Factors Associated with Early Versus Late Development of Breast and Ovarian Cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Positive Women

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is caused by a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation are at increased risks for breast and ovarian cancer and often develop cancer at an earlier age than the general population. However, some women with a BRCA1/2 mutation do not develop breast or ovarian cancer under the age of 50 years. There have been no specific studies on BRCA positive women with no cancer prior to age 50, therefore this study sought to investigate factors within these women with no cancer under age 50 with respect to reproductive risk factors, BMI, tumor pathology, screening history, risk-reducing surgeries, and family history. 241 women were diagnosed with cancer prior to age 50, 92 with cancer at age 50 or older, and 20 women were over age 50 with no cancer. Data were stratified based on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status. Within the cohorts we investigated differences between women who developed cancer prior to age 50 and those who developed cancer at age 50 or older. We also investigated the differences between women who developed cancer at age 50 or older and those who were age 50 or older with no cancer. Of the 92 women with a BRCA1/2 mutation who developed cancer at age 50 or older, 46 developed ovarian cancer first, 45 developed breast cancer, and one had breast and ovarian cancer diagnosed synchronously. BRCA2 carriers diagnosed age 50 or older were more likely to have ER/PR negative breast tumors when compared to BRCA2 carriers who were diagnosed before age 50. This is consistent with one other study that has been performed. Ashkenazi Jewish women with a BRCA1 mutation were more likely to be diagnosed age 50 or older than other ethnicities. Hispanic women with a BRCA2 mutation were more likely to be diagnosed prior to age 50 when compared to other ethnicities. No differences in reproductive factors or BMI were observed. Further characterization of BRCA positive women with no cancer prior to age 50 may aid in finding factors important in the development of breast or ovarian cancer.

Prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy for women at risk of breast and ovarian cancer: Incorporating preferences in a decision analysis

The discoveries of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have made it possible for women of families with hereditary breast/ovarian cancer to determine if they carry cancer-predisposing genetic mutations. Women with germline mutations have significantly higher probabilities of developing both cancers than the general population. Since the presence of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation does not guarantee future cancer development, the appropriate course of action remains uncertain for these women. Prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy remain controversial since the underlying premise for surgical intervention is based more upon reduction in the estimated risk of cancer than on actual evidence of clinical benefit. Issues that are incorporated in a woman's decision making process include quality of life without breasts, ovaries, attitudes toward possible surgical morbidity as well as a remaining risk of future development of breast/ovarian cancer despite prophylactic surgery. The incorporation of patient preferences into decision analysis models can determine the quality-adjusted survival of different prophylactic approaches to breast/ovarian cancer prevention. Monte Carlo simulation was conducted on 4 separate decision models representing prophylactic oophorectomy, prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic oophorectomy/mastectomy and screening. The use of 3 separate preference assessment methods across different populations of women allows researchers to determine how quality adjusted survival varies according to clinical strategy, method of preference assessment and the population from which preferences are assessed. ^

Predictors of participation in genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Up to 10% of all breast and ovarian cancers are attributable to mutations in cancer susceptibility genes. Clinical genetic testing for deleterious gene mutations that predispose to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome is available. Mutation carriers may benefit from following high-risk guidelines for cancer prevention and early detection; however, few studies have reported the uptake of clinical genetic testing for HBOC. This study identified predictors of HBOC genetic testing uptake among a case series of 268 women who underwent genetic counseling at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center from October, 1996, through July, 2000. Women completed a baseline questionnaire that measured psychosocial and demographic variables. Additional medical characteristics were obtained from the medical charts. Logistic regression modeling identified predictors of participation in HBOC genetic testing. Psychological variables were hypothesized to be the strongest predictors of testing uptake—in particular, one's readiness (intention) to have testing. Testing uptake among all women in this study was 37% (n = 99). Contrary to the hypotheses, one's actual risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation was the strongest predictor of testing participation (OR = 15.37, CI = 5.15, 45.86). Other predictors included religious background, greater readiness to have testing, knowledge about HBOC and genetic testing, not having female children, and adherence to breast self-exam. Among the subgroup of women who were at ≥10% risk of carrying a mutation, 51% (n = 90) had genetic testing. Consistent with the hypotheses, predictors of testing participation in the high-risk subgroup included greater readiness to have testing, knowledge, and greater self-efficacy regarding one's ability to cope with test results. Women with CES-D scores ≥16, indicating the presence of depressive symptoms, were less likely to have genetic testing. Results indicate that among women with a wide range of risk for HBOC, actual risk of carrying an HBOC-predisposing mutation may be the strongest predictor of their decision to have genetic testing. Psychological variables (e.g., distress and self-efficacy) may influence testing participation only among women at highest risk of carrying a mutation, for whom genetic testing is most likely to be informative. ^

