HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) web only appendix All Versions of this Article: jmg.2006.043091v1 44/1/10    most recent Submit a response Read responses to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Smith, A Articles by Evans, D G R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Smith, A Articles by Evans, D G R Pubmed/NCBI databases OMIM Medline Plus Health Information Breast Cancer Genetic Testing Ovarian Cancer Genetics Home Reference

Phenocopies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: evidence for modifier genes and implications for screening

¹ Academic Unit of Medical Genetics and Regional Genetics Service, St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester, UK
² North Western Cancer Registry, Center for Cancer Epidemiology, Christie Hospital, Manchester
³ Section of Medical and Molecular Genetics, University of Birmingham School of Medicine; West Midlands Regional Genetics Service, Birmingham, UK

Correspondence to:
D G R Evans
University Department of Medical Genetics and Regional Genetic Service, St Mary’s Hospital, Hathersage Road, Manchester M13 0JH, UK; gareth.evans{at}cmmc.nhs.uk] Background: The identification of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in familial breast cancer kindreds allows genetic testing of at-risk relatives. Those who test negative are usually reassured and additional breast cancer surveillance is discontinued. However, we postulated that in high-risk families, such as those seen in clinical genetics centres, the risk of breast cancer might be influenced not only by the BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation but also by modifier genes. One manifestation of this would be the presence of phenocopies in BRCA1/BRCA2 kindreds.

Methods: 277 families with pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations were reviewed and 28 breast cancer phenocopies identified. The relative risk of breast cancer in those testing negative was assessed using incidence rates from our cancer registry based on local population.

Results: Phenocopies constituted up to 24% of tests on women with breast cancer after the identification of the mutation in the proband. The standardised incidence ratio for women who tested negative for the BRCA1/BRCA2 family mutation was 5.3 for all relatives, 5.0 for all first-degree relatives (FDRs) and 3.2 (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 4.9) for FDRs in whose family all other cases of breast and ovarian cancer could be explained by the identified mutation. 13 of 107 (12.1%) FDRs with breast cancer and no unexplained family history tested negative.

Conclusion: In high-risk families, women who test negative for the familial BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation have an increased risk of breast cancer consistent with genetic modifiers. In light of this, such women should still be considered for continued surveillance.

Abbreviations: FDR, first-degree relative; NICE, National Institute for Clinical Excellence; SIR, standardised incidence ratio

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. C. Allain Genetic Counseling and Testing for Common Hereditary Breast Cancer Syndromes: A Paper from the 2007 William Beaumont Hospital Symposium on Molecular Pathology J. Mol. Diagn., September 1, 2008; 10(5): 383 - 395. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. A Devlin and P. J Morrison Inherited gynaecological cancer syndromes Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), January 1, 2008; 10(1): 9 - 15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Fatouros, G. Baltoyiannis, and D. H. Roukos The Predominant Role of Surgery in the Prevention and New Trends in the Surgical Treatment of Women With BRCA1/2 Mutations Ann. Surg. Oncol., January 1, 2008; 15(1): 21 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Goldgar, V. Venne, T. Conner, and S. Buys BRCA phenocopies or ascertainment bias? J. Med. Genet., August 1, 2007; 44(8): e86 - e86. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Eisinger Phenocopies: actual risk or self-fulfilling prophecy? J. Med. Genet., August 1, 2007; 44(8): e87 - e87. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Smith, M C Boyd, M Bulman, A Shenton, F Lalloo, D G R Evans, A Moran, R Iddenden, L Smith, E R Woodward, et al. Response to correspondence on "Phenocopies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: evidence for modifier genes and implications for screening" J. Med. Genet., August 1, 2007; 44(8): e88 - e88. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Rowan, A. Poll, and S. A Narod A prospective study of breast cancer risk in relatives of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers J. Med. Genet., August 1, 2007; 44(8): e89 - e89. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P Sasieni Phenocopies in families seen by cancer geneticists J. Med. Genet., June 1, 2007; 44(6): e82 - e82. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M M A Tilanus-Linthorst No screening yet after a negative test for the family mutation J. Med. Genet., May 1, 2007; 44(5): e79 - e79. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Gronwald, C. Cybulski, J. Lubinski, and S. A Narod Phenocopies in breast cancer 1 (BRCA1) families: implications for genetic counselling J. Med. Genet., April 1, 2007; 44(4): e76 - e76. [Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters: