Search

Summary Background The development of anti-HER2 antibody–drug conjugates opens new therapeutic options for patients with breast cancer, including patients with low expression of HER2. To characterise this new breast cancer subtype, we have compared the clinical and molecular characteristics of HER2-low-positive and HER2-zero breast cancer, including response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and prognosis. Methods In this pooled analysis of individual patient data, we evaluated a cohort of 2310 patients with HER2-non-amplified primary breast cancer that were treated with neoadjuvant combination chemotherapy in four prospective neoadjuvant clinical trials (GeparSepto, NCT01583426 ; GeparOcto, NCT02125344 ; GeparX, NCT02682693 ; Gain-2 neoadjuvant, NCT01690702 ) between July 30, 2012, and March 20, 2019. Central HER2 testing was done prospectively before random assignment of participants in all trials. HER2-low-positive status was defined as immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or IHC2+/in-situ hybridisation negative and HER2-zero was defined as IHC0, based on the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines. Disease-free survival and overall survival data were available for 1694 patients (from all trials except GeparX) with a median follow-up of 46·6 months (IQR 35·0–52·3). Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models and Cox-proportional hazards models were performed based on a predefined statistical analysis plan for analysis of the endpoints pathological complete response, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Findings A total of 1098 (47·5%) of 2310 tumours were HER2-low-positive and 1212 (52·5%) were HER2-zero. 703 (64·0%) of 1098 patients with HER2-low-positive tumours were hormone receptor positive, compared with 445 (36·7%) of 1212 patients with HER2-zero tumours (p Interpretation Our results show that HER2-low-positive tumours can be identified as new subgroup of breast cancer by standardised IHC, distinct from HER2-zero tumours. HER2-low-positive tumours have a specific biology and show differences in response to therapy and prognosis, which is particularly relevant in therapy-resistant, hormone receptor-negative tumours. Our results provide a basis for a better understanding of the biology of breast cancer subtypes and the refinement of future diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Funding German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe).

BRCA1 and BRCA2 play a central role in DNA repair. Therefore, patients harbouring germline (g) BRCA1/2 mutations (m) treated with chemotherapy might be at higher risk of haematological toxicities.Patients from German Breast Group (GBG) and Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie-breast group studies with early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and known gBRCA1/2m status treated with anthracycline-taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy were analysed. Primary objective was the rate of neutropenia grade (G)III-IV in cycle 1 (C1). Secondary objectives included effects on overall and other haematological toxicities GIII-IV in C1, cumulative haematological toxicity across all cycles, relative total dose intensity, and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor prophylaxis. Haematological toxicities under taxanes, carboplatin, and cyclophosphamide were explored.Two hundred nine of 1171 (17.8%) evaluated patients had gBRCA1/2m. In C1, 37.4% gBRCA1/2m versus 35.7% wild-type patients had neutropenia GIII-IV (P = 0.683). For C1, gBRCA1/2m predicted neither for neutropenia GIII-IV (odds ratio [OR]: 1.26, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.87-1.82, P = 0.226) nor for other haematological toxicities GIII-IV (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.64-1.31, P = 0.625) in multivariable regression models. Analyses of cumulative toxicities across all cycles yielded similar results except thrombocytopaenia GIII-IV, which was increased in gBRCA1m patients. In patients treated with taxanes, the rate of haematological toxicities GIII-IV was higher in gBRCA1/2m compared with wild-type (59.5% versus 43.1%; p 0.001). No difference was seen under cyclophosphamide or platinum-containing chemotherapies.gBRCA1/2m was not associated with higher risk of overall severe haematological toxicities in the first cycle or cumulatively across all cycles under standard chemotherapy for TNBC. Under taxane, patients with gBRCA1/2m might have a higher risk of haematological toxicities GIII-IV, requiring further research.

Variant-specific loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analyses may be useful to classify BRCA1/2 germline variants of unknown significance (VUS). The sensitivity and specificity of this approach, however, remains unknown. We performed comparative next-generation sequencing analyses of the BRCA1/2 genes using blood-derived and tumour-derived DNA of 488 patients with ovarian cancer enrolled in the observational AGO-TR1 trial (NCT02222883). Overall, 94 pathogenic, 90 benign and 24 VUS were identified in the germline. A significantly increased variant fraction (VF) of a germline variant in the tumour indicates loss of the wild-type allele; a decreased VF indicates loss of the variant allele. We demonstrate that significantly increased VFs predict pathogenicity with high sensitivity (0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91), poor specificity (0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.73) and poor positive predictive value (PPV; 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79). Significantly decreased VFs predict benignity with low sensitivity (0.26, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), high specificity (1.0, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00) and PPV (1.0, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00). Variant classification based on significantly increased VFs results in an unacceptable proportion of false-positive results. A significantly decreased VF in the tumour may be exploited as a reliable predictor for benignity, with no false-negative result observed. When applying the latter approach, VUS identified in four patients can now be considered benign. Trial registration number NCT02222883., publishedVersion

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

Die aktuelle Datenlage unterstreicht den Stellenwert der Keimbahndiagnostik fur Pravention, Prognose und auch Therapiewahl. Insbesondere kosteneffektive Sequenzierverfahren werden die personalisierte Medizin in der Gynakoonkologie weiter vorantreiben und zu einer Verbesserung der Pravention und Therapie des Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinoms fuhren. Dies gilt ebenso fur die Tumorgenetik, die darauf abzielt, therapierelevante somatische (Epi‑)Mutationen zu nachzuweisen, die auf die Tumorzellen beschrankt sind. Bei mehr als 25 % aller Patientinnen, welche die erweiterten Einschlusskriterien des Deutschen Konsortiums Familiarer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs fur die genetische Testung erfullen, werden Keimbahnmutationen in BRCA1/2 und weiteren Risikogenen identifiziert, bei weiteren 20 % werden unklare genetische Veranderungen identifiziert, die einer weiterfuhrenden Evaluation bedurfen. Der Nachweis einer familienspezifischen Keimbahnmutation ist die Grundlage dafur, gesunden Familienangehorigen eine pradiktive genetische Testung und Anlagetragerinnen risikoadaptierte praventive Masnahmen anzubieten. Zunehmend finden im Kontext der personalisierten Medizin auch weitere genetische Risikofaktoren Beachtung, die das individuelle Risiko modulieren. Der Nutzen von Checkpointinhibitoren zur Behandlung des Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinoms wird derzeit gepruft. Die Etablierung von Empfehlungen fur Ratsuchende mit Mutationen in nur selten veranderten Genen erfordert prospektive Kohortenstudien. Eine Keimbahnanalyse sollte daher in ein Dokumentations- und Evaluationskonzept eingebettet sein.

PURPOSE To estimate age-specific relative and absolute cancer risks of breast cancer and to estimate risks of ovarian, pancreatic, male breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants (PVs) because these risks have not been extensively characterized. METHODS We analyzed data from 524 families with PALB2 PVs from 21 countries. Complex segregation analysis was used to estimate relative risks (RRs; relative to country-specific population incidences) and absolute risks of cancers. The models allowed for residual familial aggregation of breast and ovarian cancer and were adjusted for the family-specific ascertainment schemes. RESULTS We found associations between PALB2 PVs and risk of female breast cancer (RR, 7.18; 95% CI, 5.82 to 8.85; P = 6.5 × 10−76), ovarian cancer (RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.40 to 6.04; P = 4.1 × 10−3), pancreatic cancer (RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.50; P = 8.7 × 10−3), and male breast cancer (RR, 7.34; 95% CI, 1.28 to 42.18; P = 2.6 × 10−2). There was no evidence for increased risks of prostate or colorectal cancer. The breast cancer RRs declined with age ( P for trend = 2.0 × 10−3). After adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case families were similar to the estimates from families ascertained through population-based studies ( P for difference = .41). On the basis of the combined data, the estimated risks to age 80 years were 53% (95% CI, 44% to 63%) for female breast cancer, 5% (95% CI, 2% to 10%) for ovarian cancer, 2%-3% (95% CI females, 1% to 4%; 95% CI males, 2% to 5%) for pancreatic cancer, and 1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 5%) for male breast cancer. CONCLUSION These results confirm PALB2 as a major breast cancer susceptibility gene and establish substantial associations between germline PALB2 PVs and ovarian, pancreatic, and male breast cancers. These findings will facilitate incorporation of PALB2 into risk prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.