Elucidation of the role of 53BP1 in DNA double strand break (DSB) repair and tumor suppression

The protein p53 binding protein one (53BP1) was discovered in a yeast two-hybrid screen that used the DNA binding domain of p53 as bait. Cloning of full-length 53BP1 showed that this protein contains several protein domains which help make up the protein, which include two tandem BRCT domains and a amino-terminal serine/glutamine cluster domain (SCD). These are two protein domains are often seen in factors that are involved in the cellular response to DNA damage and control of cell cycle checkpoints and we hypothesize that 53BP1 is involved in the cellular response to DNA damage. In support of this hypothesis we observe that 53BP1 is phosphorylated and undergoes a dramatic nuclear re-localization in response to DNA damaging agents. 53BP1 also interacts with several factors that are important in the cellular response to DNA damage, such as the BRCA1 tumor suppressor, ATM and Rad3 related (ATR), and the phosphorylated version of the histone variant H2AX. Mice deficient in 53BP1 display increased sensitivity ionizing radiation (IR), a DNA damaging agent that introduces DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). In addition, 53BP1-deficient mice do not properly undergo the process of class switch recombination (CSR). We also observe that when a defect in 53BP1 is combined with a defect in p53; the resulting mice have an increased rate of formation of spontaneous tumors, notably the formation of B and T lineage lymphomas. The T lineage tumors arise by two distinct mechanisms: one driven by defects in cell cycle regulation and a second driven by defects in the ability to repair DNA DSBs. The B lineage tumors arise by the inability to repair DNA damage and over-expression of the oncogene c-myc. ^ With these observations, we conclude that not only does 53BP1 function in the cellular response to DNA damage, but it also works in concert with p53 to suppress tumor formation. ^

Response to chemotherapy, recurrence and survival in advanced-stage ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer patients with non-Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA mutations, compared to those without

Objectives. Previous studies have shown a survival advantage in ovarian cancer patients with Ashkenazi-Jewish (AJ) BRCA founder mutations, compared to sporadic ovarian cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to determine if this association exists in ovarian cancer patients with non-Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA mutations. In addition, we sought to account for possible "survival bias" by minimizing any lead time that may exist between diagnosis and genetic testing. ^ Methods. Patients with stage III/IV ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer and a non-Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1 or 2 mutation, seen for genetic testing January 1996-July 2007, were identified from genetics and institutional databases. Medical records were reviewed for clinical factors, including response to initial chemotherapy. Patients with sporadic (non-hereditary) ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, without family history of breast or ovarian cancer, were compared to similar cases, matched by age, stage, year of diagnosis, and vital status at time interval to BRCA testing. When possible, 2 sporadic patients were matched to each BRCA patient. An additional group of unmatched, sporadic ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer patients was included for a separate analysis. Progression-free (PFS) & overall survival (OS) were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were calculated for variables of interest. Matched pairs were treated as clusters. Stratified log rank test was used to calculate survival data for matched pairs using paired event times. Fisher's exact test, chi-square, and univariate logistic regression were also used for analysis. ^ Results. Forty five advanced-stage ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer patients with non-Ashkenazi Jewish (non-AJ) BRCA mutations, 86 sporadic-matched and 414 sporadic-unmatched patients were analyzed. Compared to the sporadic-matched and sporadic-unmatched ovarian cancer patients, non-AJ BRCA mutation carriers had longer PFS (17.9 & 13.8 mos. vs. 32.0 mos., HR 1.76 [95% CI 1.13–2.75] & 2.61 [95% CI 1.70–4.00]). In relation to the sporadic- unmatched patients, non-AJ BRCA patients had greater odds of complete response to initial chemotherapy (OR 2.25 [95% CI 1.17–5.41]) and improved OS (37.6 mos. vs. 101.4 mos., HR 2.64 [95% CI 1.49–4.67]). ^ Conclusions. This study demonstrates a significant survival advantage in advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients with non-AJ BRCA mutations, confirming the previous studies in the Jewish population. Our efforts to account for "survival bias," by matching, will continue with collaborative studies. ^

