Germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 cause hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The vast majority of these variants are inherited from a parent. De novo constitutional pathogenic variants are rare. Even fewer cases of constitutional mosaicism have been reported and these have mostly been described in women with breast cancer. Here we report low-level constitutional mosaicism identified by Next Generation Sequencing in two women with ovarian cancer. A BRCA1 c.5074G > A p.(Asp1692Asn) variant detected in the first female at 42 years, classed as likely pathogenic, was found in ~ 52% of reads in DNA extracted from tumour, ~ 10% of reads in DNA extracted from peripheral blood leukocytes and ~ 10% of reads in DNA extracted from buccal mucosa. The second BRCA1 c.2755_2758dupCCTG p.(Val920AlafsTer6) variant was detected in a female aged 53 years, classed as pathogenic, and was found in ~ 59% of reads in DNA extracted from tumour, ~ 14% of reads in DNA extracted from peripheral blood leukocytes and similarly in ~ 14% of reads in both DNA extracted from buccal mucosa and urine sample. Sanger sequencing confirmed the presence of these variants at a corresponding low level consistent with mosaicism that may not have been detected by this method alone. This report demonstrates the clinical benefit for two women of BRCA1/BRCA2 germline NGS testing at a depth that can detect low-level mosaicism. As well as informing appropriate treatments, tumour sequencing results may facilitate the detection and interpretation of low-level mosaic variants in the germline. Both results have implications for other cancer risks and for relatives when providing a family cancer risk assessment and reproductive risk. The implications for laboratory practice, clinical genetics management and genetic counselling for constitutional mosaicism of BRCA1/BRCA2 are discussed.

Uncertainty is increasingly discussed during genetic counseling due to innovative techniques, e.g., multigene panel testing. Discussions about uncertainty may impact counselees variably, depending on counselors’ communication styles. Ideally, the discussion of uncertainty enables counselees to cope with uncertainty and make well-informed decisions about testing. We examined the impact of how counselors convey uncertainty and address counselees’ uncertainty, and explored the role of individual characteristics. Therefore, a randomized controlled experiment using videos was conducted. Former counselees (N = 224) viewed one video depicting a genetic consultation about multigene panel testing. The extent of counselors’ communication of uncertainty (comprehensive vs. the essence) and their response to counselees’ uncertainty expressions (providing information vs. providing space for emotions vs. normalizing and counterbalancing uncertainty) were systematically manipulated. Individual characteristics, e.g., uncertainty tolerance, were assessed, as well as outcome variables (primary outcomes: feelings of uncertainty and information recall). No effects were found on primary outcomes. Participants were most satisfied when the essence was communicated, combined with providing information or providing space responses (p = 0.002). Comprehensive information resulted in less perceived steering toward testing (p = 0.005). Participants with lower uncertainty tolerance or higher trait anxiety were less confident about their understanding when receiving comprehensive information (p = 0.025). Participants seeking information experienced less uncertainty (p = 0.003), and trusted their counselor more (p = 0.028), when the counselor used information providing responses. In sum, the impact of discussing uncertainty primarily depends on individual characteristics. Practical guidelines should address how to tailor the discussion of uncertainty.