Breast and prostate cancer risks; Pathogenic variant Riscos de càncer de mama i pròstata; Variants patogèniques Riesgos de cáncer de mama y próstata; Variantes patogénicas Background Recent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Methods 483 BRCA1 and 1318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were 3 versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen receptor (ER)–negative (PRSER-), or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk. Results PRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07 to 1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28 to 2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer odds ratios were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions. Conclusions Population-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and informing clinical management. The CIMBA data management and data analysis were supported by Cancer Research UK grants C12292/A20861 and PPRPGM-Nov20\100002. The research leading to these results has received funding from the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) under IG 2018 - ID. 21389 and the Italian League for the Fight Against Cancer (LILT) under IG 2019 projects, P.I. Ottini Laura and Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research-Dipartimenti di Eccellenza-L. 232/2016. CIMBA: GCT is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Research Fellow. iCOGS and OncoArray data: the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement No. 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer (CRN-87521), and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade (PSR-SIIRI-701), Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The Personalized Risk Stratification for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer (PERSPECTIVE) and PERSPECTIVE I&I projects were supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Ministry of Economy and Innovation through Genome Québec, and The Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation and the Ontario Research Fund. Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR): UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Baltic Familial Breast Ovarian Cancer Consortium (BFBOCC): Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT): Research Council of Lithuania grant SEN-18/2015. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC): Breast Cancer Research Foundation. BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA): Cancer Association of South Africa (PI Elizabeth J. van Rensburg). Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO): Spanish Ministry of Health PI16/00440 supported by Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) funds, the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) SAF2014-57680-R and the Spanish Research Network on Rare diseases (CIBERER). City of Hope - Clinical Cancer Genomics Community Research Network (COH-CCGCRN): Research reported in this publication was supported by the NCI of the NIH under grant No. R25CA112486, and RC4CA153828 (PI: J. Weitzel) from the NCI and the Office of the Director, NIH. CONsorzio Studi ITaliani sui Tumori Ereditari Alla Mammella (CONSIT TEAM): Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; IG2014 No.15547) to P. Radice. Funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5x1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects ‘5x1000’) to S. Manoukian. Associazione CAOS Varese to M.G. Tibiletti. AIRC (IG2015 No.16732) to P. Peterlongo. National Centre for Scientific Research Demokritos (DEMOKRITOS): European Union (European Social Fund—ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program “Education and Lifelong Learning” of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) - Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research & Technology: SYN11_10_19 NBCA. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund. German Cancer Research Center (DFKZ): German Cancer Research Center. Epidemiological Study of Familial Breast Cancer (EMBRACE): Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Ros Eeles and Elizabeth Bancroft are supported by Cancer Research UK Grant C5047/A8385. Ros Eeles is also supported by NIHR support to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC): The University of Kansas Cancer Center (P30 CA168524) and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. AKG was in part funded by the NCI (R01 CA214545 and R01 CA140323), The Kansas Institute for Precision Medicine (P20 GM130423), and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. A.K.G. is the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professor. Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica (FPGMX): FISPI05/2275 and Mutua Madrileña Foundation (FMMA). German Familial Breast Group (GC-HBOC): German Cancer Aid (grant No. 110837, Rita K. Schmutzler) and the European Regional Development Fund and Free State of Saxony, Germany (LIFE—Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases, project No. 713-241202, No. 713-241202, No. 14505/2470, and No. 14575/2470). Genetic Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (GEMO): Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Association “Le cancer du sein, parlons-en!” Award, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program and the French National Institute of Cancer (INCa grants 2013-1-BCB-01-ICH-1 and SHS-E-SP 18-015). Georgetown University (GEORGETOWN): the Non-Therapeutic Subject Registry Shared Resource at Georgetown University (NIH/NCI grant P30-CA051008), the Fisher Center for Hereditary Cancer and Clinical Genomics Research, and Swing Fore the Cure. Ghent University Hospital (G-FAST): Bruce Poppe is a senior clinical investigator of FWO. Mattias Van Heetvelde obtained funding from IWT. Hospital Clinico San Carlos (HCSC): Spanish Ministry of Health PI15/00059, PI16/01292, and CB-161200301 CIBERONC from ISCIII (Spain), partially supported by European Regional Development FEDER funds. Helsinki Breast Cancer Study (HEBCS): Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund, the Finnish Cancer Society and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. Hereditary Breast and Ovarian cancer study the Netherlands (HEBON): the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research grant NWO 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grants 110005 and 2014-187.WO76, the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI) grant NWO 184.021.007/CP46 and the Transcan grant JTC 2012 Cancer 12-054. HEBON thanks the registration teams of Dutch Cancer Registry (IKNL; S. Siesling, J. Verloop) and the Dutch Pathology database (PALGA; L. Overbeek) for part of the data collection. Study of Genetic Mutations in Breast and Ovarian Cancer patients in Hong Kong and Asia (HRBCP): Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Dr Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, The Kerry Group Kuok Foundation, National Institute of Health1R 03CA130065, and North California Cancer Center. Molecular Genetic Studies of Breast- and Ovarian Cancer in Hungary (HUNBOCS): Hungarian Research Grants KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and NKFI_OTKA K-112228. Institut Català d’Oncologia (ICO): The authors would like to particularly acknowledge the support of the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (organismo adscrito al Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad) and “FEDER, una manera de hacer Europa” (PI10/01422, PI13/00285, PIE13/00022, PI15/00854, PI16/00563 and CIBERONC) and the Institut Català de la Salut and Autonomous Government of Catalonia (2009SGR290, 2014SGR338 and PERIS Project MedPerCan). International Hereditary Cancer Centre (IHCC): PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. Iceland Landspitali – University Hospital (ILUH): Icelandic Association “Walking for Breast Cancer Research” and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INterdisciplinary HEalth Research Internal Team BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT): Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program—grant No. CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade—grant No. PSR-SIIRI-701. Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOVHBOCS): Ministero della Salute and “5x1000” Istituto Oncologico Veneto grant. Portuguese Oncology Institute-Porto Breast Cancer Study (IPOBCS): Liga Portuguesa Contra o Cancro. Kathleen Cuningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab): The National Breast Cancer Foundation, and previously by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. Korean Hereditary Breast Cancer Study (KOHBRA): the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), and the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI16C1127; 1020350; 1420190). Mayo Clinic (MAYO): NIH grants CA116167, CA192393 and CA176785, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), and a grant from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. McGill University (MCGILL): Jewish General Hospital Weekend to End Breast Cancer, Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade. Marc Tischkowitz is supported by the funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program (2007Y2013)/European Research Council (Grant No. 310018). Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease (MODSQUAD): MH CZ—DRO (MMCI, 00209805), MEYS—NPS I—LO1413 to LF, and by Charles University in Prague project UNCE204024 (MZ). Memorial Sloane Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC): the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, the Andrew Sabin Research Fund and a Cancer Center Support Grant/Core Grant (P30 CA008748). Women’s College Research Institute Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study (NAROD): 1R01 CA149429-01. National Cancer Institute (NCI): the Intramural Research Program of the US NCI, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50, N02-CP-21013-63 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Inc, Rockville, MD. National Israeli Cancer Control Center (NICCC): Clalit Health Services in Israel, the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology (NNPIO): the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 17-54-12007, 17-00-00171 and 18-515-12007). NRG Oncology: U10 CA180868, NRG SDMC grant U10 CA180822, NRG Administrative Office and the NRG Tissue Bank (CA 27469), the NRG Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517) and the Intramural Research Program, NCI. The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center (OSUCCG): Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Università di Pisa (PBCS): AIRC [IG 2013 N.14477] and Tuscany Institute for Tumors (ITT) grant 2014-2015-2016. South East Asian Breast Cancer Association Study (SEABASS): Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. Sheba Medical Centre (SMC): the Israeli Cancer Association. Swedish Breast Cancer Study (SWE-BRCA): the Swedish Cancer Society. University of Chicago (UCHICAGO): NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA125183), R01 CA142996, 1U01CA161032 and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women’s Cancer Research Alliance and the Breast Cancer research Foundation. OIO is an American Cancer Society (ACS) Clinical Research Professor. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA): Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation; Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California San Francisco (UCSF): UCSF Cancer Risk Program and Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry (UKFOCR): Cancer Research UK. University of Pennsylvania (UPENN): NIH (R01-CA102776 and R01-CA083855); Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Susan G. Komen Foundation for the cure, Basser Research Center for BRCA. Cancer Family Registry University of Pittsburg (UPITT/MWH): Hackers for Hope Pittsburgh. Victorian Familial Cancer Trials Group (VFCTG): Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, National Breast Cancer Foundation. Women’s Cancer Program at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (WCP): Dr Karlan is funded by the ACS Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), Grant UL1TR000124. TN-D is a recipient of a Career Development Fellow from the National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia, ECF-17-001).

