The predictive ability of the 313 variant-based polygenic risk score for contralateral breast cancer risk prediction in women of European ancestry with a heterozygous BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association between a previously published 313 variant-based breast cancer (BC) polygenic risk score (PRS313) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk, in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant heterozygotes.

METHODS

We included women of European ancestry with a prevalent first primary invasive BC (BRCA1 = 6,591 with 1,402 prevalent CBC cases; BRCA2 = 4,208 with 647 prevalent CBC cases) from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA), a large international retrospective series. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the association between overall and ER-specific PRS313 and CBC risk.

RESULTS

For BRCA1 heterozygotes the estrogen receptor (ER)-negative PRS313 showed the largest association with CBC risk, hazard ratio (HR) per SD = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.06-1.18), C-index = 0.53; for BRCA2 heterozygotes, this was the ER-positive PRS313, HR = 1.15, 95% CI (1.07-1.25), C-index = 0.57. Adjusting for family history, age at diagnosis, treatment, or pathological characteristics for the first BC did not change association effect sizes. For women developing first BC < age 40 years, the cumulative PRS313 5th and 95th percentile 10-year CBC risks were 22% and 32% for BRCA1 and 13% and 23% for BRCA2 heterozygotes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The PRS313 can be used to refine individual CBC risks for BRCA1/2 heterozygotes of European ancestry, however the PRS313 needs to be considered in the context of a multifactorial risk model to evaluate whether it might influence clinical decision-making.

Prediction of contralateral breast cancer: external validation of risk calculators in 20 international cohorts

BACKGROUND

Three tools are currently available to predict the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). We aimed to compare the performance of the Manchester formula, CBCrisk, and PredictCBC in patients with invasive breast cancer (BC).

METHODS

We analyzed data of 132,756 patients (4682 CBC) from 20 international studies with a median follow-up of 8.8 years. Prediction performance included discrimination, quantified as a time-dependent Area-Under-the-Curve (AUC) at 5 and 10 years after diagnosis of primary BC, and calibration, quantified as the expected-observed (E/O) ratio at 5 and 10 years and the calibration slope.

RESULTS

The AUC at 10 years was: 0.58 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.59) for CBCrisk; 0.60 (95% CI 0.59-0.61) for the Manchester formula; 0.63 (95% CI 0.59-0.66) and 0.59 (95% CI 0.56-0.62) for PredictCBC-1A (for settings where BRCA1/2 mutation status is available) and PredictCBC-1B (for the general population), respectively. The E/O at 10 years: 0.82 (95% CI 0.51-1.32) for CBCrisk; 1.53 (95% CI 0.63-3.73) for the Manchester formula; 1.28 (95% CI 0.63-2.58) for PredictCBC-1A and 1.35 (95% CI 0.65-2.77) for PredictCBC-1B. The calibration slope was 1.26 (95% CI 1.01-1.50) for CBCrisk; 0.90 (95% CI 0.79-1.02) for PredictCBC-1A; 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-0.99) for PredictCBC-1B, and 0.39 (95% CI 0.34-0.43) for the Manchester formula.

CONCLUSIONS

Current CBC risk prediction tools provide only moderate discrimination and the Manchester formula was poorly calibrated. Better predictors and re-calibration are needed to improve CBC prediction and to identify low- and high-CBC risk patients for clinical decision-making.

Prediction and clinical utility of a contralateral breast cancer risk model

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer survivors are at risk for contralateral breast cancer (CBC), with the consequent burden of further treatment and potentially less favorable prognosis. We aimed to develop and validate a CBC risk prediction model and evaluate its applicability for clinical decision-making.

METHODS

We included data of 132,756 invasive non-metastatic breast cancer patients from 20 studies with 4682 CBC events and a median follow-up of 8.8 years. We developed a multivariable Fine and Gray prediction model (PredictCBC-1A) including patient, primary tumor, and treatment characteristics and BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, accounting for the competing risks of death and distant metastasis. We also developed a model without BRCA1/2 mutation status (PredictCBC-1B) since this information was available for only 6% of patients and is routinely unavailable in the general breast cancer population. Prediction performance was evaluated using calibration and discrimination, calculated by a time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) at 5 and 10 years after diagnosis of primary breast cancer, and an internal-external cross-validation procedure. Decision curve analysis was performed to evaluate the net benefit of the model to quantify clinical utility.

