Article Text

other Versions

PDF
BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2 c.1100 delC mutations in patients with double primaries of the breasts and/or ovaries
  1. D Gareth Evans1,2,
  2. Munaza Ahmed1,
  3. Stuart Bayliss1,
  4. Emma Howard1,
  5. Fiona Lalloo1,
  6. Andrew Wallace1
  1. 1Genetic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Central Manchester University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
  2. 2Genesis Prevention Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor D Gareth Evans, Genetic Medicine, 6th Floor, St Mary's Hospital, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9LW, UK; gareth.evans{at}cmft.nhs.uk

Abstract

Background Previous publications and utilisation of risk models for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation identification suggests that multiple primary disease in an individual is a strong predictor of a BRCA1/2 mutation and that this is more predictive than the same cancers occurring in close relatives.

Methods This study assessed the pathological mutation detection rates for BRCA1, BRCA2 and the CHEK2c.1100 delC mutation in 2022 women with breast cancer, including 100 with breast/ovary double primary and 255 with bilateral breast cancer.

Results and discussion Although detection rates for mutations in BRCA1/2 are high at 49% for breast/ovarian double primary and 34% for bilateral breast cancer, the differential effect of multiple primaries in an individual appears to have been overestimated, particularly in those families with only a few malignancies. Nonetheless, bilateral breast cancer does differentially enhance detection rates in strong familial aggregations. CHEK2 1100 DelC mutation rates were lower in bilateral than for unilateral cases at 0.8% compared to 2%. The detected mutation rates for isolated double primary breast and ovarian cancer was 14% (3/22) compared to 17% (17/99) for the same two primaries in two close relatives in families with no other cases of breast/ovarian cancer. Risk models may need to be adjusted if further studies corroborate these findings.

  • Diagnostics tests
  • obstetrics and gynaecology
  • cancer: breast
  • genetic epidemiology

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the Central Manchester University Hospitals Foundation Trust.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.