Introduction/Background* Recently 3 Phase III first-line studies, PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 (Ray-Coquard et al. NEJM 2019). PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 (Gonzales Martin et al. NEJM 2019) and VELIA/GOG-3005 (Coleman et al. NEJM 2019) have demonstrated that the addition of a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) to platinum-based therapy+/-bevacizumab improved progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) patients. The benefit was greater when the tumor was homologous recombination deficient (HRD) according to Myriad myChoice test, independently of BRCA status. The PAOLA-1 olaparib+bevacizumab maintenance regimen was approved in USA/Europe/Japan for HRD positive patients. The European initiative aims at evaluating various HRD tests on PAOLA-1 tumor samples to identify new reliable and feasible HRD tests Methodology The HRD initiative has 2 components; one based on artificial intelligence with various partners and the other, the European HRD ENGOT initiative (EHEI), is led by academic research laboratories (RL) from ENGOT groups. The HRD test evaluation protocol for the EHEI RL includes 3 phases. The phase 1 (2019/12) brought together European RL. Because non-BRCA Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) mutations have not been found predictive of PARPi activity in PAOLA-1 (Pujade-Lauraine et al, SGO 2021)) RL tests based on these mutations were not selected for the next phases. Phase 2 evaluated the correlation between RL tests and the Myriad myChoice test on tumor samples from 85 PAOLA-1 BRCA wild type patients using the KAPPA statistics. Phase 3 is the final PFS evaluation on more than 350 additional patient samples. Result(s)* A total of 20 RL from 21 ENGOT groups participated to the EHEI phase 1. Half of them had a test mainly based on an HRR gene panel. Three RL did not pursue for various reasons (capacity, financial or regulatory). The remaining 7 RL from 6 countries (table 1) completed the phase 2 in May 2021 and may proceed to phase 3. Conclusion* The EHEI is a unique collaboration of European academic laboratories involved in gynecologic oncology translational research with the aim of providing a reliable biomarker (HRD) for selecting AOC patients who could benefit most from PARPi+/-bevacizumab in first-line therapy. HRD tests performance will be described after their phase 3 is completed.

Background GeparOcto demonstrated that pathological complete response (pCR) of intense dose-dense epirubicin, paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) was comparable to weekly paclitaxel/non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (plus carboplatin (PM(Cb) in triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC]) in high-risk early breast cancer (BC). Here, we report time-to-event secondary end-points. Patients and methods Patients were randomised to receive 18 weeks of E (150 mg/m2) followed by P (225 mg/m2) followed by C (2000 mg/m2), each q2w or weekly P (80 mg/m2) plus M (20 mg/m2) plus, in TNBC, Cb (AUC 1.5). Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+)BC received trastuzumab (6[loading dose 8]mg/kg q3w) and pertuzumab (420[840]mg q3w) with P and C cycles. Results 945 patients started treatment (iddEPC n = 470; PM(Cb) n = 475). After a median follow-up of 47.0 (range 1.6-61.5) months, 162 (75 in iddEPC; 87 in PM(Cb)) invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) events and 79 (41 in iddEPC; 38 in PM(Cb)) deaths were reported. No significant difference was observed in 4-year iDFS (81.9% iddEPC versus 79.7% PM(Cb), HR = 1.16 [95%CI 0.85-1.59], log-rank p = 0.334) or 4-year overall survival (OS) (90.3% iddEPC versus 90.6% PM(Cb), HR = 0.90 [95%CI 0.58-1.40], log-rank p = 0.637) overall and in HER2+ and TNBC subgroups. HR+/HER2- BC patients, however, had significantly better 4-year iDFS (77.9% iddEPC versus 62.5% PM, HR = 2.11 [95%CI 1.08-4.10], log-rank p = 0.025) and 4-year OS with iddEPC (94.7% iddEPC versus 80.1% PM, HR = 3.26 [95%CI 1.06-10.00], log-rank p = 0.029). Conclusion While there was no difference in survival for the entire cohort, the HR+/HER2-subgroup significantly benefits from iddEPC. This supports the concept of an additional effect of NACT beyond pCR in patients with HR+/HER2- BC. CLINICALTRIALS. Gov identifier NCT02125344.

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

Comparably little is known about breast cancer (BC) risks in women from families tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations despite an indicative family history, as opposed to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We determined the age-dependent risks of first and contralateral breast cancer (FBC, CBC) both in noncarriers and carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, who participated in an intensified breast imaging surveillance program. The study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2017, at 12 university centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Two cohorts were prospectively followed up for incident FBC (n = 4,380; 16,398 person-years [PY], median baseline age: 39 years) and CBC (n = 2,993; 10,090 PY, median baseline age: 42 years). Cumulative FBC risk at age 60 was 61.8% (95% CI 52.8-70.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 43.2% (95% CI 32.1-56.3%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 15.7% (95% CI 11.9-20.4%) for noncarriers. FBC risks were significantly higher than in the general population, with incidence rate ratios of 23.9 (95% CI 18.9-29.8) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 13.5 (95% CI 9.2-19.1) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 4.9 (95% CI 3.8-6.3) for BRCA1/2 noncarriers. Cumulative CBC risk 10 years after FBC was 25.1% (95% CI 19.6-31.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 6.6% (95% CI 3.4-12.5%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 3.6% (95% CI 2.2-5.7%) for noncarriers. CBC risk in noncarriers was similar to women with unilateral BC from the general population. Further studies are needed to confirm whether less intensified surveillance is justified in women from BRCA1/2 negative families with elevated risk.

Background In the neoadjuvant GeparSixto study, adding carboplatin to taxane- and anthracycline-based chemotherapy improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we present survival data and the potential prognostic and predictive role of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Patients and methods Patients were randomized to paclitaxel plus nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet®) (PM) or PM plus carboplatin (PMCb). The secondary study end points disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Median follow-up was 47.3 months. HRD was among the exploratory analyses in GeparSixto and was successfully measured in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples of 193/315 (61.3%) participants with TNBC. Homologous recombination (HR) deficiency was defined as HRD score ≥42 and/or presence of tumor BRCA mutations (tmBRCA). Results A significantly better DFS (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.34–0.93; P = 0.022) was observed in patients with TNBC when treated with PMCb. The improvement of OS with PMCb was not statistically significant. Additional carboplatin did not improve DFS or OS in patients with HER2-positive tumors. HR deficiency was detected in 136 (70.5%) of 193 triple-negative tumors, of which 82 (60.3%) showed high HRD score without tmBRCA. HR deficiency independently predicted pCR (ypT0 ypN0) [odds ratio (OR) 2.60, 95% CI 1.26–5.37, P = 0.008]. Adding carboplatin to PM significantly increased the pCR rate from 33.9% to 63.5% in HR deficient tumors (P = 0.001), but only marginally in HR nondeficient tumors (from 20.0% to 29.6%, P = 0.540; test for interaction P = 0.327). pCR rates with carboplatin were also higher (63.2%) than without carboplatin (31.7%; OR 3.69, 1.46–9.37, P = 0.005) in patients with high HRD score but no tmBRCA. DFS rates were improved with addition of carboplatin, both in HR nondeficient (hazard ratio 0.44, 0.17–1.17, P = 0.086) and HR deficient tumors (hazard ratio 0.49, 0.23–1.04, P = 0.059). Conclusions The addition of carboplatin to neoadjuvant PM improved DFS significantly in TNBC. Long-term survival analyses support the neoadjuvant use of carboplatin in TNBC. HR deficiency in TNBC and HRD score in non-tmBRCA TNBC are predictors of response. HRD does not predict for carboplatin benefit.