RESULTS

In the multivariable model, BRCA1/2 germline mutation status, family history, and systemic adjuvant treatment showed the strongest associations with CBC risk. The AUC of PredictCBC-1A was 0.63 (95% prediction interval (PI) at 5 years, 0.52-0.74; at 10 years, 0.53-0.72). Calibration-in-the-large was -0.13 (95% PI: -1.62-1.37), and the calibration slope was 0.90 (95% PI: 0.73-1.08). The AUC of Predict-1B at 10 years was 0.59 (95% PI: 0.52-0.66); calibration was slightly lower. Decision curve analysis for preventive contralateral mastectomy showed potential clinical utility of PredictCBC-1A between thresholds of 4-10% 10-year CBC risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and non-carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a reasonably calibrated model to predict the risk of CBC in women of European-descent; however, prediction accuracy was moderate. Our model shows potential for improved risk counseling, but decision-making regarding contralateral preventive mastectomy, especially in the general breast cancer population where limited information of the mutation status in BRCA1/2 is available, remains challenging.

Risk factors for metachronous contralateral breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The risk of developing metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is a recurrent topic at the outpatient clinic. We aimed to provide CBC risk estimates of published patient, pathological, and primary breast cancer (PBC) treatment-related factors.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for publications on factors associated with CBC risk. Meta-analyses were performed with grouping of studies by mutation status (i.e., BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100delC), familial cohorts, and general population-based cohorts.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight papers satisfied our inclusion criteria. Strong associations with CBC were found for carrying a BRCA1 (RR = 3.7; 95%CI:2.8-4.9), BRCA2 (RR = 2.8; 95%CI:1.8-4.3) or CHEK2 c.1100delC (RR = 2.7; 95%CI:2.0-3.7) mutation. In population-based cohorts, PBC family history (RR = 1.8; 95%CI:1.2-2.6), body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m² (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.3-1.9), lobular PBC (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.8), estrogen receptor-negative PBC (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.0-2.3) and treatment with radiotherapy <40 years (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.7) was associated with increased CBC risk. Older age at PBC diagnosis (RR per decade = 0.93; 95%CI:0.88-0.98), and treatment with chemotherapy (RR = 0.7; 95%CI:0.6-0.8) or endocrine therapy (RR = 0.6; 95%CI:0.5-0.7) were associated with decreased CBC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Mutation status, family history, and PBC treatment are key factors for CBC risk. Age at PBC diagnosis, BMI, lobular histology and hormone receptor status have weaker associations and should be considered in combination with key factors to accurately predict CBC risk.

Reproductive profiles and risk of breast cancer subtypes: a multi-center case-only study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that reproductive factors are differentially associated with breast cancer (BC) risk by subtypes. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between reproductive factors and BC subtypes, and whether these vary by age at diagnosis.

METHODS

We used pooled data on tumor markers (estrogen and progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)) and reproductive risk factors (parity, age at first full-time pregnancy (FFTP) and age at menarche) from 28,095 patients with invasive BC from 34 studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). In a case-only analysis, we used logistic regression to assess associations between reproductive factors and BC subtype compared to luminal A tumors as a reference. The interaction between age and parity in BC subtype risk was also tested, across all ages and, because age was modeled non-linearly, specifically at ages 35, 55 and 75 years.

RESULTS

Parous women were more likely to be diagnosed with triple negative BC (TNBC) than with luminal A BC, irrespective of age (OR for parity = 1.38, 95% CI 1.16-1.65, p = 0.0004; p for interaction with age = 0.076). Parous women were also more likely to be diagnosed with luminal and non-luminal HER2-like BCs and this effect was slightly more pronounced at an early age (p for interaction with age = 0.037 and 0.030, respectively). For instance, women diagnosed at age 35 were 1.48 (CI 1.01-2.16) more likely to have luminal HER2-like BC than luminal A BC, while this association was not significant at age 75 (OR = 0.72, CI 0.45-1.14). While age at menarche was not significantly associated with BC subtype, increasing age at FFTP was non-linearly associated with TNBC relative to luminal A BC. An age at FFTP of 25 versus 20 years lowered the risk for TNBC (OR = 0.78, CI 0.70-0.88, p < 0.0001), but this effect was not apparent at a later FFTP.

CONCLUSIONS

Our main findings suggest that parity is associated with TNBC across all ages at BC diagnosis, whereas the association with luminal HER2-like BC was present only for early onset BC.