Emerging roles for the double strand break repair protein 53BP1 in transcriptional regulation

Disruption of the mechanisms that regulate cell-cycle checkpoints, DNA repair, and apoptosis results in genomic instability and often leads to the development of cancer. In response to double stranded breaks (DSBs) as induced by ionizing radiation (IR), generated during DNA replication, or through immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) rearrangements in T and B cells of lymphoid origin, the protein kinases ATM and ATR are central players that activate signaling pathways leading to DSB repair. p53 binding protein 1 (53BP1) participates in the repair of DNA double stranded breaks (DSBs) where it is recruited to or near sites of DNA damage. In addition to its well established role in DSB repair, multiple lines of evidence implicate 53BP1 in transcription which stem from its initial discovery as a p53 binding protein in a yeast two-hybrid screen. However, the mechanisms behind the role of 53BP1 in these processes are not well understood. ^ 53BP1 possesses several motifs that are likely important for its role in DSB repair including two BRCA1 C-terminal repeats, tandem Tudor domains, and a variety of phosphorylation sites. In addition to these motifs, we identified a glycine and arginine rich region (GAR) upstream of the Tudor domains, a sequence that is oftentimes serves as a site for protein arginine methylation. The focus of this project was to characterize the methylation of 53BP1 and to evaluate how methylation influenced the role of 53BP1 as a tumor suppressor. ^ Using a variety of biochemical techniques, we demonstrated that 53BP1 is methylated by the PRMT1 methyltransferase in vivo. Moreover, GAR methylation occurs on arginine residues in an asymmetric manner. We further show that sequences upstream of the Tudor domains that do not include the GAR stretch are sufficient for 53BP1 oligomerization in vivo. While investigating the role of arginine methylation in 53BP1 function, we discovered that 53BP1 associates with proteins of the general transcription apparatus as well as to other factors implicated in coordinating transcription with chromatin function. Collectively, these data support a role for 53BP1 in regulating transcription and provide insight into the possible mechanisms by which this occurs. ^

Polycomb repressive complex 2 and induced basal-like breast cancer phenotype mediated by cyclin E/Cdk2

Despite of much success of breast cancer treatment, basal-like breast cancer subtype still presented as a clinical challenge to mammary oncologist for its lack of available targeted therapy owing to their negative expression of targeted molecules, such as PgR, ERα and Her2. These molecules are all critical regulators in mammary gland development. EZH2, a histone methyltransferase, by forming Polycomb Repressive Complex 2(PRC2) can directly suppress a large array of developmental regulators. Overexpression of cyclin E has also been correlated with basal-like (triple-negative) breast cancer and poor prognosis. We found an important functional link between these two molecules. Cyclin E/Cdk2 can enhance PRC2 function by phosphorylating a specific residue of EZH2, threonine 416 and increasing EZH2's ability to complex with SUZ12. This regulation would further recruit whole PRC2 complex to core promoter regions of these developmental regulators. The local enrichment of PRC2 complex would then trimethylate H3K27 around the core promoter regions and suppress the expression of targeted genes, which included PgR, ERα, erbB2 and BRCA1. This widespread gene suppressive effect imposed by highly active PRC2 complex would then transform the lumina) type cell to adopt a basal-like phenotype. This finding suggested deregulated Cdk2 activity owing to cyclin E overexpression may contribute to basal phenotype through enhancing epigenetic silencing effects by regulating PRC2 function. Inhibition of Cdk2 activity in basal-like cancer cells may help release the suppression, reexpress the silenced genes and become responsive to existing anti-hormone or anti-Her2 therapy. From this study, the mechanisms described here provided a rationale to target basal-like breast cancer by new combinational therapy of Cdk2 inhibitors together with Lapatinib, or Aromatin. ^

