Previous studies on the counsellees' perception of DNA test results did not clarify whether counsellees were asked about their recollections or interpretations, and focused only on patients' own... Show morePrevious studies on the counsellees' perception of DNA test results did not clarify whether counsellees were asked about their recollections or interpretations, and focused only on patients' own risks and not on the likelihood that cancer is heritable in the family. We tested differences and correlations of four perception aspects: recollections and interpretations of both cancer risks and heredity likelihood. In a retrospective study, women tested for BRCA1/2 on average, 5 years ago, completed questionnaires about their perception. Participants had received an unclassified variant (n = 76), uninformative (n = 76) or pathogenic mutation (n = 51) result in BRCA1/2. Analyses included t-tests, correlations and structural equation modelling. The counsellees' perception showed to consist of four distinctive phenomena: recollections and interpretations of cancer risks and of heredity likelihood. This distinctiveness was suggested by significant differences between these perception variables. Moderate to strong correlations were found between these variables, suggesting that these differences between variables were consistent. The relationships between these variables were not influenced by actually communicated DNA test results, sociodemographics, medical and pedigree information, or framing of cancer risk questions. The largest differences between recollections and interpretations were found in the unclassified variant group and the smallest in uninformatives. Cancer risks and heredity likelihood correlated least in the pathogenic mutation group. Communication of ambiguous genetic information enlarged the differences. To understand the counsellees' perception of genetic counselling, researchers should study recollections and interpretations of cancer risks and heredity likelihood. Genetic counsellors should explicitly address the counsellees' recollections and interpretations, and be aware of possible inaccuracies. Show less
Objective of this paper is to study how DNA-test result information was communicated and perceived within families. A retrospective descriptive study in 13 probands with a BRCA1/2 unclassified... Show moreObjective of this paper is to study how DNA-test result information was communicated and perceived within families. A retrospective descriptive study in 13 probands with a BRCA1/2 unclassified variant, 7 with a pathogenic mutation, 5 with an uninformative result, and in 44, 14, and 12 of their 1st and 2nd degree relatives respectively. We examined differences and correlations between: (a) information actually communicated (b) probands' perception, (c) relatives' perception. The perception consisted of recollections and interpretations of both their own and their relatives' cancer-risks, and heredity-likelihood (i.e. likelihood that cancer is heritable in the family). Differences and low correlations suggested few similarities between the actually communicated information, the probands' and the relatives' perception. More specifically, probands recalled the communicated information differently compared with the actually communicated information (R = .40), and reinterpreted this information differently (R = .30). The relatives' perception was best correlated with the proband's interpretation (R = .08), but this perception differed significantly from their proband's perception. Finally, relatives reinterpreted the information they received from their proband differently (R = .25), and this interpretation was only slightly related with the original message communicated by the genetic-counsellor (R = .15). Unclassified-variants were most frequently misinterpreted by probands and relatives, and had the largest differences between probands' and relatives' perceptions. Like in a children's whisper-game, many errors occur in the transmission of DNA-test result information in families. More attention is required for how probands disseminate information to relatives. Genetic-counsellors may help by supporting the probands in communicating to relatives, e.g. by providing clear summary letters for relatives. Show less
Obesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer in the general population. However, it is still unclear whether this association also exists in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We... Show moreObesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer in the general population. However, it is still unclear whether this association also exists in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We investigated the association between self-reported anthropometric measures and breast cancer risk in a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 719 BRCA1/2 carriers, of whom 218 had been diagnosed with breast cancer within 10 years prior to questionnaire completion. All time-varying Cox proportional hazards analyses were stratified by menopausal status. For premenopausal breast cancer, no statistically significant associations were observed for any of the anthropometric measures. The association between body mass index (BMI) at age 18 and premenopausal breast cancer risk suggested a trend of decreasing risk with increasing BMI (HR22.50-24.99 vs. 18.50-22.49 = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.47-1.44 