Breast Cancer Survival of BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Carriers in a Hospital-Based Cohort of Young Women

Background

The primary aim of the study was to investigate prognosis and long-term survival in young breast cancer patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation compared with noncarriers. The secondary aim was to investigate whether differences in survival originate from associations with tumor characteristics, second cancers, and/or treatment response.

Methods

We established a cohort of invasive breast cancer patients diagnosed younger than age 50 years in 10 Dutch hospitals between 1970 and 2003. BRCA1/2 testing of most prevalent mutations was mainly done using DNA isolate from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded nontumor tissue. Survival estimates were derived using Cox regression and competing risk models.

Results

In 6478 breast cancer patients, we identified 3.2% BRCA1 and 1.2% BRCA2 mutation carriers. BRCA1 mutation carriers had a worse overall survival independent of clinico-pathological/treatment characteristics, compared with noncarriers (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97 to 1.47), though only statistically significant in the first five years of follow-up (adjusted HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.84). A large part of the worse survival was explained by incidence of ovarian cancers. Breast cancer-specific, disease-free, and metastasis-free survival results were less pronounced and mostly statistically nonsignificant but in the same direction with those of overall survival. Overall survival was worse, although not statistically significantly, within the ER-negative or ER-positive, grade 3, and small tumor subgroups. The worse survival was most pronounced in non-chemotherapy-treated patients (adjusted HR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.08 to 2.19). Power for BRCA2 mutation carriers was limited; only after five years' follow-up overall survival was worse (adjusted HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.00 to 2.17).

Conclusions

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 years are prone to a worse survival, which is partly explained by differences in tumor characteristics, treatment response, and second ovarian cancers.

An updated PREDICT breast cancer prognostication and treatment benefit prediction model with independent validation

BACKGROUND

PREDICT is a breast cancer prognostic and treatment benefit model implemented online. The overall fit of the model has been good in multiple independent case series, but PREDICT has been shown to underestimate breast cancer specific mortality in women diagnosed under the age of 40. Another limitation is the use of discrete categories for tumour size and node status resulting in 'step' changes in risk estimates on moving between categories. We have refitted the PREDICT prognostic model using the original cohort of cases from East Anglia with updated survival time in order to take into account age at diagnosis and to smooth out the survival function for tumour size and node status.

METHODS

Multivariable Cox regression models were used to fit separate models for ER negative and ER positive disease. Continuous variables were fitted using fractional polynomials and a smoothed baseline hazard was obtained by regressing the baseline cumulative hazard for each patients against time using fractional polynomials. The fit of the prognostic models were then tested in three independent data sets that had also been used to validate the original version of PREDICT.

RESULTS

In the model fitting data, after adjusting for other prognostic variables, there is an increase in risk of breast cancer specific mortality in younger and older patients with ER positive disease, with a substantial increase in risk for women diagnosed before the age of 35. In ER negative disease the risk increases slightly with age. The association between breast cancer specific mortality and both tumour size and number of positive nodes was non-linear with a more marked increase in risk with increasing size and increasing number of nodes in ER positive disease. The overall calibration and discrimination of the new version of PREDICT (v2) was good and comparable to that of the previous version in both model development and validation data sets. However, the calibration of v2 improved over v1 in patients diagnosed under the age of 40.

CONCLUSIONS

The PREDICT v2 is an improved prognostication and treatment benefit model compared with v1. The online version should continue to aid clinical decision making in women with early breast cancer.

Accuracy of the online prognostication tools PREDICT and Adjuvant! for early-stage breast cancer patients younger than 50 years

IMPORTANCE

Online prognostication tools such as PREDICT and Adjuvant! are increasingly used in clinical practice by oncologists to inform patients and guide treatment decisions about adjuvant systemic therapy. However, their validity for young breast cancer patients is debated.

OBJECTIVE

To assess first, the prognostic accuracy of PREDICT's and Adjuvant! 10-year all-cause mortality, and second, its breast cancer-specific mortality estimates, in a large cohort of breast cancer patients diagnosed <50 years.

DESIGN

Hospital-based cohort.

