1
|
Le Calvez-Kelm F, Oliver J, Damiola F, Forey N, Robinot N, Durand G, Voegele C, Vallée MP, Byrnes G, Registry BCF, Hopper JL, Southey MC, Andrulis IL, John EM, Tavtigian SV, Lesueur F. RAD51 and breast cancer susceptibility: no evidence for rare variant association in the Breast Cancer Family Registry study. PLoS One 2012; 7:e52374. [PMID: 23300655 PMCID: PMC3531476 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052374] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2012] [Accepted: 11/15/2012] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although inherited breast cancer has been associated with germline mutations in genes that are functionally involved in the DNA homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, including BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, ATM, BRIP1, CHEK2 and PALB2, about 70% of breast cancer heritability remains unexplained. Because of their critical functions in maintaining genome integrity and already well-established associations with breast cancer susceptibility, it is likely that additional genes involved in the HRR pathway harbor sequence variants associated with increased risk of breast cancer. RAD51 plays a central biological function in DNA repair and despite the fact that rare, likely dysfunctional variants in three of its five paralogs, RAD51C, RAD51D, and XRCC2, have been associated with breast and/or ovarian cancer risk, no population-based case-control mutation screening data are available for the RAD51 gene. We thus postulated that RAD51 could harbor rare germline mutations that confer increased risk of breast cancer. Methodology/Principal Findings We screened the coding exons and proximal splice junction regions of the gene for germline sequence variation in 1,330 early-onset breast cancer cases and 1,123 controls from the Breast Cancer Family Registry, using the same population-based sampling and analytical strategy that we developed for assessment of rare sequence variants in ATM and CHEK2. In total, 12 distinct very rare or private variants were characterized in RAD51, with 10 cases (0.75%) and 9 controls (0.80%) carrying such a variant. Variants were either likely neutral missense substitutions (3), silent substitutions (4) or non-coding substitutions (5) that were predicted to have little effect on efficiency of the splicing machinery. Conclusion Altogether, our data suggest that RAD51 tolerates so little dysfunctional sequence variation that rare variants in the gene contribute little, if anything, to breast cancer susceptibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florence Le Calvez-Kelm
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Javier Oliver
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Francesca Damiola
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Nathalie Forey
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Nivonirina Robinot
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Geoffroy Durand
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Catherine Voegele
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Maxime P. Vallée
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Graham Byrnes
- Biostatistics Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Breast Cancer Family Registry
- Center for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic and Analytical Epidemiology, School of Population Health, EGA The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Genetic Epidemiology Laboratory, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Molecular Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, California, United States of America
- Stanford University School of Medicine and Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, California, United States of America
| | - John L. Hopper
- Center for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic and Analytical Epidemiology, School of Population Health, EGA The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Melissa C. Southey
- Genetic Epidemiology Laboratory, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Irene L. Andrulis
- Department of Molecular Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Esther M. John
- Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, California, United States of America
- Stanford University School of Medicine and Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, California, United States of America
| | - Sean V. Tavtigian
- Department of Oncological Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States of America
| | - Fabienne Lesueur
- Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|