Background Current genetic and genomic tests measuring homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) show limited predictive value. This study compares the performance of an immunohistology-based RAD51 test with genetic/genomic tests to identify patients with HRD primary triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and evaluates its accuracy to select patients sensitive to platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Patients and methods This is a retrospective, blinded, biomarker analysis from the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial. TNBC patients received neoadjuvant paclitaxel plus Myocet®-nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PM) or PM plus carboplatin (PMCb), both arms including bevacizumab. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples were laid on tissue microarrays. RAD51, BRCA1 and γH2AX were quantified using an immunofluorescence assay. The predictive value of RAD51 was assessed by regression models. Concordance analyses were carried out between RAD51 score and tumor BRCA (tBRCA) status or genomic HRD score (Myriad myChoice®). Associations with pathological complete response (pCR) and survival were studied. Functional HRD was predefined as a RAD51 score ≤10% (RAD51-low). Results Functional HRD by RAD51-low was evidenced in 81/133 tumors (61%). RAD51 identified 93% tBRCA-mutated tumors and 45% non-tBRCA mutant cases as functional HRD. The concordance between RAD51 and genomic HRD was 87% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79% to 93%]. In patients with RAD51-high tumors, pCR was similar between treatment arms [PMCb 31% versus PM 39%, odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 0.23-2.24, P = 0.56]. Patients with RAD51-low tumors benefited from PMCb (pCR 66% versus 33%, OR 3.96, 1.56-10.05, P = 0.004; interaction test P = 0.02). This benefit maintained statistical significance in the multivariate analysis. Carboplatin addition showed similar disease-free survival in the RAD51-high [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, log-rank P = 0.11] and RAD51-low (0.45, P = 0.11) groups. Conclusions The RAD51 test identifies tumors with functional HRD and is highly concordant with tBRCA mutation and genomic HRD. RAD51 independently predicts clinical benefit from adding Cb to NACT in TNBC. Our results support further development to incorporate RAD51 testing in clinical decision-making.

Bi-allelic loss-of-function (LoF) variants in the base excision repair (BER) gene NTHL1 cause a high-risk hereditary multi-tumor syndrome that includes breast cancer, but the contribution of heterozygous variants to hereditary breast cancer is unknown. An analysis of 4985 women with breast cancer, enriched for familial features, and 4786 cancer-free women revealed significant enrichment for NTHL1 LoF variants. Immunohistochemistry confirmed reduced NTHL1 expression in tumors from heterozygous carriers but the NTHL1 bi-allelic loss characteristic mutational signature (SBS 30) was not present. The analysis was extended to 27,421 breast cancer cases and 19,759 controls from 10 international studies revealing 138 cases and 93 controls with a heterozygous LoF variant (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.82–1.39) and 316 cases and 179 controls with a missense variant (OR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.09–1.57). Missense variants selected for deleterious features by a number of in silico bioinformatic prediction tools or located within the endonuclease III functional domain showed a stronger association with breast cancer. Somatic sequencing of breast cancers from carriers indicated that the risk associated with NTHL1 appears to operate through haploinsufficiency, consistent with other described low-penetrance breast cancer genes. Data from this very large international multicenter study suggests that heterozygous pathogenic germline coding variants in NTHL1 may be associated with low- to moderate- increased risk of breast cancer.

Background Given the high heterogeneity among breast tumors, associations between common germline genetic variants and survival that may exist within specific subgroups could go undetected in an unstratified set of breast cancer patients. Methods We performed genome-wide association analyses within 15 subgroups of breast cancer patients based on prognostic factors, including hormone receptors, tumor grade, age, and type of systemic treatment. Analyses were based on 91,686 female patients of European ancestry from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium, including 7531 breast cancer-specific deaths over a median follow-up of 8.1 years. Cox regression was used to assess associations of common germline variants with 15-year and 5-year breast cancer-specific survival. We assessed the probability of these associations being true positives via the Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP Results Evidence of associations with breast cancer-specific survival was observed in three patient subgroups, with variant rs5934618 in patients with grade 3 tumors (15-year-hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] 1.32 [1.20, 1.45], P = 1.4E−08, BFDP = 0.01, per G allele); variant rs4679741 in patients with ER-positive tumors treated with endocrine therapy (15-year-HR [95% CI] 1.18 [1.11, 1.26], P = 1.6E−07, BFDP = 0.09, per G allele); variants rs1106333 (15-year-HR [95% CI] 1.68 [1.39,2.03], P = 5.6E−08, BFDP = 0.12, per A allele) and rs78754389 (5-year-HR [95% CI] 1.79 [1.46,2.20], P = 1.7E−08, BFDP = 0.07, per A allele), in patients with ER-negative tumors treated with chemotherapy. Conclusions We found evidence of four loci associated with breast cancer-specific survival within three patient subgroups. There was limited evidence for the existence of associations in other patient subgroups. However, the power for many subgroups is limited due to the low number of events. Even so, our results suggest that the impact of common germline genetic variants on breast cancer-specific survival might be limited.

Breast cancer metastasis accounts for most of the deaths from breast cancer. Identification of germline variants associated with survival in aggressive types of breast cancer may inform understanding of breast cancer progression and assist treatment. In this analysis, we studied the associations between germline variants and breast cancer survival for patients with distant metastases at primary breast cancer diagnosis. We used data from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) including 1062 women of European ancestry with metastatic breast cancer, 606 of whom died of breast cancer. We identified two germline variants on chromosome 1, rs138569520 and rs146023652, significantly associated with breast cancer-specific survival (P = 3.19 × 10−8 and 4.42 × 10−8). In silico analysis suggested a potential regulatory effect of the variants on the nearby target genes SDE2 and H3F3A. However, the variants showed no evidence of association in a smaller replication dataset. The validation dataset was obtained from the SNPs to Risk of Metastasis (StoRM) study and included 293 patients with metastatic primary breast cancer at diagnosis. Ultimately, larger replication studies are needed to confirm the identified associations.

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

Contains fulltext : 229292.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 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.

Importance The limited data on cancer phenotypes in men with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants (PVs) have hampered the development of evidence-based recommendations for early cancer detection and risk reduction in this population. Objective To compare the cancer spectrum and frequencies between male BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective cohort study of 6902 men, including 3651 BRCA1 and 3251 BRCA2 PV carriers, older than 18 years recruited from cancer genetics clinics from 1966 to 2017 by 53 study groups in 33 countries worldwide collaborating through the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Clinical data and pathologic characteristics were collected. Main Outcomes and Measures BRCA1/2 status was the outcome in a logistic regression, and cancer diagnoses were the independent predictors. All odds ratios (ORs) were adjusted for age, country of origin, and calendar year of the first interview. Results Among the 6902 men in the study (median [range] age, 51.6 [18-100] years), 1634 cancers were diagnosed in 1376 men (19.9%), the majority (922 of 1,376 [67%]) being BRCA2 PV carriers. Being affected by any cancer was associated with a higher probability of being a BRCA2, rather than a BRCA1, PV carrier (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.81-3.70; P

Background The efficacy and toxicity of olaparib as combination therapy in early breast cancer (BC) patients with homologous recombinant deficiency (HRD) [score high and/or germline (g) or tumour (t) BRCA1/2 mutation] is not well described. GeparOLA ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02789332 ) investigated olaparib in combination with paclitaxel in HER2-negative early BC with HRD. Patients and methods Patients with untreated primary HER2-negative cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c with either cN+ or pNSLN+ or cT1c and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or cT1c and Ki-67>20% BC with HRD were randomised either to paclitaxel (P) 80 mg/m2 weekly plus olaparib (O) 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus carboplatinum (Cb) area under the curve 2 weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (EC). Stratification factors were hormone receptor (HR) status (HR+ versus HR−) and age ( Results A total of 107 patients were randomised between September 2016 and July 2018; 106 (PO N = 69; PCb N = 37) started treatment. Median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 36.2% had cT1, 61.0% cT2, 2.9% cT3, and 31.8% cN-positive tumours; grade 3 tumours: 86.8%; Ki-67>20%: 89.6%; TNBC: 72.6%; confirmed gBRCA1/2 mutation: 56.2%. The pCR rate with PO was 55.1% [90% confidence interval (CI) 44.5% to 65.3%] versus PCb 48.6% (90% CI 34.3% to 63.2%). Analysis for the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients Conclusion GeparOLA could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm. PO was significantly better tolerated and the combination merits further evaluation.