ACCURACY OF THE BRCAPRO RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL IN MALES PRESENTING TO MD ANDERSON FOR BRCA TESTING

ACCURACY OF THE BRCAPRO RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL IN MALES PRESENTING TO MD ANDERSON FOR BRCA TESTING Publication No. _______ Carolyn A. Garby, B.S. Supervisory Professor: Banu Arun, M.D. Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) syndrome is due to mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Women with HBOC have high risks to develop breast and ovarian cancers. Males with HBOC are commonly overlooked because male breast cancer is rare and other male cancer risks such as prostate and pancreatic cancers are relatively low. BRCA genetic testing is indicated for men as it is currently estimated that 4-40% of male breast cancers result from a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (Ottini, 2010) and management recommendations can be made based on genetic test results. Risk assessment models are available to provide the individualized likelihood to have a BRCA mutation. Only one study has been conducted to date to evaluate the accuracy of BRCAPro in males and was based on a cohort of Italian males and utilized an older version of BRCAPro. The objective of this study is to determine if BRCAPro5.1 is a valid risk assessment model for males who present to MD Anderson Cancer Center for BRCA genetic testing. BRCAPro has been previously validated for determining the probability of carrying a BRCA mutation, however has not been further examined particularly in males. The total cohort consisted of 152 males who had undergone BRCA genetic testing. The cohort was stratified by indication for genetic counseling. Indications included having a known familial BRCA mutation, having a personal diagnosis of a BRCA-related cancer, or having a family history suggestive of HBOC. Overall there were 22 (14.47%) BRCA1+ males and 25 (16.45%) BRCA2+ males. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed for the cohort overall, for each particular indication, as well as for each cancer subtype. Our findings revealed that the BRCAPro5.1 model had perfect discriminating ability at a threshold of 56.2 for males with breast cancer, however only 2 (4.35%) of 46 were found to have BRCA2 mutations. These results are significantly lower than the high approximation (40%) reported in previous literature. BRCAPro does perform well in certain situations for men. Future investigation of male breast cancer and men at risk for BRCA mutations is necessary to provide a more accurate risk assessment.

Predictors of Contralateral Breast Cancer in BRCA Negative Women

Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis and second leading cause of death in women. Risk factors associated with breast cancer include: increased age, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, white race, physical inactivity, benign breast conditions, reproductive and hormonal factors, dietary factors, and family history. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is caused by mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Women carrying a mutation in these genes are at an increased risk to develop a second breast cancer. Contralateral breast cancer is the most common second primary cancer in patients treated for a first breast cancer. Other risk factors for developing contralateral breast cancer include a strong family history of breast cancer, age of onset of first primary breast cancer, and if the first primary was a lobular carcinoma, which has an increased risk of being bilateral. A retrospective chart review was performed on a select cohort of women in an IRB approved database at MD Anderson Cancer Center. The final cohort contained 572 women who tested negative for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, had their primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed under the age of 50, and had a BRCAPro risk assessment number over 10%. Of the 572 women, 97 women developed contralateral breast cancer. A number of predictors of contralateral breast cancer were looked at between the two groups. Using univariable Cox Proportional Hazard model, thirteen statistically interesting risk factors were found, defined as having a p-value under 0.2. Multivariable stepwise Cox Proportional Hazard model found four statistically significant variables out of the thirteen found in the univariable analysis. In our study population, the incidence of contralateral breast cancer was 17%. Four statistically significant variables were identified. Undergoing a prophylactic mastectomy was found to reduce the risk of developing contralateral breast cancer, while not having a prophylactic mastecomy, a young age at primary diagnosis, having a positive estrogen receptor status of the primary tumor, and having a family history of breast cancer increased a woman’s risk to develop contralateral breast cancer.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Utilization of BRCA Testing Among Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is an inherited cancer syndrome that is associated with mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Carriers of BRCA mutations, both men and women, are at an increased risk for developing certain cancers. Carriers are most notably at an increased risk to develop breast and ovarian cancers; however an increased risk for prostate cancer, melanoma, and pancreatic cancers has also been associated with these mutations. In 2009 the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released a practice bulletin stating that evaluating a patient’s risk for HBOC should be a routine part of obstetric and gynecologic practice. A survey was created and completed by 83 obstetricians and gynecologists in the greater Houston, TX area. The survey consisted of four sections designed to capture demographic information, attitudes towards HBOC and BRCA testing, utilization of BRCA testing, and the overall knowledge of respondents with regards to HBOC and BRCA testing. This study found that the majority of participants indicated that they felt that obstetricians and gynecologists should have the primary responsibility of identifying patients who may be at increased risk of carrying a BRCA mutation. Moreover, this study found that the majority of participants indicated that they felt comfortable or very comfortable in identifying patients at an increased risk of carrying a BRCA mutation. However, only about a quarter of participants indicated that they order BRCA genetic testing one to two times per month or more. Lastly, this study demonstrates that the overall knowledge of HBOC and BRCA testing among this population of obstetricians and gynecologists is poor. The results of this study stress the need for more education regarding HBOC, genetic testing, and strategies for identifying patients that may be at risk for having a mutation in a BRCA gene. Furthermore, it reiterates the importance of raising awareness to current practice guidelines and recommendations that can assist obstetricians and gynecologist to better identify and manage patients that may be at an increased risk of having HBOC.

