with clinical questions about appropriateness and timing of risk-reducing gynaecological surgery. Furthermore, while recognition of RAD51C and R AD51D as OC predisposition genes has been established for several years, an association with breast cancer (BC) has only more recently been described and clinical management of this risk has been unclear. With expansion of genetic testing of these genes to all patients with non-mucinous OC, new data on BC risk and improved estimates of OC risk, the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project convened a 2-day meeting to reach a national consensus on clinical management of BRIP1 , PALB2 , RAD51D and RAD51C carriers in clinical practice. In this paper, we present a summary of the processes used to reach and agree on a consensus, as well as the key recommendations from the meeting., Competing Interests: Competing interests: HH received honoraria from AstraZeneca for advisory roles. CT received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Roche for advisory roles, which were donated in full to charity (https://tukongote.com/, registration number 11511580, charity number 1186151). RM declares research funding from Barts & the London Charity, Rosetrees Trust, GSK, Eve Appeal, CRUK and Yorkshire Cancer Research outside this work; and honorarium for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca/MSD/GSK/EGL. DME was in receipt of research funding from AstraZeneca. ANR had prior consultancy arrangements with Abcodia and Everything Genetic. ACA was listed as a creator of BOADICEA, which was licensed by Cambridge Enterprise for commercial purposes., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

In the UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends that women at moderate or high risk of breast cancer be offered risk-reducing medication and enhanced breast screening/surveillance. In June 2022, NICE withdrew a statement recommending assessment of risk in primary care only when women present with concerns. This shift to the proactive assessment of risk substantially changes the role of primary care, in effect paving the way for a primary care-based screening programme to identify those at moderate or high risk of breast cancer. In this article, we review the literature surrounding proactive breast cancer risk assessment within primary care against the consolidated framework for screening. We find that risk assessment for women under 50 years currently satisfies many of the standard principles for screening. Most notably, there are large numbers of women at moderate or high risk currently unidentified, risk models exist that can identify those women with reasonable accuracy, and management options offer the opportunity to reduce breast cancer incidence and mortality in that group. However, there remain a number of uncertainties and research gaps, particularly around the programme/system requirements, that need to be addressed before these benefits can be realised., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The multifactorial risk prediction model BOADICEA enables identification of women at higher or lower risk of developing breast cancer. BOADICEA models genetic susceptibility in terms of the effects of rare variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes and a polygenic component, decomposed into an unmeasured and a measured component - the polygenic risk score (PRS). The current version was developed using a 313 SNP PRS. Here, we evaluated approaches to incorporating this PRS and alternative PRS in BOADICEA., Methods: The mean, SD, and proportion of the overall polygenic component explained by the PRS (α2) need to be estimated. $\alpha $ was estimated using logistic regression, where the age-specific log-OR is constrained to be a function of the age-dependent polygenic relative risk in BOADICEA; and using a retrospective likelihood (RL) approach that models, in addition, the unmeasured polygenic component., Results: Parameters were computed for 11 PRS, including 6 variations of the 313 SNP PRS used in clinical trials and implementation studies. The logistic regression approach underestimates $\alpha $, as compared with the RL estimates. The RL $\alpha $ estimates were very close to those obtained by assuming proportionality to the OR per 1 SD, with the constant of proportionality estimated using the 313 SNP PRS. Small variations in the SNPs included in the PRS can lead to large differences in the mean., Conclusions: BOADICEA can be readily adapted to different PRS in a manner that maintains consistency of the model., Impact: : The methods described facilitate comprehensive breast cancer risk assessment., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Second primary cancer incidence is rising among breast cancer survivors. We examined the risks of non-breast second primaries, in combination and at specific cancer sites, through a systematic review and meta-analysis., Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, seeking studies published by March 2022. We included studies that reported standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), with associated standard errors, assessing the combined risk of second non-breast primaries following breast cancer. We performed meta-analyses of combined second primary risks, stratifying by age, follow-up duration, and geographic region. We also assessed second primary risks at several specific sites, stratifying by age. The inverse variance method with DerSimonian-Laird estimators was used in all meta-analyses, assuming a random-effects model. Associated biases and study quality were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale., Results: One prospective and twenty-seven retrospective cohort studies were identified. SIRs for second non-breast primaries combined ranged from 0.84 to 1.84. The summary SIR estimate was 1.24 (95% CI 1.14-1.36, I 2 : 99%). This varied by age: the estimate was 1.59 (95% CI 1.36-1.85) when breast cancer was diagnosed before age 50, which was significantly higher than in women first diagnosed at 50 or over (SIR: 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.36, p for difference: < 0.001). SPC risks were also significantly higher when based on Asian, rather than European, registries (Asia-SIR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.29-1.67. Europe-SIR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.28). There were significantly increased risks of second thyroid (SIR: 1.89, 95% CI 1.49-2.38), corpus uteri (SIR: 1.84, 95% CI 1.53-2.23), ovary (SIR: 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73), kidney (SIR: 1.43, 95% CI 1.17-1.73), oesophagus (SIR: 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.55), skin (melanoma) (SIR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52), blood (leukaemia) (SIR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.45), lung (SIR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.51), stomach (SIR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.12-1.36) and bladder (SIR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) primaries., Conclusions: Breast cancer survivors are at significantly increased risk of second primaries at many sites. Risks are higher for those diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 and in Asian breast cancer survivors compared to European breast cancer survivors. This study is limited by a lack of data on potentially confounding variables. The conclusions may inform clinical management decisions following breast cancer, although specific clinical recommendations lie outside the scope of this review., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Truncating pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants of CDH1 cause hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), a tumour risk syndrome that predisposes carrier individuals to diffuse gastric and lobular breast cancer. Rare CDH1 missense variants are often classified as variants of unknown significance. We conducted a genotype-phenotype analysis in families carrying rare CDH1 variants, comparing cancer spectrum in carriers of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPV; analysed jointly) or missense variants of unknown significance, assessing the frequency of families with lobular breast cancer among PV/LPV carrier families, and testing the performance of lobular breast cancer-expanded criteria for CDH1 testing., Methods: This genotype-first study used retrospective diagnostic and clinical data from 854 carriers of 398 rare CDH1 variants and 1021 relatives, irrespective of HDGC clinical criteria, from 29 institutions in ten member-countries of the European Reference Network on Tumour Risk Syndromes (ERN GENTURIS). Data