SETTING

General and cancer hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

A consecutive series of 2710 patients without a prior history of cancer, diagnosed between 1990 and 2000 with unilateral stage I-III breast cancer aged <50 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Calibration and discriminatory accuracy, measured with C-statistics, of estimated 10-year all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, PREDICT's calibration for all-cause mortality was good (predicted versus observed) mean_difference: -1.1% (95%CI: -3.2%-0.9%; P = 0.28). PREDICT tended to underestimate all-cause mortality in good prognosis subgroups (range mean_difference: -2.9% to -4.8%), overestimated all-cause mortality in poor prognosis subgroups (range mean_difference: 2.6%-9.4%) and underestimated survival in patients < 35 by -6.6%. Overall, PREDICT overestimated breast cancer-specific mortality by 3.2% (95%CI: 0.8%-5.6%; P = 0.007); and also overestimated it seemingly indiscriminately in numerous subgroups (range mean_difference: 3.2%-14.1%). Calibration was poor in the cohort of patients with the lowest and those with the highest mortality probabilities. Discriminatory accuracy was moderate-to-good for all-cause mortality in PREDICT (0.71 [95%CI: 0.68 to 0.73]), and the results were similar for breast cancer-specific mortality. Adjuvant!'s calibration and discriminatory accuracy for both all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality were in line with PREDICT's findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Although imprecise at the extremes, PREDICT's estimates of 10-year all-cause mortality seem reasonably sound for breast cancer patients <50 years; Adjuvant! findings were similar. Prognostication tools should be used with caution due to the intrinsic variability of their estimates, and because the threshold to discuss adjuvant systemic treatment is low. Thus, seemingly insignificant mortality overestimations or underestimations of a few percentages can significantly impact treatment decision-making.

Impact of Age at Primary Breast Cancer on Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers

PURPOSE

To determine prospectively overall and age-specific estimates of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for young patients with breast cancer with or without BRCA1/2 mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cohort of 6,294 patients with invasive breast cancer diagnosed under 50 years of age and treated between 1970 and 2003 in 10 Dutch centers was tested for the most prevalent BRCA1/2 mutations. We report absolute risks and hazard ratios within the cohort from competing risk analyses.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 12.5 years, 578 CBCs were observed in our study population. CBC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers was two to three times higher than for noncarriers (hazard ratios, 3.31 [95% CI, 2.41 to 4.55; P < .001] and 2.17 [95% CI,1.22 to 3.85; P = .01], respectively). Ten-year cumulative CBC risks were 21.1% (95% CI, 15.4 to 27.4) for BRCA1, 10.8% (95% CI, 4.7 to 19.6) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 5.1% (95% CI, 4.5 to 5.7) for noncarriers. Age at diagnosis of the first breast cancer was a significant predictor of CBC risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers only; those diagnosed before age 41 years had a 10-year cumulative CBC risk of 23.9% (BRCA1: 25.5%; BRCA2: 17.2%) compared with 12.6% (BRCA1: 15.6%; BRCA2: 7.2%) for those 41 to 49 years of age (P = .02); our review of published studies showed ranges of 24% to 31% before age 40 years (BRCA1: 24% to 32%; BRCA2:17% to 29%) and 8% to 21% after 40 years (BRCA1: 11% to 52%; BRCA2: 7% to 18%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Age at first breast cancer is a strong risk factor for cumulative CBC risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Considering the available evidence, age-specific risk estimates should be included in counseling.

Worse breast cancer prognosis of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: what's the evidence? A systematic review with meta-analysis

Objective

Conflicting conclusions have been published regarding breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Here we provide an evidence-based systematic literature review.

Methods

Eligible publications were observational studies assessing the survival of breast cancer patients carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation compared to non-carriers or the general breast cancer population. We performed meta-analyses and best-evidence syntheses for survival outcomes taking into account study quality assessed by selection bias, misclassification bias and confounding.

Results

Sixty-six relevant studies were identified. Moderate evidence for a worse unadjusted recurrence-free survival for BRCA1 mutation carriers was found. For BRCA1 and BRCA2 there was a tendency towards a worse breast cancer-specific and overall survival, however, results were heterogeneous and the evidence was judged to be indecisive. Surprisingly, only 8 studies considered adjuvant treatment as a confounder or effect modifier while only two studies took prophylactic surgery into account. Adjustment for tumour characteristics tended to shift the observed risk estimates towards a relatively more favourable survival.

Conclusions

In contrast to currently held beliefs of some oncologists, current evidence does not support worse breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in the adjuvant setting; differences if any are likely to be small. More well-designed studies are awaited.

