Linkage analysis suggests that mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are responsible for cancer predisposition in more than 80% of the families with high incidence of breast/ovarian cancer. However, pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes are generally identified in much less than half of the families investigated in a diagnostic setting with the currently used PCR-based screening protocols. Here we report the identification of two different de novo Alu element insertions within the BRCA1/2 coding sequences in three out of the 50 families in which we found a cancer predisposing mutation, suggesting that this type of mutation is much more common than suggested by their occurrence in mutation databases. The Alu insertion in the BRCA2 gene resulted in the removal of the targeted exon from the corresponding mRNA molecule. Unexpectedly the Target Site Duplications generated by both Alu element insertions contained a specific 9 bp long segment, which might eventually serve as a recognition site for the transposition machinery. Finally, in contrast to the disease causing Alu insertions reported to date, the transposon identified in the BRCA1 gene does not belong to a "young" AluY but to an AluS subfamily, indicating that some of these "old" Alu elements, which are supposed to be non-functional fossil relics, are still able to retrotranspose in vivo.
BackgroundCancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer.MethodsWe analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis).ResultsA total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29).ConclusionsThis population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.
Background: Predictive genetic testing has high impact on cancer prevention for BRCA carriers and passing this information in BRCA families is important. Mostly, this is proband-mediated but this path is defective and denies relatives lifesaving information. Objective: To assess the efficacy/safety of an intervention, in which relatives are actively informed. Design: Sequential prospective study in new BRCA families. The proband informed relatives about predictive testing (phase I). After 6 months, a letter was sent to adult relatives who had not been reached (phase II). Then a phone call was made to obtain a final notion of their wishes. All subjects received psychometric testing (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI), an interview and routine counselling. Results: Twenty families were included. Twenty-four of the relatives could not be reached, 59 were ‘decliners’, 47 participated by the proband and 42 by the letter. Predictive testing was performed in 98 % of the participants of which 30 were mutation carriers. The intervention is psychologically safe: the 95 % CI for the estimated mean difference in STAI DY1 between phase II/I subjects (mean difference −1.07, 95 % CI −4.4 to 2.35, p = 0.53) shows that the mean STAI DY1 score (measured at first consult) for phase II is no more than 2.35 units higher than for phase I, which is not relevant. Conclusions: A protocol directly informing relatives nearly doubles the number of relatives tested and is psychologically safe. This should lead to a change in counselling guidelines in families with a strong germline predisposition for cancer.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10689-015-9854-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Fifteen years ago BRCA1 and BRCA2 were reported as high penetrant breast cancer predisposing genes. However, mutations in these genes are found in only a fraction of high risk families. BARD1 is a candidate breast cancer gene, but only a limited number of missense mutations with rather unclear pathogenic consequences have been reported. We screened 196 high risk breast cancer families for the occurrence of BARD1 variants. All genetic variants were analyzed using clinical information as well as IN SILICO predictive tools, including protein modeling. We found three candidate pathogenic mutations in seven families including a first case of a protein truncating mutation (p.Glu652fs) removing the entire second BRCT domain of BARD1. In conclusion, we provide evidence for an increased breast cancer risk associated to specific BARD1 germline mutations. However, these BARD1 mutations occur in a minority of hereditary breast cancer families.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.