were collected from Oct 1, 2018, to Sept 20, 2022. Variants were classified by molecular type and clinical actionability with the American College of Medical Genetics and Association for Molecular Pathology CDH1 guidelines (version 2). Families were categorised by whether they fulfilled the 2015 and 2020 HDGC clinical criteria. Genotype-phenotype associations were analysed by Student's t test, Kruskal-Wallis, χ 2 , and multivariable logistic regression models. Performance of HDGC clinical criteria sets were assessed with an equivalence test and Youden index, and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were compared by Z test., Findings: From 1971 phenotypes (contributed by 854 probands and 1021 relatives aged 1-93 years), 460 had gastric and breast cancer histology available. CDH1 truncating PV/LPVs occurred in 176 (21%) of 854 families and missense variants of unknown significance in 169 (20%) families. Multivariable logistic regression comparing phenotypes occurring in families carrying PV/LPVs or missense variants of unknown significance showed that lobular breast cancer had the greatest positive association with the presence of PV/LPVs (odds ratio 12·39 [95% CI 2·66-57·74], p=0·0014), followed by diffuse gastric cancer (8·00 [2·18-29·39], p=0·0017) and gastric cancer (7·81 [2·03-29·96], p=0·0027). 136 (77%) of 176 families carrying PV/LPVs fulfilled the 2015 HDGC criteria. Of the remaining 40 (23%) families, who did not fulfil the 2015 criteria, 11 fulfilled the 2020 HDGC criteria, and 18 had lobular breast cancer only or lobular breast cancer and gastric cancer, but did not meet the 2020 criteria. No specific CDH1 variant was found to predispose individuals specifically to lobular breast cancer, although 12 (7%) of 176 PV/LPV carrier families had lobular breast cancer only. Addition of three new lobular breast cancer-centred criteria improved testing sensitivity while retaining high specificity. The probability of finding CDH1 PV/LPVs in patients fulfilling the lobular breast cancer-expanded criteria, compared with the 2020 criteria, increased significantly (AUC 0·92 vs 0·88; Z score 3·54; p=0·0004)., Interpretation: CDH1 PV/LPVs were positively associated with HDGC-related phenotypes (lobular breast cancer, diffuse gastric cancer, and gastric cancer), and no evidence for a positive association with these phenotypes was found for CDH1 missense variants of unknown significance. CDH1 PV/LPVs occurred often in families with lobular breast cancer who did not fulfil the 2020 HDGC criteria, supporting the expansion of lobular breast cancer-centred criteria., Funding: European Reference Network on Genetic Tumour Risk Syndromes, European Regional Development Fund, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portugal), Cancer Research UK, and European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DGE declares fees from Astrazeneca and Recursion. ERW declares grants from International Alliance for Cancer Early Detection, for which they are codirector of the research domain. GNR declares receipt of funding for study materials, medical writing, and article processing charges from Italian Ministry of Education (GNR). MJLL declares consulting fees (via the Radboud University Medical Center) from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), AstraZeneca, Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Illumina, GlaxoSmithKline. PRB declares fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and is a scientific committee member for the Geneticancer patients association. JBa declares fees from AstraZeneca, Lilly, and Pfizer. SA is a member of APC subVCEP of the InSiGHT/ClinGen Hereditary Colorectal Cancer/Polyposis Variant Curation Expert Panel; is an unpaid member of the German Gene Diagnostics Commission and speaker of the Centre for Hereditary Tumour Syndromes of the University of Bonn. RH declares grants from SLA Pharma and Janssen Pharmaceuticals; consulting fees from Janssen and One Two Therapeutics; equipment from Fujifilm; is the head of German Consortium for Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer; and is an unpaid advisory board member of the Lynch Syndrome advocacy Group and the Familial Polyposis Group. ES declares grants from NCT/DKTK Master. ES declares honoraria for presentations from AstraZeneca, Georg Thieme Verlag KG, and payment for expert testimony from Illumina; is a member of the board of directors of Deutsche Gesellschaft für HumanGenetik; an advisor for Dresden-concept Genome Center; and is board of directors president (paid) for LNS laboratoire National de Santé. RdP declares support for presentations (via his institution) from MSD and AstraZeneca. GC declares to receive funding for study materials, medical writing, article processing charges from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, the Instituto de Salud Carlos III CIBERONC, and the Government of Catalonia.; consulting fees from VCN Biosciences Synthetic Biologics; is the chair of the Council of the International Society of Hereditary Gastrointestinal Tumours and the FUREGA Fundació Recerca en Gastroenterologia; and stock in Synthetic Biologics. CLa declares consulting fees and honoraria from AstraZeneca and MSD, and is a paid advisory board member for Illumina., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) for breast cancer and the epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer (EOC) models included in the CanRisk tool (www.canrisk.org) provide future cancer risks based on pathogenic variants in cancer-susceptibility genes, polygenic risk scores, breast density, questionnaire-based risk factors and family history. Here, we extend the models to include the effects of pathogenic variants in recently established breast cancer and EOC susceptibility genes, up-to-date age-specific pathology distributions and continuous risk factors., Methods: BOADICEA was extended to further incorporate the associations of pathogenic variants in BARD1 , RAD51C and RAD51D with breast cancer risk. The EOC model was extended to include the association of PALB2 pathogenic variants with EOC risk. Age-specific distributions of oestrogen-receptor-negative and triple-negative breast cancer status for pathogenic variant carriers in these genes and CHEK2 and ATM were also incorporated. A novel method to include continuous risk factors was developed, exemplified by including adult height as continuous., Results: BARD1 , RAD51C and RAD51D explain 0.31% of the breast cancer polygenic variance. When incorporated into the multifactorial model, 34%-44% of these carriers would be reclassified to the near-population and 15%-22% to the high-risk categories based on the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Under the EOC multifactorial model, 62%, 35% and 3% of PALB2 carriers have lifetime EOC risks of <5%, 5%-10% and >10%, respectively. Including height as continuous, increased the breast cancer relative risk variance from 0.002 to 0.010., Conclusions: These extensions will allow for better personalised risks for BARD1 , RAD51C , RAD51D and PALB2 pathogenic variant carriers and more informed choices on screening, prevention, risk factor modification or other risk-reducing options., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors ACA, DFE, AL, AC and TC are named inventors of BOADICEA v5 commercialised by Cambridge Enterprise. AL is now employed by Illumina., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