Evaluation of the Dutch BRCA1/2 clinical genetic center referral criteria in an unselected early breast cancer population

In this study, we evaluated the diagnostic value of the Dutch Clinical Genetic Center (CGC) referral guidelines for BRCA1/2 mutation testing in 903 early breast cancer patients, unselected for family history, diagnosed in a cancer hospital before the age of 50 years in 1974-2002; most prevalent Dutch pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations had been analyzed on coded DNA in a research setting. Forty-nine (5.4%) of the patients were proven to be BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We found that 78% and 69% of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers identified met the criteria for referral to the CGC based on age, family history and synchronous multiple tumors; reflected by a combined sensitivity of 75.5% and specificity of 63.2%. More than half of the BRCA1 mutation carriers, that is, 58% had a triple-negative tumor. The highest AUC was obtained by shifting the age at diagnosis threshold criterion from 40 to 35 years and by adding a 'triple-negative breast cancer' criterion with an age threshold of 45 years; the specificity increased to 71.2%, whereas the sensitivity remained the same; that is, a referral of fewer patients will lead to the identification of at least the same number of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Two-thirds of the BRCA1/2 mutation carriers identified in this research setting had been referred for counseling and testing. Our results indicate that, awaiting a possibly more extended mutation screening of all breast cancer patients, the triple-negative status of a breast cancer should be added to the CGC referral criteria.

Identification of new genetic susceptibility loci for breast cancer through consideration of gene-environment interactions

Genes that alter disease risk only in combination with certain environmental exposures may not be detected in genetic association analysis. By using methods accounting for gene-environment (G × E) interaction, we aimed to identify novel genetic loci associated with breast cancer risk. Up to 34,475 cases and 34,786 controls of European ancestry from up to 23 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium were included. Overall, 71,527 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), enriched for association with breast cancer, were tested for interaction with 10 environmental risk factors using three recently proposed hybrid methods and a joint test of association and interaction. Analyses were adjusted for age, study, population stratification, and confounding factors as applicable. Three SNPs in two independent loci showed statistically significant association: SNPs rs10483028 and rs2242714 in perfect linkage disequilibrium on chromosome 21 and rs12197388 in ARID1B on chromosome 6. While rs12197388 was identified using the joint test with parity and with age at menarche (P-values = 3 × 10(-07)), the variants on chromosome 21 q22.12, which showed interaction with adult body mass index (BMI) in 8,891 postmenopausal women, were identified by all methods applied. SNP rs10483028 was associated with breast cancer in women with a BMI below 25 kg/m(2) (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.15-1.38) but not in women with a BMI of 30 kg/m(2) or higher (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.72-1.11, P for interaction = 3.2 × 10(-05)). Our findings confirm comparable power of the recent methods for detecting G × E interaction and the utility of using G × E interaction analyses to identify new susceptibility loci.

Germline variation in TP53 regulatory network genes associates with breast cancer survival and treatment outcome

Germline variation in the TP53 network genes PRKAG2, PPP2R2B, CCNG1, PIAS1 and YWHAQ was previously suggested to have an impact on drug response in vitro. Here, we investigated the effect on breast cancer survival of germline variation in these genes in 925 Finnish breast cancer patients and further analyzed five single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in PRKAG2 (rs1029946, rs4726050, rs6464153, rs7789699) and PPP2R2B (rs10477313) for 10-year survival in breast cancer patients, interaction with TP53 R72P and MDM2-SNP309, outcome after specific adjuvant therapy and correlation to tumor characteristics in 4,701 invasive cases from four data sets. We found evidence for carriers of PRKAG2-rs1029946 and PRKAG2-rs4726050 having improved survival in the pooled data (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.3-0.9; p = 0.023 for homozygous carriers of the rare G-allele and HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.7-0.9; p = 0.049 for carriers of the rare G allele, respectively). PRKAG2-rs4726050 showed a significant interaction with MDM2-SNP309, with PRKAG2-rs4726050 rare G-allele having a dose-dependent effect for better breast cancer survival confined only to MDM2 SNP309 rare G-allele carriers (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.2-0.7; p = 0.001). This interaction also emerged as an independent predictor of better survival (p = 0.047). PPP2R2B-rs10477313 rare A-allele was found to predict better survival (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.6-0.9; p = 0.018), especially after hormonal therapy (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.5-0.9; p = 0.048). These findings warrant further studies and suggest that genetic markers in TP53 network genes such as PRKAG2 and PPP2R2B might affect prognosis and treatment outcome in breast cancer patients.

