BACKGROUND:In women at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer, the identification of a mutation in breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1) and BRCA2 has important implications for screening and prevention counseling. Uncertainty regarding the role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high‐risk women from diverse ancestral backgrounds exists because of variability in prevalence estimates of deleterious (disease‐associated) mutations in non‐white populations. In this study, the authors examined the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in an ethnically diverse group of women who were referred for genetic testing.METHODS:In this cross‐sectional analysis, the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations was assessed in a group of non‐Ashkenazi Jewish women who underwent genetic testing.RESULTS:From 1996 to 2006, 46,276 women who met study criteria underwent DNA full‐sequence analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Deleterious mutations were identified in 12.5% of women, and recurrent deleterious mutations (prevalence >2%) were identified in all ancestral groups. Women of non‐European descent were younger (mean age, 45.9 years; standard deviation [SD], 11.6 years) than European women (mean age, 50 years; SD, 11.9 years; P < .001). Women of African (15.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.3 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.1‐1.5]) and Latin American (14.8%; OR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.1‐1.4]) ancestries had a significantly higher prevalence of deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations compared with women of Western European ancestry (12.1%), primarily because of an increased prevalence of BRCA1 mutations in those 2 groups. Non‐European ethnicity was associated strongly with having a variant of uncertain significance; however, reclassification decreased variant reporting (from 12.8%→5.9%), and women of African ancestry experienced the largest decline (58%).CONCLUSIONS:Mutation prevalence was found to be high among women who were referred for clinical BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing, and the risk was similar across diverse ethnicities. BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing is integral to cancer risk assessment in all high‐risk women. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.

No abstract

Classification of rare missense variants as neutral or disease causing is a challenge and has important implications for genetic counseling. A multifactorial likelihood model for classification of unclassified variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 has previously been developed, which uses data on cooccurrence of the unclassified variant with pathogenic mutations in the same gene, cosegregation of the unclassified variant with affected status, and Grantham analysis of the fit between the missense substitution and the evolutionary range of variation observed at its position in the protein. We have further developed this model to take into account relevant features of BRCA1-and BRCA2-associated tumors, such as the characteristic histopathology and immunochemical profiles associated with pathogenic mutations in BRCA1, and the fact that f80% of tumors from BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers undergo inactivation of the wild-type allele by loss of heterozygosity. We examined 10 BRCA1 and 15 BRCA2 unclassified variants identified in Australian, multiple-case breast cancer families. By a combination of genetic, in silico, and histopathologic analyses, we were able to classify one BRCA1 variant as pathogenic and six BRCA1 and seven BRCA2 variants as neutral. Five of these neutral variants were also found in at least 1 of 180 healthy controls, suggesting that screening a large number of appropriate controls might be a useful adjunct to other methods for evaluation of unclassified

Genetic testing has the potential to guide the prevention and treatment of disease in a variety of settings, and recent technical advances have greatly increased our ability to acquire large amounts of genetic data. The interpretation of this data remains challenging, as the clinical significance of genetic variation detected in the laboratory is not always clear. Although regulatory agencies and professional societies provide some guidance regarding the classification, reporting, and long-term follow-up of variants, few protocols for the implementation of these guidelines have been described. Because the primary aim of clinical testing is to provide results to inform medical management, a variant classification program that offers timely, accurate, confident and cost-effective interpretation of variants should be an integral component of the laboratory process. Here we describe the components of our laboratory's current variant classification program (VCP), based on 20 years of experience and over one million samples tested, using the BRCA1/2 genes as a model. Our VCP has lowered the percentage of tests in which one or more BRCA1/2 variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) are detected to 2.1% in the absence of a pathogenic mutation, demonstrating how the coordinated application of resources toward classification and reclassification significantly impacts the clinical utility of testing.

Personal and family history characteristics can accurately predict the outcome of genetic testing in a large population at risk of Lynch syndrome. The PREMM(1,2) model provides clinicians with an objective, easy-to-use tool to estimate the likelihood of finding mutations in the MLH1/MSH2 genes and may guide the strategy for molecular evaluation.