Pre-test counseling about multigene panel testing involves many uncertainties. Ideally, counselees are informed about uncertainties in a way that enables them to make an informed decision about panel testing. It is presently unknown whether and how uncertainty is discussed during initial cancer genetic counseling. We therefore investigated whether and how counselors discuss and address uncertainty, and the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), and explored associations between counselors’ communication and their characteristics in consultations on panel testing for cancer. For this purpose, consultations of counselors discussing a multigene panel with a simulated patient were videotaped. Simulated patients represented a counselee who had had multiple cancer types, according to a script. Before and afterwards, counselors completed a survey. Counselors’ uncertainty expressions, initiating and the framing of expressions, and their verbal responses to scripted uncertainties of the simulated patient were coded by two researchers independently. Coding was done according to a pre-developed coding scheme using The Observer XT software for observational analysis. Additionally, the degree of SDM was assessed by two observers. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to assess associations of communicated uncertainties, responses and the extent of SDM, with counselors’ background characteristics. In total, twenty-nine counselors, including clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, physician assistants-in-training, residents and interns, participated of whom working experience varied between 0 and 25 years. Counselors expressed uncertainties mainly regarding scientific topics (94%) and on their own initiative (95%). Most expressions were framed directly (77%), e.g. We don’t know , and were emotionally neutral (59%; without a positive/negative value). Counselors mainly responded to uncertainties of the simulated patient by explicitly referring to the uncertainty (69%), without providing space for further disclosure (66%). More experienced counselors provided less space to further disclose uncertainty ( p < 0.02), and clinical geneticists scored lower on SDM compared with other types of counselors ( p < 0.03). Our findings that counselors mainly communicate scientific uncertainties and use space-reducing responses imply that the way counselors address counselees’ personal uncertainties and concerns during initial cancer genetic counseling is suboptimal.

Additional file of Exploring the link between MORF4L1 and risk of breast cancer

Additional file 2: siRNAs used in the present study. Supplementary Table 2 containing details of the siRNAs used in the present study. (XLS 22 KB)

Abstract Background: We compared levels of psychological distress of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who knew they were at heightened risk of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation (HRBC) (eg, because of young age at diagnosis and/or a positive family history) with breast cancer patients who were not assessed for their risk (unknown risk breast cancer, or URBC). Methods: We administered the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to a sample of 238 Dutch HRBC patients and 165 Norwegian URBC patients within 3 weeks of breast cancer diagnosis, prior to primary surgery. We compared HADS scores between these groups, and identified variables associated with those scores. Results: The HRBC patients reported significantly more symptoms of depression than URBC patients (P < .001, effect size = .40). The percentage of women with a suspected or probable (HADS depression score ≥8) and a probable diagnosis of depression (HADS depression score ≥11) was 29% versus 12% (P = .001) and 15% versus 5% (P = .01) in the HRBC and URBC groups, respectively. There were no significant group differences in HADS anxiety scores. In the HRBC sample, having children and psychological problems in the year before breast cancer diagnosis were associated significantly with both depression and anxiety following the diagnosis of breast cancer. Conclusions: Shortly after diagnosis, high hereditary-risk breast cancer patients report significantly higher levels of clinically relevant depressive symptoms as compared to breast cancer patients not assessed for their risk. Screening for psychological distress among high-risk breast cancer patients could facilitate timely referral to appropriate psychosocial services.

Background Inactivating mutations in the MLH1 DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene underlie 42% of Lynch syndrome (LS) cases. LS is a cancer predisposition causing early onset colorectal and endometrial cancer. Nonsense and frameshift alterations unambiguously cause LS. The phenotype of missense mutations that only alter a single amino acid is often unclear. These variants of uncertain significance (VUS) hinder LS diagnosis and family screening and therefore functional tests are urgently needed. We developed a functional test for MLH1 VUS termed ‘oligonucleotide-directed mutation screening’ (ODMS). Methods The MLH1 variant was introduced by oligonucleotide-directed gene modification in mouse embryonic stem cells that were subsequently exposed to the guanine analogue 6-thioguanine to determine whether the variant abrogated MMR. Resuts In a proof-of-principle analysis, we demonstrate that ODMS can distinguish pathogenic and non-pathogenic MLH1 variants with a sensitivity of >95% and a specificity of > 91%. We subsequently applied the screen to 51 MLH1 VUS and identified 31 pathogenic variants. Conclusion ODMS is a reliable tool to identify pathogenic MLH1 variants. Implementation in clinical diagnostics will improve clinical care of patients with suspected LS and their relatives.

BackgroundRapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) in newly diagnosed high‐risk breast cancer (BC) patients may influence surgical treatment decisions. To successfully integrate RGCT in practice, knowledge of professionals’, and patients’ attitudes toward RGCT is essential.MethodsBetween 2008 and 2010, we performed a randomized clinical trial evaluating the impact of RGCT. Attitudes toward and experience with RGCT were assessed in 265 patients (at diagnosis, 6‐ and 12‐month follow‐up) and 29 medical professionals (before and after the recruitment period).ResultsAt 6‐month follow‐up, more patients who had been offered RGCT felt they had been actively involved in treatment decision‐making than patients who had been offered usual care (67% vs 48%, P = 0.06). Patients who received DNA‐test results before primary surgery reported more often that RGCT influenced treatment decisions than those who received results afterwards (P < 0.01). Eighty‐seven percent felt that genetic counseling and testing (GCT) should preferably take place between diagnosis and surgery. Most professionals (72%) agreed that RGCT should be routinely offered to eligible patients. Most patients (74%) and professionals (85%) considered surgeons the most appropriate source for referral.ConclusionsRGCT is viewed as helpful for newly diagnosed high‐risk BC patients in choosing their primary surgery and should be offered routinely by surgeons.

Purpose—CHEK2*1100delC is a founder variant in European populations conferring a 2–3 fold increased risk of breast cancer (BC). Epidemiologic and family studies have suggested that the risk associated with CHEK2*1100delC is modified by other genetic factors in a multiplicative fashion. We have investigated this empirically using data from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). Methods—With genotype data of 39,139 (624 1100delC carriers) BC patients and 40,063 (224) healthy controls from 32 BCAC studies, we analyzed the combined risk effects of CHEK2*1100delC and 77 common variants in terms of a polygenic risk score (PRS) and pairwise interaction. Results—The PRS conferred an odds ratio (OR) of 1.59 [95% CI 1.21–2.09] per standard deviation for BC for CHEK2*1100delC carriers and 1.58 [1.55–1.62] for non-carriers. No evidence for deviation from the multiplicative model was found. The OR for the highest quintile of the PRS was 2.03 [0.86–4.78] for CHEK2*1100delC carriers placing them to the high risk category according to UK NICE guidelines. OR for the lowest quintile was 0.52 [0.16–1.74], indicating life-time risk close to population average. Conclusion—Our results confirm the multiplicative nature of risk effects conferred by CHEK2*1100delC and the common susceptibility variants. Furthermore, the PRS could identify the carriers at a high life-time risk for clinical actions.

To assess the need for adjustment in the likelihood of germline BRCA1/2 mutations in women with HER2+ breast cancers. We analysed primary mutation screens on women with breast cancer with unequivocal HER2 overexpression and assessed the likelihood of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations by age, oestrogen receptor status and Manchester score. Of 1111 primary BRCA screens with confirmed HER2 status only 4/161 (2.5%) of women with HER2 amplification had a BRCA1 mutation identified and 5/161 (3.1%) a BRCA2 mutation. The pathology adjusted Manchester score between 10 and 19% and 20%+ thresholds resulted in a detection rate of only 6.5 and 15% respectively. BOADICEA examples appeared to make even less downward adjustment. There is a very low detection rate of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in women with HER2 amplified breast cancers. The Manchester score and BOADICEA do not make sufficient downward adjustment for HER2 amplification. For unaffected women, assessment of breast cancer risk and BRCA1/2 probability should take into account the pathology of the most relevant close relative. Unaffected women undergoing mutation testing for BRCA1/2 should be advised that there is limited reassurance from a negative test result if their close relative had a HER2+ breast cancer.