and HRa parts per thousand yen25.00 vs. 18.50-22.49 = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.13-1.27). For postmenopausal breast cancer, being 1.67 m and taller increased the risk 1.7-fold (HR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.01-2.74) when compared to a height < 1.67 m. Compared with a current body weight < 72 kg, a current body weight of a parts per thousand yen72 kg increased the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer 2.1-fold (95% CI = 1.23-3.59). A current BMI of a parts per thousand yen25.0 kg/m(2), an adult weight gain of 5 kg or more, and a relative adult weight gain of 20% or more were all non-significantly associated with a 50-60% increased risk of postmenopausal breast cancer [HR = 1.46 (0.86-2.51), HR = 1.56 (95% CI = 0.85-2.87), and HR = 1.60 (95% CI = 0.97-2.63), respectively], when compared with having a healthy or stable weight. No associations for body weight or BMI at age 18 were observed. In conclusion, menopausal status seemed to modify the association between body weight and breast cancer risk among BRCA1/2 carriers. We observed no clear association between body weight and premenopausal breast cancer, while overweight and weight gain increased postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Carriers may reduce their risk of postmenopausal breast cancer by maintaining a healthy body weight throughout life. Show less
The known breast cancer susceptibility polymorphisms in FGFR2, TNRC9/TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, and 2q35 confer increased risks of breast cancer for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We evaluated the... Show moreThe known breast cancer susceptibility polymorphisms in FGFR2, TNRC9/TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, and 2q35 confer increased risks of breast cancer for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We evaluated the associations of 3 additional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), rs4973768 in SLC4A7/NEK10, rs6504950 in STXBP4/COX11, and rs10941679 at 5p12, and reanalyzed the previous associations using additional carriers in a sample of 12,525 BRCA1 and 7,409 BRCA2 carriers. Additionally, we investigated potential interactions between SNPs and assessed the implications for risk prediction. The minor alleles of rs4973768 and rs10941679 were associated with increased breast cancer risk for BRCA2 carriers (per-allele HR - 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.18, P - 0.006 and HR - 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.19, P = 0.03, respectively). Neither SNP was associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers, and rs6504950 was not associated with breast cancer for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers. Of the 9 polymorphisms investigated, 7 were associated with breast cancer for BRCA2 carriers (FGFR2, TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, 2q35, SLC4A7, 5p12, P 7 = 10 x (11) - 0.03), but only TOX3 and 2q35 were associated with the risk for BRCA1 carriers (P = 0.0049, 0.03, respectively). All risk-associated polymorphisms appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk for mutation carriers. Based on the joint genotype distribution of the 7 risk-associated SNPs in BRCA2 mutation carriers, the 5% of BRCA2 carriers at highest risk (i.e., between 95th and 100th percentiles) were predicted to have a probability between 80% and 96% of developing breast cancer by age 80, compared with 42% Show less
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Current attempts to identify genetic modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 associated risk have focused on a candidate gene approach, based on knowledge of gene functions, or the... Show moreABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Current attempts to identify genetic modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 associated risk have focused on a candidate gene approach, based on knowledge of gene functions, or the development of large genome-wide association studies. In this study, we evaluated 24 SNPs tagged to 14 candidate genes derived through a novel approach that analysed gene expression differences to prioritise candidate modifier genes for association studies. METHODS: We successfully genotyped 24 SNPs in a cohort of up to 4,724 BRCA1 and 2,693 BRCA2 female mutation carriers from 15 study groups and assessed whether these variants were associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: SNPs in five of the 14 candidate genes showed evidence of association with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers (P < 0.05). Notably, the minor alleles of two SNPs (rs7166081 and rs3825977) in high linkage disequilibrium (r2 = 0.77), located at the SMAD3 locus (15q22), were each associated with increased breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers (relative risk = 1.25, 95% confidence interval = 1.07 to 1.45, Ptrend = 0.004; and relative risk = 1.20, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.40, Ptrend = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the SMAD3 gene, which encodes a key regulatory protein in the transforming growth factor beta signalling pathway and is known to interact directly with BRCA2, may contribute to increased risk of breast cancer in BRCA2 mutation carriers. This finding suggests that genes with expression associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status are enriched for the presence of common genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk in these populations. Show less