IMPORTANCE: The GeparOcto randomized clinical trial compared the efficacy of 2 neoadjuvant breast cancer (BC) treatment regimens: sequential intense dose-dense epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) vs weekly paclitaxel and nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PM) in patients with different biological BC subtypes. Patients with triple-negative BC (TNBC) randomized to the PM arm received additional carboplatin (PMCb). Overall, no difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) rates was observed between study arms. It remained elusive whether the germline variant status of BRCA1/2 and further BC predisposition genes are associated with treatment outcome. OBJECTIVE: To determine treatment outcome for BC according to germline variant status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective biomarker study is a secondary analysis of the GeparOcto multicenter prospective randomized clinical trial conducted between December 2014 and June 2016. Genetic analyses assessing for variants in BRCA1/2 and 16 other BC predisposition genes in 914 of 945 women were performed at the Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne, Germany, from August 2017 through December 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of patients who achieved pCR (ypT0/is ypN0 definition) after neoadjuvant treatment according to germline variant status. RESULTS: In the study sample of 914 women with different BC subtypes with a mean (range) age at BC diagnosis of 48 (21-76) years, overall higher pCR rates were observed in patients with BRCA1/2 variants than in patients without (60.4% vs 46.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.74; 95% CI, 1.13-2.68; P = .01); variants in non-BRCA1/2 BC predisposition genes were not associated with therapy response. Patients with TNBC with BRCA1/2 variants achieved highest pCR rates. In the TNBC subgroup, a positive BRCA1/2 variant status was associated with therapy response in both the PMCb arm (74.3% vs 47.0% without BRCA1/2 variant; OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.44-7.39; P = .005) and the iddEPC arm (64.7% vs 45.0%; OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.04-4.84; P = .04). A positive BRCA1/2 variant status was also associated with elevated pCR rates in patients with ERBB2-negative, hormone receptor–positive BC (31.8% vs 11.9%; OR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.22-9.72; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Effective chemotherapy for BRCA1/2-mutated TNBC is commonly suggested to be platinum based. With a pCR rate of 64.7%, iddEPC may also be effective in these patients, though further prospective studies are needed. The elevated pCR rate in BRCA1/2-mutated ERBB2-negative, hormone receptor–positive BC suggests that germline BRCA1/2 testing should be considered prior to treatment start. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02125344

Pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. We evaluated whether PSVs in BRCA1/2 were associated with risk of overall prostate cancer or high grade (Gleason 8+) prostate cancer using an international sample of 65 BRCA1 and 171 BRCA2 male PSV carriers with prostate cancer, and 3,388 BRCA1 and 2,880 BRCA2 male PSV carriers without prostate cancer. PSVs in the 3′ region of BRCA2 (c.7914+) were significantly associated with elevated risk of prostate cancer compared with reference bin c.1001-c.7913 [HR = 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25–2.52; P = 0.001], as well as elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.63–5.95; P = 0.001). c.756-c.1000 was also associated with elevated prostate cancer risk (HR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.71–4.68; P = 0.00004) and elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 4.95; 95% CI, 2.12–11.54; P = 0.0002). No genotype–phenotype associations were detected for PSVs in BRCA1. These results demonstrate that specific BRCA2 PSVs may be associated with elevated risk of developing aggressive prostate cancer. Significance: Aggressive prostate cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers may vary according to the specific BRCA2 mutation inherited by the at-risk individual.

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.

Background Germline mutations in the BRIP1 gene have been described as conferring a moderate risk for ovarian cancer (OC), while the role of BRIP1 in breast cancer (BC) pathogenesis remains controversial. Methods To assess the role of deleterious BRIP1 germline mutations in BC/OC predisposition, 6341 well-characterized index patients with BC, 706 index patients with OC, and 2189 geographically matched female controls were screened for loss-of-function (LoF) mutations and potentially damaging missense variants. All index patients met the inclusion criteria of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer for germline testing and tested negative for pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants. Results BRIP1 LoF mutations confer a high OC risk in familial index patients (odds ratio (OR) = 20.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 12.02–36.57, P

Early detection of breast cancer through screening reduces breast cancer mortality. The benefits of screening must also be considered within the context of potential harms (e.g., false positives, overdiagnosis). Furthermore, while breast cancer risk is highly variable within the population, most screening programs use age to determine eligibility. A risk-based approach is expected to improve the benefit-harm ratio of breast cancer screening programs. The PERSPECTIVE I&I (Personalized Risk Assessment for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer: Integration and Implementation) project seeks to improve personalized risk assessment to allow for a cost-effective, population-based approach to risk-based screening and determine best practices for implementation in Canada. This commentary describes the four inter-related activities that comprise the PERSPECTIVE I&I project. 1: Identification and validation of novel moderate to high-risk susceptibility genes. 2: Improvement, validation, and adaptation of a risk prediction web-tool for the Canadian context. 3: Development and piloting of a socio-ethical framework to support implementation of risk-based breast cancer screening. 4: Economic analysis to optimize the implementation of risk-based screening. Risk-based screening and prevention is expected to benefit all women, empowering them to work with their healthcare provider to make informed decisions about screening and prevention.

This abstract was not presented at the symposium.

Introduction Addition of carboplatin to anthracycline/taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy has shown to improve pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0 ypN0) rates in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in two large phase II studies (GeparSixto: von Minckwitz et al, Lancet Oncol 2014, CALGB 40603: Sikov WM, J Clin Oncol 2015). Participants of the GeparSixto study showed an improvement of pCR rate from 36.9 to 53.2% (p=0.005) and DFS by absolute 9% (HR 0.56 95% CI 0.33-0.96] p=0.035) with the addition of carboplatin in the TNBC subgroup. No effect was observed in the HER2-positive subgroup. We here report results on homologous repair deficiency (HRD) status in relation to pCR and DFS in the TNBC subgroup. Patients and Methods In the GeparSixto trial (NCT01426880), patients were treated for 18 weeks with paclitaxel 80mg/m2 q1w and non-pegylated-liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) 20mg/m2 q1w. Patients with TNBC (N=315) received concurrently bevacizumab 15mg/kg i.v. q2w until surgery. All patients were randomized 1:1 to receive concurrently carboplatin AUC 1.5-2 q1w vs no carboplatin. Carboplatin dose was reduced from AUC 2.0 to 1.5 by an amendment after 330 patients. Primary objective is pCR rate (ypT0 ypN0). Event free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) were secondary objectives. HR Deficiency status was assessed on FFPE material from pretherapeutic core biopsies. HR Deficiency was defined as either HRD score high or a BRCA mutation. Results HRD status was measurable in 193 of 315 TNBC patients. 101 patients of them were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin and 92 to no additional carboplatin. After median follow-up of 34.3 months 43 event free survival (EFS) events have been reported. HR deficiency was detected in 136 (70.5%) tumors of which 79 (58.1%) showed high HRD score with intact tBRCA. HR deficiency independently predicted pCR (ypT0is ypN0) (odds ratio (OR) 2.506, CI 1.243-5.051, p=0.009). Adding carboplatin to PM significantly increased the pCR rate from 36.6% to 63.2% in HR deficient tumors with intact tBRCA (p=0.018), only marginally from 61.9% to 72.7% in BRCA mutated tumors (p=0.406), and moderately from 20.0% to 40.7% in HR non-deficient tumors (p=0.086). In general, patients with HRD deficient tumors had a better ESF than non HRD deficient ones (HR 1.805 (0.985-3.309); p=0.0526). Patients with high HRD score had an insignificant trend towards an improved EFS compared to those with low HRD score (HR 1.546 (0.764-3.127) p=0.2223). HRD deficiency did not predict carboplatin effect in patients without BRCA mutation (HR 0.8617). In multivariable analysis, only therapy, clinical nodal status before treatment, and lymphocyte predominant breast cancer were significant prognostic on EFS. Conclusion Within the GeparSixto study HR deficiency (either HRD score high or BRCA mutation) was associated with a higher pCR in general and an improved EFS. The effect of carboplatin could not be predicted by HR deficiency in this relatively small study. However, the results will help to understand the role of HR deficiency and the value of the HRD score in TNBC especially in patients without BRCA mutation. Citation Format: von Minckwitz G, Timms K, Untch M, Elkin EP, Hahnen E, Fasching PA, Schneeweiss A, Salat CT, Rezai M, Blohmer J-U, Zahm D-M, Jackisch C, Gerber B, Klare P, Kümmel S, Paepke S, Schmutzler R, Chau S, Reid J, Hartman A-R, Nekljudova V, Weber KE, Loibl S. Homologous repair deficiency (HRD) as measure to predict the effect of carboplatin on survival in the neoadjuvant phase II trial GeparSixto in triple-negative early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-09-02.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with a poor prognosis and defines a subgroup of patients who do not benefit from endocrine or anti-HER2 therapy. Rather than being a biological entity, TNBC represents a heterogeneous disease, and further subtyping is necessary to establish targeted therapies. Germline mutational status may serve as a robust biomarker predicting therapy response, especially with respect to compounds challenging the DNA repair machinery. Patients with TNBC usually show an early onset of the disease, as well as a positive family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer in more than one third of all cases, which suggests that TNBC is closely associated with a hereditary disease cause. In unselected TNBC cases, the prevalence of pathogenic germline BRCA1/2 mutations is approximately twice as high as in breast cancer overall. Early age at diagnosis and positive family history are strong predictors for an increased BRCA1/2 mutation probability, which is up to 40% when both risk factors are considered. Apart from BRCA1/2, the rarely mutated breast cancer predisposition genes PALB2 and FANCM have been associated with TNBC. This review summarizes the role of germline mutational status in TNBC pathogenesis. Clinical trials addressing BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are discussed.