Objective: It has been hypothesized that BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have an earlier age at natural menopause (ANM), although to date findings are inconclusive. This study assessed the influence of BRCA mutation status on ANM, and aimed to explore the reasons of inconsistency in the literature.Methods: Cross-sectional assessment from an ongoing nationwide cohort study among members of BRCA1/2 mutated families. Information was obtained by a standardized questionnaire. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed, and Cox regression was used to assess the association between BRCA1/2 mutation status and ANM. Adjustments were made for birth cohort, family, smoking, use of hormonal contraceptives, and parity.Results: A total of 1,208 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and 2,211 proven noncarriers were included. Overall, no association was found between BRCA1/2 mutation status and ANM (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.06 [95% CI, 0.87-1.30]). We examined if the null finding was due to informative censoring by uptake of risk-reducing salpingooophorectomy. Indeed, within the oldest birth cohort, in which the percentage of surgical menopause events was lowest and comparable between carriers and noncarriers, the HR for earlier natural menopause in carriers was 1.45 (95% CI, 1.09-1.94). The second oldest birth cohort, however, demonstrated a decreased HR (0.67 [95% CI, 0.460.98]), and thus no trend over birth cohorts was found.Conclusions: Various types of selection bias hamper the comparison of ANM between BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and noncarriers, genetically tested in the clinic.

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a dominantly inherited syndrome caused by germline mutations in the APC gene and characterized by the development of multiple colorectal adenomas and a high risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC). The severity of polyposis is correlated with the site of the APC mutation. However, there is also phenotypic variability within families with the same underlying APC mutation, suggesting that additional factors influence the severity of polyposis. Genome-wide association studies identified several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are associated with CRC. We assessed whether these SNPs are associated with polyp multiplicity in proven APC mutation carriers. Sixteen CRC-associated SNPs were analysed in a cohort of 419 APC germline mutation carriers from 182 families. Clinical data were retrieved from the Dutch Polyposis Registry. Allele frequencies of the SNPs were compared for patients with <100 colorectal adenomas versus patients with ≥100 adenomas, using generalized estimating equations with the APC genotype as a covariate. We found a trend of association of two of the tested SNPs with the ≥100 adenoma phenotype: the C alleles of rs16892766 at 8q23.3 (OR 1.71, 95 % CI 1.05–2.76, p = 0.03, dominant model) and rs3802842 at 11q23.1 (OR 1.51, 95 % CI 1.03–2.22, p = 0.04, dominant model). We identified two risk variants that are associated with a more severe phenotype in APC mutation carriers. These risk variants may partly explain the phenotypic variability in families with the same APC gene defect. Further studies with a larger sample size are recommended to evaluate and confirm the phenotypic effect of these SNPs in FAP.

Single-stranded DNA oligonucleotides can achieve targeted base-pair substitution with modest efficiency but high precision. We show that "oligo targeting" can be used effectively to study missense mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Inherited inactivating mutations in DNA MMR genes are causative for the cancer predisposition Lynch syndrome (LS). Although overtly deleterious mutations in MMR genes can clearly be ascribed as the cause of LS, the functional implications of missense mutations are often unclear. We developed a genetic screen to determine the pathogenicity of these variants of uncertain significance (VUS), focusing on mutator S homolog 2 (MSH2). VUS were introduced into the endogenous Msh2 gene of mouse embryonic stem cells by oligo targeting. Subsequent selection for MMR-deficient cells using the guanine analog 6-thioguanine allowed the detection of MMR-abrogating VUS. The screen was able to distinguish weak and strong pathogenic variants from polymorphisms and was used to investigate 59 Msh2 VUS. Nineteen of the 59 VUS were identified as pathogenic. Functional assays revealed that 14 of the 19 detected variants fully abrogated MMR activity and that five of the detected variants attenuated MMR activity. Implementation of the screen in clinical practice allows proper counseling of mutation carriers and treatment of their tumors.