The contribution of germline copy number variants (CNVs) to risk of developing cancer in individuals with pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants remains relatively unknown. We conducted the largest genome-wide analysis of CNVs in 15,342 BRCA1 and 10,740 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. We used these results to prioritise a candidate breast cancer risk-modifier gene for laboratory analysis and biological validation. Notably, the HR for deletions in BRCA1 suggested an elevated breast cancer risk estimate (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.21), 95% confidence interval (95% CI = 1.09-1.35) compared with non-CNV pathogenic variants. In contrast, deletions overlapping SULT1A1 suggested a decreased breast cancer risk (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers. Functional analyses of SULT1A1 showed that reduced mRNA expression in pathogenic BRCA1 variant cells was associated with reduced cellular proliferation and reduced DNA damage after treatment with DNA damaging agents. These data provide evidence that deleterious variants in BRCA1 plus SULT1A1 deletions contribute to variable breast cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer (EOC) has high mortality partly due to late diagnosis. Prevention is available but may be associated with adverse effects. A multifactorial risk model based on known genetic and epidemiological risk factors (RFs) for EOC can help identify women at higher risk who could benefit from targeted screening and prevention., Methods: We developed a multifactorial EOC risk model for women of European ancestry incorporating the effects of pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 , BRCA2 , RAD51C , RAD51D and BRIP1 , a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) of arbitrary size, the effects of RFs and explicit family history (FH) using a synthetic model approach. The PRS, PV and RFs were assumed to act multiplicatively., Results: Based on a currently available PRS for EOC that explains 5% of the EOC polygenic variance, the estimated lifetime risks under the multifactorial model in the general population vary from 0.5% to 4.6% for the first to 99th percentiles of the EOC risk distribution. The corresponding range for women with an affected first-degree relative is 1.9%-10.3%. Based on the combined risk distribution, 33% of RAD51D PV carriers are expected to have a lifetime EOC risk of less than 10%. RFs provided the widest distribution, followed by the PRS. In an independent partial model validation, absolute and relative 5-year risks were well calibrated in quintiles of predicted risk., Conclusion: This multifactorial risk model can facilitate stratification, in particular among women with FH of cancer and/or moderate-risk and high-risk PVs. The model is available via the CanRisk Tool (www.canrisk.org)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DFE, ACA, APC, AL and TC are listed as creators of the BOADICEA model, which has been licensed to Cambridge Enterprise for commercialisation. UM has shares in Abcodia awarded to her by UCL., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To provide precise age-specific risk estimates of cancers other than female breast and ovarian cancers associated with pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 for effective cancer risk management., Methods: We used data from 3,184 BRCA1 and 2,157 BRCA2 families in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 to estimate age-specific relative (RR) and absolute risks for 22 first primary cancer types adjusting for family ascertainment., Results: BRCA1 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 4.30; 95% CI, 1.09 to 16.96), pancreatic (RR = 2.36; 95% CI, 1.51 to 3.68), and stomach (RR = 2.17; 95% CI, 1.25 to 3.77) cancers. Associations with colorectal and gallbladder cancers were also suggested. BRCA2 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 44.0; 95% CI, 21.3 to 90.9), stomach (RR = 3.69; 95% CI, 2.40 to 5.67), pancreatic (RR = 3.34; 95% CI, 2.21 to 5.06), and prostate (RR = 2.22; 95% CI, 1.63 to 3.03) cancers. The stomach cancer RR was higher for females than males (6.89 v 2.76; P = .04). The absolute risks to age 80 years ranged from 0.4% for male breast cancer to approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer for BRCA1 carriers and from approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer to 27% for prostate cancer for BRCA2 carriers., Conclusion: In addition to female breast and ovarian cancers, BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs are associated with increased risks of male breast, pancreatic, stomach, and prostate (only BRCA2 PVs) cancers, but not with the risks of other previously suggested cancers. The estimated age-specific risks will refine cancer risk management in men and women with BRCA1/2 PVs., Competing Interests: Timothy R. RebbeckHonoraria: AstraZeneca (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca (I) Andrew LeeEmployment: IlluminaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I am an inventor of the BOADICEA model that is licensed to Cambridge Enterprise (part of the University of Cambridge) for commercialization. I have received royalties from Cambridge Enterprise. Norbert ArnoldHonoraria: AstraZeneca Åke BorgHonoraria: Roche, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, AstraZeneca Sandrine CaputoResearch Funding: AstraZeneca/France (Inst) Wendy K. ChungConsulting or Advisory Role: RegeneronResearch Funding: Biogen Chrystelle ColasConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca/Merck, Pfizer Miguel de la HoyaConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZenecaResearch Funding: AstraZeneca D. Gareth EvansHonoraria: AstraZeneca Tanja N. FehmConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche George FountzilasStock and Other Ownership Interests: GENPREX Inc (I), ARIAD (I), Deciphera Pharmaceuticals Inc (I), Daiichi Sankyo, RFL Holdings, FORMYCONHonoraria: AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Roche, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Roche (I), LEO Pharma (I), Pfizer (I)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck (I), Pfizer (I), K.A.M Oncology/Hematology (I) Megan FronePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Receive royalties for being a codeveloper of CancerGene Connect Eric HahnenConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca Helen HansonHonoraria: Pfizer Beth Y. KarlanConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche Pharma AG, Merck, Mercy Bioanalytics, GRAILResearch Funding: GOG Foundation (Inst), NCI-NRG Oncology (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: US and EU patent on gene signatureOther Relationship: Elsevier Irene KonstantopoulouSpeakers' Bureau: AstraZenecaResearch Funding: AstraZeneca Ava KwongHonoraria: Stryker, AstraZeneca Taiwan Limited, Roche Singapore, Pfizer, AstraZeneca Hong Kong Ltd Joanne Ngeow Yuen YieResearch Funding: AstraZeneca Rita K. SchmutzlerHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Clovis, MSD/AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, MSD/AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Amgen Leigha SenterConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca/MerckSpeakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca/Merck Christian F. SingerHonoraria: Novartis, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbHConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gilead Sciences, Sanofi/Aventis, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Novartis, AstraZeneca/MedImmuneResearch Funding: Novartis, Sanofi, Myriad Genetics, Roche, AstraZeneca/MedImmuneTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Novartis Dominique Stoppa-LyonnetHonoraria: AstraZeneca/Merck (Inst) Soo Hwang TeoSpeakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche Sebastian A. WagnerConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer Antonis C. AntoniouPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Inventor of the BOADICEA model, which has been licensed to Cambridge Enterprise for commercialization. May receive royalties if commercialization is realized.No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

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 ancestries; 7,669 women of East Asian ancestries; 1,072 women of African ancestries, and in 18,915 BRCA1 and 12,337 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestries. 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 ancestries; 1.14 (95% CI: 1.08-1.19, AUC: 0.538) in women of East Asian ancestries; 1.38 (95% CI: 1.21-1.58, AUC: 0.593) in women of African ancestries; hazard ratios of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.29-1.43, AUC: 0.592) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.35-1.64, 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., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