Background: We examined the associations between germline variants and breast cancer mortality using a large meta-analysis of women of European ancestry. Methods: Meta-analyses included summary estimates based on Cox models of twelve datasets using ~10.4 million variants for 96,661 women with breast cancer and 7697 events (breast cancer-specific deaths). Oestrogen receptor (ER)-specific analyses were based on 64,171 ER-positive (4116) and 16,172 ER-negative (2125) patients. We evaluated the probability of a signal to be a true positive using the Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP). Results: We did not find any variant associated with breast cancer-specific mortality at P < 5 × 10 −8 . For ER-positive disease, the most significantly associated variant was chr7:rs4717568 (BFDP = 7%, P = 1.28 × 10 −7 , hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.84–0.92); the closest gene is AUTS2. For ER-negative disease, the most significant variant was chr7:rs67918676 (BFDP = 11%, P = 1.38 × 10 −7 , HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.16–1.39); located within a long intergenic non-coding RNA gene (AC004009.3), close to the HOXA gene cluster. Conclusions: We uncovered germline variants on chromosome 7 at BFDP < 15% close to genes for which there is biological evidence related to breast cancer outcome. However, the paucity of variants associated with mortality at genome-wide significance underpins the challenge in providing genetic-based individualised prognostic information for breast cancer patients.

Altres ajuts: Deutsche Krebshilfe, Grant/Award Number: 110837, 70111850 and 70112504 Background: Biallelic BRCA1 mutations are regarded either embryonically lethal or to cause Fanconi anemia (FA), a genomic instability syndrome characterized by bone marrow failure, developmental abnormalities, and cancer predisposition. We report biallelic BRCA1 mutations c.181T > G (p.Cys61Gly) and c.5096G > A (p.Arg1699Gln) in a woman with breast cancer diagnosed at the age of 30 years. The common European founder mutation p.Cys61Gly confers high cancer risk, whereas the deleterious p.Arg1699Gln is hypomorphic and was suggested to confer intermediate cancer risk. Methods and Results: Aside from significant toxicity from chemotherapy, the patient showed mild FA-like features (e.g., short stature, microcephaly, skin hyperpigmentation). Chromosome fragility, a hallmark of FA patient cells, was not present in patient-derived peripheral blood lymphocytes. We demonstrated that the p.Arg1699Gln mutation impairs DNA double-strand break repair, elevates RAD51 foci levels at baseline, and compromises BRCA1 protein function in protecting from replication stress. Although the p.Arg1699Gln mutation compromises BRCA1 function, the residual activity of the p.Arg1699Gln allele likely prevents from chromosome fragility and a more severe FA phenotype. Conclusion: Our data expand the clinical spectrum associated with biallelic BRCA1 mutations, ranging from embryonic lethality to a mild FA-like phenotype and no chromosome fragility.

579 Background: The phase II trial WSG-ADAPT TN randomized triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients to receive 12 weeks of neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel (nab-pac) combined with carboplatin (carbo) vs gemcitabine (gem) and showed a substantial improvement of pathological complete response (pCR: ypT0/is, ypN0) with carbo (45.9% vs 28.7%). pCR had a strong favorable impact on iDFS after 3-year follow-up. Distribution of tumor mutations in BC-associated genes and impact of BRCA mutation status on pCR and outcome are analyzed here. Methods: NGS-based mutational analysis of BRCA1/2 and 18 further (potentially) BC-associated genes was performed on DNA derived from pretreatment FFPE samples (gem: n = 158, carbo: n = 108) using a customized gene panel. Variants with a variant fraction of ≥5% were included and classified according to IARC and ENIGMA guidelines. Results: In 42 of the 266 analyzed samples, at least one deleterious BRCA1/2-variant was found (15.8%; BRCA1 n = 37, BRCA2 n = 3, BRCA1+ BRCA2 n = 2) one of which displayed an additional STK11-mutation. In the BRCA1/2-negative cohort, a mutation in one of 14 further analyzed (potential) BC-risk genes was found in 19 samples (7.1%; BARD1 n = 3, CHEK2 n = 2, CDH1 n = 2, FANCM n = 3, PALB2 n = 5, RAD50 n = 1, RAD51C n = 1, RAD51D n = 1, XRCC2 n = 1; no deleterious mutations were found in ATM, BRIP1, MRE11A, NBN). At least one deleterious variant in TP53, PIK3CA, PTEN or MAP3K1 was seen in 89.1% (n = 237; TP53 n = 233, PIK3CA n = 22 PTEN n = 15, MAP3K1 n = 1). In 22 samples (8.3%) no deleterious mutation was identified in the analyzed genes. Overall, patients with tumor BRCA mutation (carbo n = 14, gem n = 28) had 45.2% vs 34.4% pCR (OR = 1.58, 95%-CI: 0.81-3.07, p =.18) without a mutation. pCR in the small group with mutation receiving carbo (n = 14) was 64.3% vs. 34.5% in all others (OR = 3.41, 95%-CI: 1.11-10.50; p =.03); direct comparison to BRCA-positive patients receiving gem (n = 28, 35.7%, OR = 3.2, 95%-CI: 0.85-12.36, p = 0.079) did not reach statistical significance. The results suggest that the strong favorable impact of pCR on iDFS is preserved even among BRCA-positive patients (n = 42, p =.07), as well as in the BRCA-negative subgroup (p

Purpose To characterise the prevalence of pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in families with breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) history. Patients and methods Data from 21 401 families were gathered between 1996 and 2014 in a clinical setting in the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, comprising full pedigrees with cancer status of all individual members at the time of first counselling, and BRCA1/2 mutation status of the index patient. Results The overall BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence was 24.0% (95% CI 23.4% to 24.6%). Highest mutation frequencies were observed in families with at least two OCs (41.9%, 95% CI 36.1% to 48.0%) and families with at least one breast and one OC (41.6%, 95% CI 40.3% to 43.0%), followed by male BC with at least one female BC or OC (35.8%; 95% CI 32.2% to 39.6%). In families with a single case of early BC (

The detection of deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 considerably influences the clinical management of healthy and diseased carriers. Therefore, the identification of persons at risk who could uptake genetic counseling and testing is pivotal. We developed a checklist with validated criteria to improve the identification, and prospectively evaluate the incidence, of familial cancer history in 5091 breast cancer patients. The rate of 30.4% of patients at high genetic risk underpins the demand for care in risk identification and counseling. The easy-to-use instrument promotes the implementation and dissemination of risk counseling by physicians.

Non-small cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (NSCNEC) account for 2% of gynecological cancer cases and are associated with a poor prognosis due to delayed diagnosis and aggressive tumor behavior. BRCA2-associated ovarian carcinomas predominantly possess a high-grade serous phenotype, which respond to platinum and targeted therapy with PARP inhibitors. Presented here is the case of an adult patient with NSCNEC of the ovaries associated with a deleterious BRCA2 germline mutation. The pathogenic mutation was also confirmed on the somatic level, while the wild-type allele had a high variant fraction, suggesting loss of heterozygosity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of an adult BRCA2 germline mutation carrier with the rare NSCNEC of the ovary phenotype. Therefore, ovarian cancer patients with histological subtypes other than high-grade serous carcinomas should be tested for BRCA1/2 mutations, as they may benefit from targeted therapy with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors.

Background There is no international consensus up to which age women with a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and no family history of breast or ovarian cancer should be offered genetic testing for germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (gBRCA) mutations. Here, we explored the association of age at TNBC diagnosis with the prevalence of pathogenic gBRCA mutations in this patient group. Methods The study comprised 802 women (median age 40 years, range 19–76) with oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 negative breast cancers, who had no relatives with breast or ovarian cancer. All women were tested for pathogenic gBRCA mutations. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the association between age at TNBC diagnosis and the presence of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation. Results A total of 127 women with TNBC (15.8%) were gBRCA mutation carriers (BRCA1: n = 118, 14.7%; BRCA2: n = 9, 1.1%). The mutation prevalence was 32.9% in the age group 20–29 years compared to 6.9% in the age group 60–69 years. Logistic regression analysis revealed a significant increase of mutation frequency with decreasing age at diagnosis (odds ratio 1.87 per 10 year decrease, 95%CI 1.50–2.32, p 10% for women diagnosed below approximately 50 years. Conclusions Based on the general understanding that a heterozygous mutation probability of 10% or greater justifies gBRCA mutation screening, women with TNBC diagnosed before the age of 50 years and no familial history of breast and ovarian cancer should be tested for gBRCA mutations. In Germany, this would concern approximately 880 women with newly diagnosed TNBC per year, of whom approximately 150 are expected to be identified as carriers of a pathogenic gBRCA mutation.