Monoallelic PMS2 germline mutations cause 5%-15% of Lynch syndrome, a midlife cancer predisposition, whereas biallelic PMS2 mutations cause approximately 60% of constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (CMMRD), a rare childhood cancer syndrome. Recently improved DNA- and RNA-based strategies are applied to overcome problematic PMS2 mutation analysis due to the presence of pseudogenes and frequent gene conversion events. Here, we determined PMS2 mutation detection yield and mutation spectrum in a nationwide cohort of 396 probands. Furthermore, we studied concordance between tumor IHC/MSI (immunohistochemistry/microsatellite instability) profile and mutation carrier state. Overall, we found 52 different pathogenic PMS2 variants explaining 121 Lynch syndrome and nine CMMRD patients. In vitro mismatch repair assays suggested pathogenicity for three missense variants. Ninety-one PMS2 mutation carriers (70%) showed isolated loss of PMS2 in their tumors, for 31 (24%) no or inconclusive IHC was available, and eight carriers (6%) showed discordant IHC (presence of PMS2 or loss of both MLH1 and PMS2). Ten cases with isolated PMS2 loss (10%; 10/97) harbored MLH1 mutations. We confirmed that recently improved mutation analysis provides a high yield of PMS2 mutations in patients with isolated loss of PMS2 expression. Application of universal tumor prescreening methods will however miss some PMS2 germline mutation carriers.

Background The rarity of mutations in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM make it difficult to estimate precisely associated cancer risks. Population-based family studies have provided evidence that at least some of these mutations are associated with breast cancer risk as high as those associated with rare BRCA2 mutations. We aimed to estimate the relative risks associated with specific rare variants in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM via a multicentre case-control study. Methods We genotyped 10 rare mutations using the custom iCOGS array: PALB2 c.1592delT, c.2816T>G and c.3113G>A, CHEK2 c.349A>G, c.538C>T, c.715G>A, c.1036C>T, c.1312G>T, and c.1343T>G and ATM c.7271T>G. We assessed associations with breast cancer risk (42 671 cases and 42 164 controls), as well as prostate (22 301 cases and 22 320 controls) and ovarian (14 542 cases and 23 491 controls) cancer risk, for each variant. Results For European women, strong evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for PALB2 c.1592delT OR 3.44 (95% CI 1.39 to 8.52, p=7.1×10 −5 ), PALB2 c.3113G>A OR 4.21 (95% CI 1.84 to 9.60, p=6.9×10 −8 ) and ATM c.7271T>G OR 11.0 (95% CI 1.42 to 85.7, p=0.0012). We also found evidence of association with breast cancer risk for three variants in CHEK2, c.349A>G OR 2.26 (95% CI 1.29 to 3.95), c.1036C>T OR 5.06 (95% CI 1.09 to 23.5) and c.538C>T OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.67) (p≤0.017). Evidence for prostate cancer risk was observed for CHEK2 c.1343T>G OR 3.03 (95% CI 1.53 to 6.03, p=0.0006) for African men and CHEK2 c.1312G>T OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.06 to 4.63, p=0.030) for European men. No evidence of association with ovarian cancer was found for any of these variants. Conclusions This report adds to accumulating evidence that at least some variants in these genes are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer that is clinically important.

The aim of this study is to delineate more clearly the prevalence of HER2+ breast cancer in women with germline BRCA1/2 mutations. For this purpose, we analysed primary mutation screens on women with breast cancer with unequivocal HER2 amplification and assessed the proportion of BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancers that were HER2+ comparing this with the existing literature. The results are that 1063 primary BRCA screens had confirmed tumour HER2 status. If HER2+ only 2.5 % (4/156) and 3.2 % (5/156) of women had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation identified respectively; compared to 27.7 % (115/415) and 8.2 % (34/415) with triple negative tumours. Only 2.1 % (4/195) women with BRCA1-related breast cancer had HER2 amplified breast cancers rising to 6.8 % (n = 12, p = 0.04) in BRCA2. These rates are in keeping with most of the existing literature except a recent large multicenter report which documented higher rates but with no control group. The study concluded that true HER2-amplified breast cancers are rare amongst BRCA1 mutation carriers and are less common in BRCA2 than background rates.