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 Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose: Germline genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants has been a part of clinical practice for >2 decades. However, no studies have compared the cancer risks associated with missense pathogenic variants (PVs) with those associated with protein truncating (PTC) variants., Methods: We collected 582 informative pedigrees segregating 1 of 28 missense PVs in BRCA1 and 153 pedigrees segregating 1 of 12 missense PVs in BRCA2. We analyzed 324 pedigrees with PTC variants in BRCA1 and 214 pedigrees with PTC variants in BRCA2. Cancer risks were estimated using modified segregation analysis., Results: Estimated breast cancer risks were markedly lower for women aged >50 years carrying BRCA1 missense PVs than for the women carrying BRCA1 PTC variants (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.9 [2.4-6.2] for PVs vs 12.8 [5.7-28.7] for PTC variants; P = .01), particularly for missense PVs in the BRCA1 C-terminal domain (HR = 2.8 [1.4-5.6]; P = .005). In case of BRCA2, for women aged >50 years, the HR was 3.9 (2.0-7.2) for those heterozygous for missense PVs compared with 7.0 (3.3-14.7) for those harboring PTC variants. BRCA1 p.[Cys64Arg] and BRCA2 p.[Trp2626Cys] were associated with particularly low risks of breast cancer compared with other PVs., Conclusion: These results have important implications for the counseling of at-risk women who harbor missense PVs in the BRCA1/2 genes., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest F.J.C. has received consulting fees from Astrazeneca. A.S. has received consulting fees from Pfizer and Astra Zeneca. T.V.O.H. has received honoraria from Pfizer. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Familial ovarian cancer (OC) cases not harbouring pathogenic variants in either of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 OC-predisposing genes, which function in homologous recombination (HR) of DNA, could involve pathogenic variants in other DNA repair pathway genes., Methods: Whole exome sequencing was used to identify rare variants in HR genes in a BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant negative OC family of French Canadian (FC) ancestry, a population exhibiting genetic drift. OC cases and cancer-free individuals from FC and non-FC populations were investigated for carrier frequency of FANCI c.1813C>T; p.L605F, the top-ranking candidate. Gene and protein expression were investigated in cancer cell lines and tissue microarrays, respectively., Results: In FC subjects, c.1813C>T was more common in familial (7.1%, 3/42) than sporadic (1.6%, 7/439) OC cases (P = 0.048). Carriers were detected in 2.5% (74/2950) of cancer-free females though female/male carriers were more likely to have a first-degree relative with OC (121/5249, 2.3%; Spearman correlation = 0.037; P = 0.011), suggesting a role in risk. Many of the cancer-free females had host factors known to reduce risk to OC which could influence cancer risk in this population. There was an increased carrier frequency of FANCI c.1813C>T in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant negative OC families, when including the discovery family, compared to cancer-free females (3/23, 13%; OR = 5.8; 95%CI = 1.7-19; P = 0.005). In non-FC subjects, 10 candidate FANCI variants were identified in 4.1% (21/516) of Australian OC cases negative for pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2, including 10 carriers of FANCI c.1813C>T. Candidate variants were significantly more common in familial OC than in sporadic OC (P = 0.04). Localization of FANCD2, part of the FANCI-FANCD2 (ID2) binding complex in the Fanconi anaemia (FA) pathway, to sites of induced DNA damage was severely impeded in cells expressing the p.L605F isoform. This isoform was expressed at a reduced level, destabilized by DNA damaging agent treatment in both HeLa and OC cell lines, and exhibited sensitivity to cisplatin but not to a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. By tissue microarray analyses, FANCI protein was consistently expressed in fallopian tube epithelial cells and only expressed at low-to-moderate levels in 88% (83/94) of OC samples., Conclusions: This is the first study to describe candidate OC variants in FANCI, a member of the ID2 complex of the FA DNA repair pathway. Our data suggest that pathogenic FANCI variants may modify OC risk in cancer families., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Establishing a universally applicable protocol to assess the impact of BRCA1 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) expression is a problem which has yet to be resolved despite major progresses have been made. The numerous difficulties which must be overcome include the choices of cellular models and functional assays. We hypothesised that the use of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells might facilitate the standardisation of protocols for classification, and could better model the disease process. We generated eight iPS cell lines from patient samples expressing either BRCA1 pathogenic variants, non-pathogenic variants, or BRCA1 VUSs. The impact of these variants on DNA damage repair was examined using a ɣH2AX foci formation assay, a Homologous Repair (HR) reporter assay, and a chromosome abnormality assay. Finally, all lines were tested for their ability to differentiate into mammary lineages in vitro. While the results obtained from the two BRCA1 pathogenic variants were consistent with published data, some other variants exhibited differences. The most striking of these was the BRCA1 variant Y856H (classified as benign), which was unexpectedly found to present a faulty HR repair pathway, a finding linked to the presence of an additional variant in the ATM gene. Finally, all lines were able to differentiate first into mammospheres, and then into more advanced mammary lineages expressing luminal- or basal-specific markers. This study stresses that BRCA1 genetic analysis alone is insufficient to establish a reliable and functional classification for assessment of clinical risk, and that it cannot be performed without considering the other genetic aberrations which may be present in patients. The study also provides promising opportunities for elucidating the physiopathology and clinical evolution of breast cancer, by using iPS cells., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is a syndrome defined by an increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer most commonly due to germline disease-causing variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, but also other causative genes such as PALB2, ATM and CHEK2. As genetic testing becomes more prevalent and new clinical data emerge, updates of national guidelines are required to incorporate these advances in our knowledge. The aim of this work is to review the guidelines for HBOC genetic testing and clinical surveillance across European countries, mostly affiliated to the European Reference Network (ERN) for Genetic Tumor Risk Syndroms (GENTURIS). Young onset breast cancer (BC), triple negative phenotype, or bilateral BC are considered as criteria for genetic testing in all, with differences in age limits. Testing of invasive epithelial non-mucinous ovarian cancer is also universally accepted. While breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is consistently recommended in high-risk individuals, age of onset for mammograms differ between 30 and 40 years. Risk-reducing mastectomy is commonly offered as an option, while risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is universally recommended. The largest differences are observed with respect to ovarian surveillance prior to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and in breast surveillance for carriers of non-BRCA1/2 genes. These differences in national guidelines reflect the variations in clinical consensus that may be reached in the absence of consistent evidence for some recommendations., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the association between a previously published 313 variant-based breast cancer (BC) polygenic risk score (PRS 313 ) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk, in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant heterozygotes., Methods: We included women of European ancestry with a prevalent first primary invasive BC (BRCA1 = 6,591 with 1,402 prevalent CBC cases; BRCA2 = 4,208 with 647 prevalent CBC cases) from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA), a large international retrospective series. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the association between overall and ER-specific PRS 313 and CBC risk., Results: For BRCA1 heterozygotes the estrogen receptor (ER)-negative PRS 313 showed the largest association with CBC risk, hazard ratio (HR) per SD = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.06-1.18), C-index = 0.53; for BRCA2 heterozygotes, this was the ER-positive PRS 313 , HR = 1.15, 95% CI (1.07-1.25), C-index = 0.57. Adjusting for family history, age at diagnosis, treatment, or pathological characteristics for the first BC did not change association effect sizes. For women developing first BC < age 40 years, the cumulative PRS 313 5th and 95th percentile 10-year CBC risks were 22% and 32% for BRCA1 and 13% and 23% for BRCA2 heterozygotes, respectively., Conclusion: The PRS 313 can be used to refine individual CBC risks for BRCA1/2 heterozygotes of European ancestry, however the PRS 313 needs to be considered in the context of a multifactorial risk model to evaluate whether it might influence clinical decision-making., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: PALB2 germline pathogenic variants are associated with increased breast cancer risk and smaller increased risk of pancreatic and likely ovarian cancer. Resources for health-care professionals managing PALB2 heterozygotes are currently limited., Methods: A workgroup of experts sought to outline management of PALB2 heterozygotes based on current evidence. Peer-reviewed publications from PubMed were identified to guide recommendations, which arose by consensus and the collective expertise of the authors., Results: PALB2 heterozygotes should be offered BRCA1/2-equivalent breast surveillance. Risk-reducing mastectomy can be considered guided by personalized risk estimates. Pancreatic cancer surveillance should be considered, but ideally as part of a clinical trial. Typically, ovarian cancer surveillance is not recommended, and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy should only rarely be considered before the age of 50. Given the mechanistic similarities, PALB2 heterozygotes should be considered for therapeutic regimens and trials as those for BRCA1/2., Conclusion: This guidance is similar to those for BRCA1/2. While the range of the cancer risk estimates overlap with BRCA1/2, point estimates are lower in PALB2 so individualized estimates are important for management decisions. Systematic prospective data collection is needed to determine as yet unanswered questions such as the risk of contralateral breast cancer and survival after cancer diagnosis., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Background: The CanRisk Tool (https://canrisk.org) is the next-generation web interface for the latest version of the BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) state-of-the-art risk model and a forthcoming ovarian cancer risk model., Methods: The tool captures information on family history, rare pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes, polygenic risk scores, lifestyle/hormonal/clinical features, and imaging risk factors to predict breast and ovarian cancer risks and estimate the probabilities of carrying pathogenic variants in certain genes. It was implemented using modern web frameworks, technologies, and web services to make it extensible and increase accessibility to researchers and third-party applications. The design of the graphical user interface was informed by feedback from health care professionals and a formal evaluation., Results: This freely accessible tool was designed to be user friendly for clinicians and to boost acceptability in clinical settings. The tool incorporates a novel graphical pedigree builder to facilitate collection of the family history data required by risk calculations., Conclusions: The CanRisk Tool provides health care professionals and researchers with a user-friendly interface to carry out multifactorial breast and ovarian cancer risk predictions. It is the first freely accessible cancer risk prediction program to carry the CE marking., Impact: There have been over 3,100 account registrations, and 98,000 breast and ovarian cancer risk calculations have been run within the first 9 months of the CanRisk Tool launch., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Breast cancer (BC) risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers varies by genetic and familial factors. About 50 common variants have been shown to modify BC risk for mutation carriers. All but three, were identified in general population studies. Other mutation carrier-specific susceptibility variants may exist but studies of mutation carriers have so far been underpowered. We conduct a novel case-only genome-wide association study comparing genotype frequencies between 60,212 general population BC cases and 13,007 cases with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We identify robust novel associations for 2 variants with BC for BRCA1 and 3 for BRCA2 mutation carriers, P < 10 -8 , at 5 loci, which are not associated with risk in the general population. They include rs60882887 at 11p11.2 where MADD, SP11 and EIF1, genes previously implicated in BC biology, are predicted as potential targets. These findings will contribute towards customising BC polygenic risk scores for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Background: The purpose of this study was to estimate precise age-specific tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC) and breast cancer (BC) risks for carriers of pathogenic variants in RAD51C and RAD51D., Methods: We analyzed data from 6178 families, 125 with pathogenic variants in RAD51C, and 6690 families, 60 with pathogenic variants in RAD51D. TOC and BC relative and cumulative risks were estimated using complex segregation analysis to model the cancer inheritance patterns in families while adjusting for the mode of ascertainment of each family. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Pathogenic variants in both RAD51C and RAD51D were associated with TOC (RAD51C: relative risk [RR] = 7.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.60 to 10.19; P = 5 × 10-40; RAD51D: RR = 7.60, 95% CI = 5.61 to 10.30; P = 5 × 10-39) and BC (RAD51C: RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.39 to 2.85; P = 1.55 × 10-4; RAD51D: RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.72; P = .002). For both RAD51C and RAD51D, there was a suggestion that the TOC relative risks increased with age until around age 60 years and decreased thereafter. The estimated cumulative risks of developing TOC to age 80 years were 11% (95% CI = 6% to 21%) for RAD51C and 13% (95% CI = 7% to 23%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. The estimated cumulative risks of developing BC to 80 years were 21% (95% CI = 15% to 29%) for RAD51C and 20% (95% CI = 14% to 28%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. Both TOC and BC risks for RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers varied by cancer family history and could be as high as 32-36% for TOC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with TOC, or 44-46% for BC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with BC., Conclusions: These estimates will facilitate the genetic counseling of RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers and justify the incorporation of RAD51C and RAD51D into cancer risk prediction models., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Whether radiation therapy (RT) affects contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk in women with pathogenic germline variants in moderate- to high-penetrance breast cancer-associated genes is unknown. In a population-based case-control study, we examined the association between RT; variants in ATM, BRCA1/2, or CHEK2*1100delC; and CBC risk. We analyzed 708 cases of women with CBC and 1399 controls with unilateral breast cancer, all diagnosed with first invasive breast cancer between 1985 and 2000 and aged younger than 55 years at diagnosis and screened for variants in breast cancer-associated genes. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable conditional logistic regression. RT did not modify the association between known pathogenic variants and CBC risk (eg, BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers without RT: RR = 3.52, 95% CI = 1.76 to 7.01; BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers with RT: RR = 4.46, 95% CI = 2.96 to 6.71), suggesting that modifying RT plans for young women with breast cancer is unwarranted. Rare ATM missense variants, not currently identified as pathogenic, were associated with increased risk of RT-associated CBC (carriers of ATM rare missense variants of uncertain significance without RT: RR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.09 to 1.55; carriers of ATM rare missense variants of uncertain significance with RT: RR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.31 to 6.80). Further mechanistic studies will aid clinical decision-making related to RT., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To examined the impact of reproductive factors on the relationship between radiation treatment (RT) for a first breast cancer and risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC)., Methods: The Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study is a multi-center, population-based case-control study where cases are women with asynchronous CBC (N = 1521) and controls are women with unilateral breast cancer (N = 2211). Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using conditional logistic regression to assess the independent and joint effects of RT (ever/never and location-specific stray radiation dose to the contralateral breast [0, >0-<1Gy, ≥1Gy]) and reproductive factors (e.g., parity)., Results: Nulliparous women treated with RT (≥1Gy dose) were at increased risk of CBC compared with nulliparous women not treated with RT, although this relationship did not reach statistical significance (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.87, 2.07). Women treated with RT who had an interval pregnancy (i.e., pregnancy after first diagnosis and before second diagnosis [in cases]/reference date [in controls]) had an increased risk of CBC compared with those who had an interval pregnancy with no RT (RR = 4.60, 95% CI 1.16, 18.28). This was most apparent for women with higher radiation doses to the contralateral breast., Conclusion: Among young female survivors of breast cancer, we found some evidence suggesting that having an interval pregnancy could increase a woman's risk of CBC following RT for a first breast cancer. While sampling variability precludes strong interpretations, these findings suggest a role for pregnancy and hormonal factors in radiation-associated CBC., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest PC: Research Funding: 10X Genomics (institution), Illumina (institution), Canon (institution), Cellink (institution), Other: Amgen (stockholder). No other authors have conflicts to report., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The European Collaborative on Personalized Early Detection and Prevention of Breast Cancer (ENVISION) brings together several international research consortia working on different aspects of the personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer. In a consensus conference held in 2019, the members of this network identified research areas requiring development to enable evidence-based personalized interventions that might improve the benefits and reduce the harms of existing breast cancer screening and prevention programmes. The priority areas identified were: 1) breast cancer subtype-specific risk assessment tools applicable to women of all ancestries; 2) intermediate surrogate markers of response to preventive measures; 3) novel non-surgical preventive measures to reduce the incidence of breast cancer of poor prognosis; and 4) hybrid effectiveness-implementation research combined with modelling studies to evaluate the long-term population outcomes of risk-based early detection strategies. The implementation of such programmes would require health-care systems to be open to learning and adapting, the engagement of a diverse range of stakeholders and tailoring to societal norms and values, while also addressing the ethical and legal issues. In this Consensus Statement, we discuss the current state of breast cancer risk prediction, risk-stratified prevention and early detection strategies, and their implementation. Throughout, we highlight priorities for advancing each of these areas.

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

Previous transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype-specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta-analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER-). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER- subtypes, using a case-only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER- breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS-significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast-cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS-significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER- breast cancer., (© 2020 The Authors. Genetic Epidemiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Breast cancer susceptibility variants frequently show heterogeneity in associations by tumor subtype 1-3 . To identify novel loci, we performed a genome-wide association study including 133,384 breast cancer cases and 113,789 controls, plus 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer) of European ancestry, using both standard and novel methodologies that account for underlying tumor heterogeneity by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and tumor grade. We identified 32 novel susceptibility loci (P < 5.0 × 10 -8 ), 15 of which showed evidence for associations with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 0.05). Five loci showed associations (P < 0.05) in opposite directions between luminal and non-luminal subtypes. In silico analyses showed that these five loci contained cell-specific enhancers that differed between normal luminal and basal mammary cells. The genetic correlations between five intrinsic-like subtypes ranged from 0.35 to 0.80. The proportion of genome-wide chip heritability explained by all known susceptibility loci was 54.2% for luminal A-like disease and 37.6% for triple-negative disease. The odds ratios of polygenic risk scores, which included 330 variants, for the highest 1% of quantiles compared with middle quantiles were 5.63 and 3.02 for luminal A-like and triple-negative disease, respectively. These findings provide an improved understanding of genetic predisposition to breast cancer subtypes and will inform the development of subtype-specific polygenic risk scores.

Background: There is a growing focus on the development of multi-factorial cancer risk prediction algorithms alongside tools that operationalise them for clinical use. BOADICEA is a breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and other risk factors. A new user-friendly Web-based tool (CanRisk.org) has been developed to apply BOADICEA. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of the prototype CanRisk tool among two healthcare professional groups to inform further development, evaluation and implementation., Method: A multi-methods approach was used. Clinicians from primary care and specialist genetics clinics in England, France and Germany were invited to use the CanRisk prototype with two test cases (either face-to-face with a simulated patient or via a written vignette). Their views about the tool were examined via a semi-structured interview or equivalent open-ended questionnaire. Qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis and organised around Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability., Results: Seventy-five clinicians participated, 21 from primary care and 54 from specialist genetics clinics. Participants were from England (n = 37), France (n = 23) and Germany (n = 15). The prototype CanRisk tool was generally acceptable to most participants due to its intuitive design. Primary care clinicians were concerned about the amount of time needed to complete, interpret and communicate risk information. Clinicians from both settings were apprehensive about the impact of the CanRisk tool on their consultations and lack of opportunities to interpret risk scores before sharing them with their patients., Conclusions: The findings highlight the challenges associated with developing a complex tool for use in different clinical settings; they also helped refine the tool. This prototype may not have been versatile enough for clinical use in both primary care and specialist genetics clinics where the needs of clinicians are different, emphasising the importance of understanding the clinical context when developing cancer risk assessment tools., Competing Interests: The BOADICEA model has been licensed to Cambridge Enterprise for commercialization, with the authors D.F.E., A.C.A., A.P.C., A.L. and T.C. listed as its inventors. These authors may receive royalties in the future if commercialization is realized. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The National Institute of health and Care Excellence issued guidelines on familial breast cancer screening in 2004. Such guidelines should be uniformly implemented to ensure that members of the same family with the same level of risk, but living in different areas, have the same access to screening. We assessed uptake by creating a short, six question online survey designed to assess compliance in each regional area. We used this to conduct a survey of all 22 regional genetics services. There was a 100% response to the survey allowing a complete map to be created. The devolved nations had near complete compliance with the sole exception of SW Scotland, but in England the picture was fragmented with regions representing a combined population of 26.6 million (48%) not implementing the full NICE recommendations. Fifteen years after the publication of the original guidelines, major inequity in provision for screening still occurs and a postcode lottery exists for the management of women from families with a history of breast cancer. We estimate that up to 73 preventable breast cancer deaths occur each year due to the current inequity of access. It may be time to consider alternative funding and implementation models to ensure consistent access across the country.

Background: Tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption have been intensively studied in the general population to assess their effects on the risk of breast cancer, but very few studies have examined these effects in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Given the high breast cancer risk for mutation carriers and the importance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in DNA repair, better evidence on the associations of these lifestyle factors with breast cancer risk is essential., Methods: Using a large international pooled cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we conducted retrospective (5,707 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 3,525 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and prospective (2,276 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 1,610 BRCA2 mutation carriers) analyses of alcohol and tobacco consumption using Cox proportional hazards models., Results: For both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, none of the smoking-related variables was associated with breast cancer risk, except smoking for more than 5 years before a first full-term pregnancy (FFTP) when compared with parous women who never smoked. For BRCA1 mutation carriers, the HR from retrospective analysis (HR R ) was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.39] and the HR from prospective analysis (HR P ) was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.99-1.87). For BRCA2 mutation carriers, smoking for more than 5 years before an FFTP showed an association of a similar magnitude, but the confidence limits were wider (HR R = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55 and HR P = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83-2.01). For both carrier groups, alcohol consumption was not associated with breast cancer risk., Conclusions: The finding that smoking during the prereproductive years increases breast cancer risk for mutation carriers warrants further investigation., Impact: This is the largest prospective study of BRCA mutation carriers to assess these important risk factors., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: The effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is uncertain. Retrospective analyses have suggested a protective effect but may be substantially biased. Prospective studies have had limited power, particularly for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further, previous studies have not considered the effect of RRSO in the context of natural menopause., Methods: A multi-centre prospective cohort of 2272 BRCA1 and 1605 BRCA2 mutation carriers was followed for a mean of 5.4 and 4.9 years, respectively; 426 women developed incident breast cancer. RRSO was modelled as a time-dependent covariate in Cox regression, and its effect assessed in premenopausal and postmenopausal women., Results: There was no association between RRSO and breast cancer for BRCA1 (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.94-1.61) or BRCA2 (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.62-1.24) mutation carriers. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, HRs were 0.68 (95% CI 0.40-1.15) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64) for RRSO carried out before or after age 45 years, respectively. The HR for BRCA2 mutation carriers decreased with increasing time since RRSO (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.26-0.99 for 5 years or longer after RRSO). Estimates for premenopausal women were similar., Conclusion: We found no evidence that RRSO reduces breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. A potentially beneficial effect for BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed, particularly after 5 years following RRSO. These results may inform counselling and management of carriers with respect to RRSO.

Partner and localiser of BRCA2 forms part of a macromolecular complex with BRCA1 and BRCA2, which is critical for the repair of double-strand DNA breaks by homologous DNA recombination. Germline loss-of-function variants in the PALB2 gene may confer an increased lifetime risk of breast, pancreatic, ovarian and other cancers. However, the complete spectrum of predicted pathogenic PALB2 variants associated with each tissue type of cancer remains unknown. A systematic review is performed with the aim of cataloguing predicted pathogenic PALB2 variants in breast, ovary and pancreas cancers. All catalogued predicted pathogenic variants are analysed to assess for overlap and mutational "hotspots" within gene exons. Our results showed that 911 (92.5%) cases were described in breast cancer patients, 49 (5.0%) cases were described in ovarian cancer patients, and 24 (2.4%) cases were described in pancreatic cancer patients. The top five most frequently reported predicted pathogenic PALB2 variants were c.509&#95;510delGA, c.3113G > A, c.1592delT, c.172&#95;175delTTGT, and c.1240C > T, accounting for 57.3% of all cases. Breast and pancreatic cancers share five variants while breast and ovarian cancers share 12 variants. Breast, ovarian and pancreatic cancers share eight common variants. Exons with the highest mutation rates were exons 2 (6.7%), 1 (6.3%) and 3 (5.8%). This systematic review provides a quantitative catalogue of predicted pathogenic PALB2 variants described in cancers. This comprehensive analysis of the PALB2 mutational spectrum represents a useful resource for clinicians overseeing PALB2-related cancer surveillance and provides a valuable resource for future PALB2-specific research.

Genome-wide association studies have identified breast cancer risk variants in over 150 genomic regions, but the mechanisms underlying risk remain largely unknown. These regions were explored by combining association analysis with in silico genomic feature annotations. We defined 205 independent risk-associated signals with the set of credible causal variants in each one. In parallel, we used a Bayesian approach (PAINTOR) that combines genetic association, linkage disequilibrium and enriched genomic features to determine variants with high posterior probabilities of being causal. Potentially causal variants were significantly over-represented in active gene regulatory regions and transcription factor binding sites. We applied our INQUSIT pipeline for prioritizing genes as targets of those potentially causal variants, using gene expression (expression quantitative trait loci), chromatin interaction and functional annotations. Known cancer drivers, transcription factors and genes in the developmental, apoptosis, immune system and DNA integrity checkpoint gene ontology pathways were over-represented among the highest-confidence target genes.