The prevalence of germ line mutations in non-BRCA1/2 genes associated with hereditary breast cancer (BC) is low, and the role of some of these genes in BC predisposition and pathogenesis is conflicting. In this study, 5589 consecutive BC index patients negative for pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations and 2189 female controls were screened for germ line mutations in eight cancer predisposition genes (ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53). All patients met the inclusion criteria of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer for germ line testing. The highest mutation prevalence was observed in the CHEK2 gene (2.5%), followed by ATM (1.5%) and PALB2 (1.2%). The mutation prevalence in each of the remaining genes was 0.3% or lower. Using Exome Aggregation Consortium control data, we confirm significant associations of heterozygous germ line mutations with BC for ATM (OR: 3.63, 95% CI: 2.67-4.94), CDH1 (OR: 17.04, 95% CI: 3.54-82), CHEK2 (OR: 2.93, 95% CI: 2.29-3.75), PALB2 (OR: 9.53, 95% CI: 6.25-14.51), and TP53 (OR: 7.30, 95% CI: 1.22-43.68). NBN germ line mutations were not significantly associated with BC risk (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.73-2.64). Due to their low mutation prevalence, the RAD51C and RAD51D genes require further investigation. Compared with control datasets, predicted damaging rare missense variants were significantly more prevalent in CHEK2 and TP53 in BC index patients. Compared with the overall sample, only TP53 mutation carriers show a significantly younger age at first BC diagnosis. We demonstrate a significant association of deleterious variants in the CHEK2, PALB2, and TP53 genes with bilateral BC. Both, ATM and CHEK2, were negatively associated with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumor phenotypes. A particularly high CHEK2 mutation prevalence (5.2%) was observed in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive tumors.

Zusammenfassung Aktuelle Untersuchungen belegen, dass das hereditäre Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinom eine extreme genetische Heterogenität aufweist. Aktuell sind neben BRCA1 und BRCA2 bereits mehr als 20 Risikogene bekannt, die etwa ein Drittel aller familiären Fälle erklären können. Zusätzlich werden ständig neue polygene Komponenten identifiziert, die derzeit 16 % der gesamten genetischen Last bedingen. Das bedeutet, diese Varianten befinden sich zusätzlich zu hoch- oder moderat penetranten Mutationen in den Familien und modulieren die Penetranz.Gegenwärtig wird eine erweiterte BRCA-Diagnostik bereits in mehreren Ländern angeboten. Das Deutsche Konsortium Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs (GC-HBOC) hat z. B. für die Multigenanalyse das TruRisk™-Genpanel konsentiert, welches neben den 10 sog. „core genes“ (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, TP53) derzeit weitere noch zu validierende 24 Kandidatengene umfasst. Innerhalb des GC-HBOC wurde festgelegt, dass zunächst nur die Untersuchung der 10 core genes verpflichtend ist. Neben dem TruRisk™-Genpanel existieren zahlreiche kommerzielle Genpanels, wie beispielsweise das TruSight Cancer Panel (Fa. Illumina), welches 94 Gene abdeckt, oder die jeweils 26 Gene umfassenden BRCA Hereditary Cancer MASTRTM Plus (Fa. Multiplicom) und Myriad myRiskTM (Myriad Genetics) Panels. Der Einsatz der Paneldiagnostik ermöglicht, im Rahmen der molekulargenetischen Diagnostik bei Tumorprädispositionserkrankungen, die flexible Untersuchung der relevanten erblichen Risikofaktoren. Das heißt aber, dass die Panels ständig neuen Erkenntnissen angepasst werden, die zwangsläufig einerseits aus den laufenden klinischen Validierungsstudien und andererseits aus den initiierten „exom“- oder „whole-genome“ Sequenzierungen resultieren.

Zusammenfassung Die Anwendung von NGS-basierten Verfahren in der molekulargenetischen Diagnostik wird in den nächsten Jahren zur Identifikation einer Vielzahl von Varianten mit unklarer Signifikanz (VUS) führen, deren Relevanz für den untersuchten Phänotyp bestimmt werden muss. In der Diagnostik erblicher Tumorprädispositionserkrankungen wird die VUS-Klassifizierung insbesondere in non-BRCA1/2-Genen in den nächsten Jahren einen hohen Stellenwert einnehmen, eine Herausforderung, die jedoch insbesondere durch internationale wissenschaftliche Kooperationen bewältigt werden kann. Das Deutsche Konsortium Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs (GC-HBOC) verwendet zur Klassifikation dieser Varianten das international etablierte IARC 5-Klassen-System und kooperiert zur Bewertung seltener Varianten sowie Varianten in bislang weniger gut untersuchten Genen mit zahlreichen internationalen Konsortien und Forschungsgruppen. Vorhersageprogramme können im Kontext von Forschungsprojekten ein nützliches Werkzeug bei der Bewertung beispielsweise der großen Zahl von Varianten in NGS-basierten Untersuchungen sein. Im Rahmen der molekulargenetischen Diagnostik sollte die Klassifizierung der identifizierten Varianten jedoch nicht ausschließlich aufgrund der Vorhersageprogramme erfolgen.

CIMBA Consortium et al., PMID: 25849179, [Importance]: Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists. [Objective]: To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2. [Design, Setting, and Participants]: Observational study ofwomen whowere ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19 581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11 900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents.We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position.We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk. [Exposures]: Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2. [Main Outcomes and Measures]: Breast and ovarian cancer risks. [Results]: Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95%CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10-6), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95%CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95%CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10-9).We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95%CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10-17). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95%CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95%CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95%CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002).We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95%CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10-17). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95%CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. [Conclusions and Relevance]: Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations., Dr Antoniou and the CIMBA data management are funded by Cancer Research UK. Dr Easton is a Principal Research Fellow of Cancer Research UK. Dr Rebbeck is supported by R01-CA083855, R01-CA102776, and P50-CA083638 from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr Rebbeck, Dr Nathanson, Ms Friebel, and Dr Domchek are supported by the Basser Research Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr Nathanson is supported by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. Drs Domchek and Nathanson are supported by the Rooney Family Foundation. Dr Poppe is supported by R01-CA112520 from NIH. Cancer Research UK provided financial support for this work. Dr Antoniou is a Senior Cancer Research UK Cancer Research Fellow. Dr Phillips is a National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia) Practitioner Fellow.

Importance The GeparSixto trial provided evidence that the addition of neoadjuvant carboplatin to a regimen consisting of anthracycline, taxane, and bevacizumab increases pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation status affects treatment outcome remains elusive. Objective To determine whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation status affects therapy response in patients with TNBC. Design, Setting, and Participants This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial used archived DNA samples and cancer family history of 315 patients with TNBC enrolled between August 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012, in the GeparSixto trial. In all, 291 participants (92.4%) were included in this multicenter prospective investigation. DNA samples were analyzed for germline mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and 16 other cancer predisposition genes. The pCR rates between the carboplatin and noncarboplatin arms were compared. Genetic analyses were performed at the Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Cologne, Germany; data analysis, November 1 through December 31, 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportion of patients who achieved pCR and disease-free survival after neoadjuvant treatment according to BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation status. For pCR rates, the ypT0/is ypN0 definition was used as a primary end point. Results Of the 291 patients with TNBC, all were women; the mean (SD) age was 48 (11) years. The pCR rate in the carboplatin group was 56.8% (83 of 146) and 41.4% (60 of 145) in the noncarboplatin group (odds ratio [OR], 1.87; 95% CI, 1.17-2.97; P = .009). Pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations were present in 50 of the 291 patients (17.2%). In the noncarboplatin arm, the pCR rate was 66.7% (16 of 24) for patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and 36.4% (44 of 121) for patients without (OR, 3.50; 95% CI, 1.39-8.84; P = .008). The high pCR rate observed in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (16 of 24 [66.7%]) was not increased further by adding carboplatin (17 of 26 [65.4%]). In contrast, carboplatin increased response rates in patients without BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: 66 of the 120 patients (55%) without BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations achieved pCR in the carboplatin arm vs 44 of the 121 patients (36.4%) in the noncarboplatin arm (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.28-3.58; P = .004). Patients without pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 alterations showed elevated disease-free survival rates when carboplatin was added (without carboplatin, 73.5%; 95% CI, 64.1%-80.8% vs with carboplatin, 85.3%; 95% CI, 77.0%-90.8%; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.96; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance Under the nonstandard GeparSixto polychemotherapy regimen, patients without BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations benefited from the addition of carboplatin and those with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations showed superior response rates without additive effects observed for carboplatin. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01426880