Vos J, Oosterwijk JC, Gómez-García E, Menko FH, Jansen AM, Stoel RD, van Asperen CJ, Tibben A, Stiggelbout AM. Perceiving cancer-risks and heredity-likelihood in genetic-counseling: how counselees... Show moreVos J, Oosterwijk JC, Gómez-García E, Menko FH, Jansen AM, Stoel RD, van Asperen CJ, Tibben A, Stiggelbout AM. Perceiving cancer-risks and heredity-likelihood in genetic-counseling: how counselees recall and interpret BRCA 1/2-test results. Previous studies on the counsellees' perception of DNA test results did not clarify whether counsellees were asked about their recollections or interpretations, and focused only on patients' own risks and not on the likelihood that cancer is heritable in the family. We tested differences and correlations of four perception aspects: recollections and interpretations of both cancer risks and heredity likelihood. In a retrospective study, women tested for BRCA1/2 on average, 5 years ago, completed questionnaires about their perception. Participants had received an unclassified variant (n = 76), uninformative (n = 76) or pathogenic mutation (n = 51) result in BRCA1/2. Analyses included t-tests, correlations and structural equation modelling. The counsellees' perception showed to consist of four distinctive phenomena: recollections and interpretations of cancer risks and of heredity likelihood. This distinctiveness was suggested by significant differences between these perception variables. Moderate to strong correlations were found between these variables, suggesting that these differences between variables were consistent. The relationships between these variables were not influenced by actually communicated DNA test results, sociodemographics, medical and pedigree information, or framing of cancer risk questions. The largest differences between recollections and interpretations were found in the unclassified variant group and the smallest in uninformatives. Cancer risks and heredity likelihood correlated least in the pathogenic mutation group. Communication of ambiguous genetic information enlarged the differences. To understand the counsellees' perception of genetic counselling, researchers should study recollections and interpretations of cancer risks and heredity likelihood. Genetic counsellors should explicitly address the counsellees' recollections and interpretations, and be aware of possible inaccuracies. Show less
Background: Truncating mutations in ATM have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer but the effect of missense variants remains contentious. Methods: We have genotyped five polymorphic ... Show moreBackground: Truncating mutations in ATM have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer but the effect of missense variants remains contentious. Methods: We have genotyped five polymorphic (minor allele frequency, 0.9-2.6%) missense single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in ATM (S49C, S707P, F858L, P1054R, and L1420F) in 26,101 breast cancer cases and 29,842 controls from 23 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results: Combining the data from all five SNPs, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.05 for being a heterozygote for any of the SNPs and 1.51 for being a rare homozygote for any of the SNPs with an overall trend OR of 1.06 (P-trend = 0.04). The trend OR among bilateral and familial cases was 1.12 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.23; P-trend = 0.02). Conclusions: In this large combined analysis, these five missense ATM SNPs were associated with a small increased risk of breast cancer, explaining an estimated 0.03% of the excess familial risk of breast cancer. Impact: Testing the combined effects of rare missense variants in known breast cancer genes in large collaborative studies should clarify their overall contribution to breast cancer susceptibility. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(9); 2143-51. (C) 2010 AACR. Show less
Background Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a rare autosomal dominant cancer predisposition syndrome. Most families fulfilling the classical diagnostic criteria harbour TP53 germline mutations.... Show moreBackground Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a rare autosomal dominant cancer predisposition syndrome. Most families fulfilling the classical diagnostic criteria harbour TP53 germline mutations. However, TP53 germline mutations may also occur in less obvious phenotypes. As a result, different criteria are in use to decide which patients qualify for TP53 mutation analysis, including the LFS, Li-Fraumeni-like (LFL) and Chompret criteria. We investigated which criteria for TP53 mutation analysis resulted in the highest mutation detection rate and sensitivity in Dutch families. We describe the tumour spectrum in TP53-positive families and calculated tumour type specific relative risks. Method A total of 180 Dutch families referred for TP53 mutation analysis were evaluated. Tumour phenotypes were verified by pathology reports or clinical records. Results A TP53 germline mutation was identified in 24 families. When the Chompret criteria were used 22/24 mutations were detected (sensitivity 92%, mutation detection rate 21%). In LFS and LFL families 18/24 mutations were found (sensitivity 75%). The two mutations detected outside the 'Chompret group' were found in a child with rhabdomyosarcoma and a young woman with breast cancer. In the mutation carriers, in addition to the classical LFS tumour types, colon and pancreatic cancer were also found significantly more often than in the general population. Conclusion We suggest TP53 mutation testing for all families fulfilling the Chompret criteria. In addition, TP53 mutation testing can be considered in the event of childhood sarcoma and breast cancer before 30 years. In addition to the risk for established LFS tumour types, TP53-positive individuals may also have an elevated risk for pancreatic and colon cancer. Show less
BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Differences in penetrance indicate that this risk may be influenced by lifestyle factors. Because physical activity... Show moreBRCA1/2 mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Differences in penetrance indicate that this risk may be influenced by lifestyle factors. Because physical activity is one of the few modifiable risk factors, it may provide a target to add to breast cancer prevention in this high-risk population. We examined the association between self-reported lifetime sports activity and breast cancer risk in a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 725 carriers, of whom 218 had been diagnosed with breast cancer within 10 years prior to questionnaire completion. We found a nonsignificantly decreased risk for ever engaging in sports activity (HR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.57-1.24). Among women who had participated in sports, a medium versus low level of intensity and duration (i.e., between 11.0 and 22.7 mean MET hours/week averaged over a lifetime) reduced the risk of breast cancer (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.36-0.95); no dose-response trend was observed. For mean hours/week of sports activity, a nonsignificant trend was observed (HRlow versus never = 0.93, 95%CI = 0.60-1.43; HRmedium versus never = 0.81, 95%CI = 0.51-1.29; HRhigh versus never = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.48-1.29; p (trend overall) = 0.272; p (trend active women) = 0.487). For number of years of sports activity no significant associations were found. Among women active in sports before age 30, mean MET hours/week showed the strongest inverse association of all activity measures (HRmedium versus low = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.38-0.96; HRhigh versus low = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.35-0.94; p (trend) = 0.053). Engaging in sports activity after age 30 was also inversely associated with breast cancer risk (HR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.44-0.91). Our results indicate that sports activity may reduce the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Show less
Obesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer in the general population. However, it is still unclear whether this association also exists in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We... Show moreObesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer in the general population. However, it is still unclear whether this association also exists in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We investigated the association between self-reported anthropometric measures and breast cancer risk in a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 719 BRCA1/2 carriers, of whom 218 had been diagnosed with breast cancer within 10 years prior to questionnaire completion. All time-varying Cox proportional hazards analyses were stratified by menopausal status. For premenopausal breast cancer, no statistically significant associations were observed for any of the anthropometric measures. The association between body mass index (BMI) at age 18 and premenopausal breast cancer risk suggested a trend of decreasing risk with increasing BMI (HR(22.50-24.99 vs. 18.50-22.49) = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.47-1.44 and HR(≥ 25.00 vs. 18.50-22.49) = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.13-1.27). For postmenopausal breast cancer, being 1.67 m and taller increased the risk 1.7-fold (HR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.01-2.74) when compared to a height <1.67 m. Compared with a current body weight < 72 kg, a current body weight of ≥ 72 kg increased the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer 2.1-fold (95% CI = 1.23-3.59). A current BMI of ≥ 25.0 kg/m², an adult weight gain of 5 kg or more, and a relative adult weight gain of 20% or more were all non-significantly associated with a 50-60% increased risk of postmenopausal breast cancer [HR = 1.46 (0.86-2.51), HR = 1.56 (95% CI = 0.85-2.87), and HR = 1.60 (95% CI = 0.97-2.63), respectively], when compared with having a healthy or stable weight. No associations for body weight or BMI at age 18 were observed. In conclusion, menopausal status seemed to modify the association between body weight and breast cancer risk among BRCA1/2 carriers. We observed no clear association between body weight and premenopausal breast cancer, while overweight and weight gain increased postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Carriers may reduce their risk of postmenopausal breast cancer by maintaining a healthy body weight throughout life. PMID: 20730487 [PubMed - in process] Show less