Importance: Radiation therapy for breast cancer is associated with increased risk of a second primary contralateral breast cancer, but the genetic factors modifying this association are not well understood., Objective: To determine whether a genetic risk score comprising single nucleotide polymorphisms in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway is associated with radiation-associated contralateral breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study included a case group of women with contralateral breast cancer that was diagnosed at least 1 year after a first primary breast cancer who were individually matched to a control group of women with unilateral breast cancer. Inclusion criteria were receiving a first invasive breast cancer diagnosis prior to age 55 years between 1985 and 2008. Women were recruited through 8 population-based cancer registries in the United States, Canada, and Denmark as part of the Women's Environment, Cancer, and Radiation Epidemiology Studies I (November 2000 to August 2004) and II (March 2010 to December 2012). Data analysis was conducted from July 2017 to August 2019., Exposures: Stray radiation dose to the contralateral breast during radiation therapy for the first breast cancer. A novel genetic risk score comprised of genetic variants in the nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway was considered the potential effect modifier, dichotomized as high risk if the score was above the median of 74 and low risk if the score was at or below the median., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was risk of contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose stratified by genetic risk score, age, and latency., Results: A total of 5953 women were approached for study participation, and 3732 women (62.7%) agreed to participate. The median (range) age at first diagnosis was 46 (23-54) years. After 5 years of latency or more, among women who received the first diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years, exposure to 1.0 Gy (to convert to rad, multiply by 100) or more of stray radiation was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of contralateral breast cancer compared with women who were not exposed (rate ratio, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.1-3.6]). The risk was higher among women with a genetic risk score above the median (rate ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.1-8.1]), and there was no association among women with a genetic risk score below the median (rate ratio, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.5-3.7]). Among younger women with a high genetic risk score, the attributable increased risk for contralateral breast cancer associated with stray radiation dose was 28%., Conclusions and Relevance: This study found an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer that was attributable to stray radiation exposure among women with a high genetic risk score and who received a first breast cancer diagnosis when they were younger than 40 years after 5 years or more of latency. This genetic risk score may help guide treatment and surveillance for women with breast cancer.

Purpose: Breast cancer (BC) risk prediction allows systematic identification of individuals at highest and lowest risk. We extend the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) risk model to incorporate the effects of polygenic risk scores (PRS) and other risk factors (RFs)., Methods: BOADICEA incorporates the effects of truncating variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM; a PRS based on 313 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explaining 20% of BC polygenic variance; a residual polygenic component accounting for other genetic/familial effects; known lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive RFs; and mammographic density, while allowing for missing information., Results: Among all factors considered, the predicted UK BC risk distribution is widest for the PRS, followed by mammographic density. The highest BC risk stratification is achieved when all genetic and lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive/anthropomorphic factors are considered jointly. With all factors, the predicted lifetime risks for women in the UK population vary from 2.8% for the 1st percentile to 30.6% for the 99th percentile, with 14.7% of women predicted to have a lifetime risk of ≥17-<30% (moderate risk according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guidelines) and 1.1% a lifetime risk of ≥30% (high risk)., Conclusion: This comprehensive model should enable high levels of BC risk stratification in the general population and women with family history, and facilitate individualized, informed decision-making on prevention therapies and screening.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 170 breast cancer susceptibility loci. Here we hypothesize that some risk-associated variants might act in non-breast tissues, specifically adipose tissue and immune cells from blood and spleen. Using expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) reported in these tissues, we identify 26 previously unreported, likely target genes of overall breast cancer risk variants, and 17 for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, several with a known immune function. We determine the directional effect of gene expression on disease risk measured based on single and multiple eQTL. In addition, using a gene-based test of association that considers eQTL from multiple tissues, we identify seven (and four) regions with variants associated with overall (and ER-negative) breast cancer risk, which were not reported in previous GWAS. Further investigation of the function of the implicated genes in breast and immune cells may provide insights into the etiology of breast cancer.

Background: The identification of new hereditary breast cancer genes is an area of highly active research. In 2015, two independent studies provided initial evidence for a novel breast cancer susceptibility gene, RECQL, a DNA helicase which plays an important role in the DNA damage response. Several subsequent studies in independent patient cohorts have provided further data on RECQL variant frequency in additional populations, some of which have brought in to question the increased breast cancer risk associated with RECQL mutations., Results: The initial reports present findings from whole exome sequencing of high-risk familial breast cancer cases in the French-Canadian, Polish and Han Chinese populations and estimate the carrier frequency of pathogenic RECQL mutations in high-risk breast cancer patients who have previously tested negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations to be approximately 1-2%. Proposed founder mutations were identified in French-Canadian and Polish populations. Functional studies support loss of function of the helicase activity of RECQL for some of the reported pathogenic mutations. An additional study in a cohort of Southern Chinese high-risk breast cancer patients estimated the frequency of pathogenic RECQL mutations to be 0.54%. A possible Chinese founder mutation was identified, but only a small number of controls were sequenced. Subsequent case-control studies screening for the Polish founder mutation in patients from Germany and Belarus did not find any evidence for increased breast cancer risk for this variant. An Australian case-control study also failed to identify an increased risk of breast cancer associated with RECQL loss of function variants., Conclusions: RECQL plays an important role in DNA repair, and is a plausible candidate breast cancer susceptibility gene. Initial studies showed evidence of an association between variants in this gene and an increased breast cancer risk in three separate populations, and identified founder mutations with significantly increased odds ratios. However, several subsequent studies have failed to support the association. With the limited and conflicting evidence available, there remains debate as to whether there is an increased breast cancer risk in individuals carrying RECQL loss of function variants. Further studies are required to better quantify the risks associated with RECQL variants and the current evidence base is not sufficient to justify routine inclusion of RECQL on breast cancer gene panels in clinical use. Management of patients in whom RECQL variants have been identified should be based on clinician assessment, in the context of the family history. Further studies are required to better quantify the risks to RECQL mutation carriers and may also guide management and potential therapeutic targeting for patients.

Background: BRCA1/2 mutations confer high lifetime risk of breast cancer, although other factors may modify this risk. Whether height or body mass index (BMI) modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remains unclear., Methods: We used Mendelian randomization approaches to evaluate the association of height and BMI on breast cancer risk, using data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 with 14 676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 11 451 cases of breast cancer. We created a height genetic score using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score using 93 BMI-associated variants. We examined both observed and genetically determined height and BMI with breast cancer risk using weighted Cox models. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Observed height was positively associated with breast cancer risk (HR = 1.09 per 10 cm increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 1.17; P = 1.17). Height genetic score was positively associated with breast cancer, although this was not statistically significant (per 10 cm increase in genetically predicted height, HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.17; P = .47). Observed BMI was inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m2 increase, HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.90 to 0.98; P = .007). BMI genetic score was also inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m2 increase in genetically predicted BMI, HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76 to 0.98; P = .02). BMI was primarily associated with premenopausal breast cancer., Conclusion: Height is associated with overall breast cancer and BMI is associated with premenopausal breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Incorporating height and BMI, particularly genetic score, into risk assessment may improve cancer management., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)