Background Identification of families at risk for ovarian cancer offers the opportunity to consider prophylactic surgery thus reducing ovarian cancer mortality. So far, identification of potentially affected families in Germany was solely performed via family history and numbers of affected family members with breast or ovarian cancer. However, neither the prevalence of deleterious variants in \(BRCA1/2\) in ovarian cancer in Germany nor the reliability of family history as trigger for genetic counselling has ever been evaluated. Methods Prospective counseling and germline testing of consecutive patients with primary diagnosis or with platinum-sensitive relapse of an invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. Testing included 25 candidate and established risk genes. Among these 25 genes, 16 genes (\(ATM\), \(BRCA1\), \(BRCA2\), \(CDH1\), \(CHEK2\), \(MLH1\), \(MSH2\), \(MSH6\), \(NBN\), \(PMS2\), \(PTEN\), \(PALB2\), \(RAD51C\), \(RAD51D\), \(STK11\), \(TP53\)) were defined as established cancer risk genes. A positive family history was defined as at least one relative with breast cancer or ovarian cancer or breast cancer in personal history. Results In total, we analyzed 523 patients: 281 patients with primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer and 242 patients with relapsed disease. Median age at primary diagnosis was 58 years (range 16–93) and 406 patients (77.6%) had a high-grade serous ovarian cancer. In total, 27.9% of the patients showed at least one deleterious variant in all 25 investigated genes and 26.4% in the defined 16 risk genes. Deleterious variants were most prevalent in the \(BRCA1\) (15.5%), \(BRCA2\) (5.5%), \(RAD51C\) (2.5%) and \(PALB2\) (1.1%) genes. The prevalence of deleterious variants did not differ significantly between patients at primary diagnosis and relapse. The prevalence of deleterious variants in \(BRCA1/2\) (and in all 16 risk genes) in patients

Neuere Ergebnisse belegen, dass das hereditare Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinom eine extreme genetische Heterogenitat aufweist – aktuell sind neben BRCA1 und BRCA2 bereits mehr als 10 Hochrisiko- bzw. Risikogene bekannt, die etwa ein Drittel aller familiaren Falle erklaren konnen. Zusatzlich werden standig sog. oligogene Komponenten identifiziert, die eventuell weitere 10–15 % der BRCA1/2-negativen Falle erklaren konnten. Gegenwartig wird bereits eine erweiterte Diagnostik fur zusatzliche Gene, neben BRCA1/2, von verschiedenen Laboratorien angeboten. Aber fur nur wenige dieser Gene gibt es bereits ausreichend Daten, die es ermoglichen, klinische Konsequenzen aus den jeweiligen Mutationen zu ziehen. Daher stellt sich die Frage, welche Gene schon im Rahmen einer Routinediagnostik und welche vorher noch dringend validiert werden mussen. Im Rahmen der offentlich diskutierten Mehr-Gen-Analysen werden z. B. auch solche Gene untersucht, in denen Mutationen vermutlich nur gering penetrante Wirkungen haben (BRIP1 oder BARD1) oder nur selten verandert sind (PTEN, STK11). Zurzeit ziehen nur Mutationen in den Hochrisikogenen BRCA1, BRCA2 und TP53 prophylaktische Masnahmen nach sich. Aber Veranderungen in anderen DNA-Reparaturgenen (z. B. CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C und RAD51D), die moderate Penetranz zeigen, konnen Konsequenzen fur die (Chemo-)Therapie oder intensivierte Fruherkennung haben. Deshalb ist es dringend erforderlich, weitere DNA-Reparaturgene mithilfe neuer technischer Verfahren (Multiplex) in Familien, die keine Veranderungen in den Hochrisikogenen zeigen, zu validieren. Dies erfordert eine Einbettung in ein standardisiertes Evaluierungskonzept, das es erlaubt, in prospektiven Studien die Wertigkeit der verschiedenen diagnostischen, praventiven und neuen therapeutischen Optionen zu validieren.

Importance Germline mutations in established moderately or highly penetrant risk genes for breast cancer (BC) and/or ovarian cancer (OC), including BRCA1 and BRCA2 , explain fewer than half of all familial BC and/or OC cases. Based on the genotyping of 2 loss-of-function (LoF) variants c.5101C>T (p.GIn1701Ter [rs147021911]) and c.5791C>T (p.Arg1931Ter [rs144567652]), the FANCM gene has been suggested as a novel BC predisposition gene, while the analysis of the entire coding region of the FANCM gene in familial index cases and geographically matched controls is pending. Objectives To assess the mutational spectrum within the FANCM gene, and to determine a potential association of LoF germline mutations within the FANCM gene with BC and/or OC risk. Design, Setting, and Participants For the purpose of identification and characterization of novel BC and/or OC predisposition genes, a total of 2047 well-characterized familial BC index cases, 628 OC cases, and 2187 geographically matched controls were screened for LoF mutations within the FANCM gene by next-generation sequencing. All patients previously tested negative for pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. All data collection occurred between June 1, 2013, and April 30, 2016. Data analysis was performed from May 1, 2016, to July 1, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures FANCM LoF mutation frequencies in patients with BC and/or OC were compared with the FANCM LoF mutation frequencies in geographically matched controls by univariate logistic regression. Positive associations were stratified by age at onset and cancer family history. Results In this case-control study, 2047 well-characterized familial female BC index cases, 628 OC cases, and 2187 geographically matched controls were screened for truncating FANCM alterations. Heterozygous LoF mutations within the FANCM gene were significantly associated with familial BC risk, with an overall odds ratio (OR) of 2.05 (95% CI, 0.94-4.54; P = .049) and a mutation frequency of 1.03% in index cases. In familial patients whose BC onset was before age 51 years, an elevated OR of 2.44 (95% CI, 1.08-5.59; P = .02) was observed. A more pronounced association was identified for patients with a triple-negative BC tumor phenotype (OR, 3.75; 95% CI, 1.00-12.85; P = .02). No significant association was detected for unselected OC cases (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.57-5.08; P = .27). Conclusions and Relevance Based on the significant associations of heterozygous LoF mutations with early-onset or triple-negative BC, FANCM should be included in diagnostic gene panel testing for individual risk assessment. Larger studies are required to determine age-dependent disease risks for BC and to assess a potential role of FANCM mutations in OC pathogenesis.

573 Background: GeparOcto compared the efficacy of two neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) regimens in high-risk early breast cancer (BC): Sequential intense dose-dense epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) and weekly paclitaxel plus non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PM), plus carboplatin (PMCb) in triple-negative BC (TNBC). There was no difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) rates (Schneeweiss et al. Eur J Cancer 2019). Here, we stratified pCR rates according to germline mutation status. Methods: Germline (g) mutation analysis of BRCA1/2 and 16 further BC predisposition genes in 914 patients (pts) enrolled (393 pts with TNBC, iddEPC n = 194, PMCb n = 199; 156 pts with HER2-/HR+ BC, iddEPC n = 75, PM n = 81; and 365 pts with HER2+ BC, iddEPC n = 182, PM n = 183). Results: The gBRCA1/2 mutation prevalence was 17.6% in TNBC, 14.1% in HER2-/HR+ BC and 1.4% in HER2+ BC. Overall, pts with gBRCA1/2 mutations achieved higher pCR rates than gBRCA1/2 wildtype pts (60.4% vs 46.7%, OR 1.74, P = 0.012), with more pronounced effects in the PM(Cb) arm (68.1% vs 45.7%, OR 2.53, P = 0.005). Among gBRCA1/2 wildtype pts, 76 carried mutations in non- BRCA1/2 predisposition genes. pCR rates were similar to those observed in pts without any mutation. Conclusions: Pts with gBRCA1/2 mutations benefitted most from NAT with highest pCR rates achieved in the gBRCA1/2 TNBC / PMCb group. The role of Cb for NAT of gBRCA1/2 TNBC should be further explored. Clinical trial information: NCT02125344. [Table: see text]