Abstract 1338: Breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 carriers compared to non-BRCA1/2 carriers in a large breast cancer cohort

The biological background and different pathological aspects of BRCA1-associated tumors support the hypothesis that patients carrying a BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation might have a worse breast cancer prognosis compared to non-carriers. However, studies showed inconsistent results, possibly due to differences in study design, study size, study populations and methodological quality. We recently performed a systematic review taking into account the quality of all relevant studies published so far on BRCA1/2 mutation carriership and survival (n=63). Using a best-evidence synthesis, we found that there is only moderate evidence for a worse unadjusted recurrence-free survival for BRCA1 mutation carriers compared to non-carriers (pooled absolute survival difference of 10%) (to be submitted). The aim of the current study was to evaluate breast cancer outcome in a multicenter cohort of breast cancer patients with long-term follow-up, unselected for family history.

We included invasive pathologically-confirmed breast cancers, diagnosed before &lt;50 years of age, in the period 1970-2002, in ten Dutch centers, in patients with no previous malignancies. DNA for BRCA1/2 analyses was isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks containing normal (non-tumor) tissue. A selection of most frequently occurring BRCA1/2 mutations was analyzed using Taqman PCR and fragment length analyses confirmed by direct sequencing, capturing ∼70% of all Dutch pathogenic mutations. Clinico-pathological data and follow-up, including recurrences and second tumors, were retrieved from tumor registries, medical records and the Dutch municipal registry. Part of the tumor characteristics (grade, ER, PR, HER2) was obtained by revision. Cox proportional hazard models were run using STATA; multivariate models were adjusted for grade, size, nodal status and age.

Among 5518 breast cancer patients with a BRCA1/2 result we found 3.6% BRCA1 and 1.2% BRCA2 mutation carriers. The proportions of ER-positive breast cancers in non-BRCA, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers were 86%, 29% and 81% respectively. Mean follow-up of the cohort was 11.3 years. Overall survival was worse for BRCA1 mutation carriers compared to non-carriers (HR-unadjusted 1.4 (95%CI: 1.1-1.7), p=0.003; HR-adjusted 1.2 (1-1.6), p=0.07); recurrence-free survival was also worse for BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR-adjusted 1.5 (1.1-1.9), p=0.004). We did not find evidence for a different survival of BRCA2 mutation carriers, except for a suggestion of a worse overall survival. These results are preliminary and further analyses including stratifications by tumor subtype and treatment will be presented at the AACR meeting. In one of the largest, unbiased, BRCA1/2 genotyped breast cancer cohort study, we found evidence for a significant worse overall and recurrence-free survival adjusted for clinico-pathological factors of BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Citation Format: Marjanka MK Schmidt, Alexandra J. van den Broek, Rob AEM Tollenaar, Flora E. van Leeuwen, Laura J. Van ‘t Veer, on behalf of collaborators of 10 centers in the Netherlands. Breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 carriers compared to non-BRCA1/2 carriers in a large breast cancer cohort. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 1338. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-1338

Association of the germline TP53 R72P and MDM2 SNP309 variants with breast cancer survival in specific breast tumor subgroups

The tumor suppressor gene TP53 and its regulator MDM2 are both important players in the DNA-damage repair "TP53 response pathway". Common germline polymorphisms in these genes may affect outcome in patients with tumors characterized by additional somatic changes in the same or a related pathway. To evaluate this hypothesis, we determined the effect of the common germline TP53 R72P and MDM2 SNP309 polymorphisms on breast cancer survival in a consecutive cohort of breast cancer patients (age at diagnosis <53 years, n = 295) with gene expression data available. Patients were classified in subgroups according to their tumor TP53 mutation status and three gene expression profiles; a TP53 mutation status expression signature, a PTEN/PI3K pathway signature and the 70-gene prognosis profile. Survival analyses were performed using Cox regression models adjusting for clinico-pathological characteristics and treatment. An increase in breast cancer-specific mortality was observed for carriers of the germline MDM2 SNP309 rare GG-genotype (range hazard ratios: 2-3) or TP53 R72P heterozygous GC-genotype (range hazard ratios: 1-2) compared to those having the common genotypes within subgroups of tumors displaying a "more aggressive phenotype" gene expression profile. There was no evidence of such an effect on survival within the TP53-mutated tumor group for TP53 R72P carriers but a suggestion of an effect for MDM2 SNP309 carriers (GG vs. TT-genotype HR 2.99, P = 0.06). These results indicate that common polymorphisms in specific pathways may add to the worse prognosis of patients with tumors in which these pathways are affected by somatic alterations.