Patenting genes and gene sequences: Analysis of public health implications and the law

At issue is whether or not isolated DNA is patent eligible under the U.S. Patent Law and the implications of that determination on public health. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued patents on DNA since the 1980s, and scientists and researchers have proceeded under that milieu since that time. Today, genetic research and testing related to the human breast cancer genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 is conducted within the framework of seven patents that were issued to Myriad Genetics and the University of Utah Research Foundation between 1997 and 2000. In 2009, suit was filed on behalf of multiple researchers, professional associations and others to invalidate fifteen of the claims underlying those patents. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears patent cases, has invalidated claims for analyzing and comparing isolated DNA but has upheld claims to isolated DNA. The specific issue of whether isolated DNA is patent eligible is now before the Supreme Court, which is expected to decide the case by year's end. In this work, a systematic review was performed to determine the effects of DNA patents on various stakeholders and, ultimately, on public health; and to provide a legal analysis of the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and the likely outcome of the Supreme Court's decision. ^ A literature review was conducted to: first, identify principle stakeholders with an interest in patent eligibility of the isolated DNA sequences BRCA1 and BRCA2; and second, determine the effect of the case on those stakeholders. Published reports that addressed gene patents, the Myriad litigation, and implications of gene patents on stakeholders were included. Next, an in-depth legal analysis of the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and methods for analyzing it was performed pursuant to accepted methods of legal research and analysis based on legal briefs, federal law and jurisprudence, scholarly works and standard practice legal analysis. ^ Biotechnology, biomedical and clinical research, access to health care, and personalized medicine were identified as the principle stakeholders and interests herein. Many experts believe that the patent eligibility of isolated DNA will not greatly affect the biotechnology industry insofar as genetic testing is concerned; unlike for therapeutics, genetic testing does not require tremendous resources or lead time. The actual impact on biomedical researchers is uncertain, with greater impact expected for researchers whose work is intended for commercial purposes (versus basic science). The impact on access to health care has been surprisingly difficult to assess; while invalidating gene patents might be expected to decrease the cost of genetic testing and improve access to more laboratories and physicians' offices that provide the test, a 2010 study on the actual impact was inconclusive. As for personalized medicine, many experts believe that the availability of personalized medicine is ultimately a public policy issue for Congress, not the courts. ^ Based on the legal analysis performed in this work, this writer believes the Supreme Court is likely to invalidate patents on isolated DNA whose sequences are found in nature, because these gene sequences are a basic tool of scientific and technologic work and patents on isolated DNA would unduly inhibit their future use. Patents on complementary DNA (cDNA) are expected to stand, however, based on the human intervention required to craft cDNA and the product's distinction from the DNA found in nature. ^ In the end, the solution as to how to address gene patents may lie not in jurisprudence but in a fundamental change in business practices to provide expanded licenses to better address the interests of the several stakeholders. ^