Dataset Information

The detection of germline and somatic BRCA1/2 genetic variants through parallel testing of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: a national retrospective audit.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the frequency of germline and somatic pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer tested by next-generation sequencing (NGS), with the aim of defining the best strategy to be implemented in future routine testing.

Design

National retrospective audit.

Setting

The All Wales Medical Genomics Service (AWMGS).

Population

Patients with high-grade serous ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal cancer referred by oncologists to the AWMGS between February 2015 and February 2021 for germline and/or tumour testing of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes by NGS.

Methods

Analysis of NGS data from germline and/or tumour testing.

Main outcome measures

Frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants.

Results

The overall observed germline/somatic pathogenic variant detection rate was 11.6% in the 844 patients included in this study, with a 9.2% (73/791) germline pathogenic variant detection rate. Parallel tumour and germline testing was carried out for 169 patients and the overall pathogenic variant detection rate for this cohort was 14.8%, with 6.5% (11/169) shown to have a somatic pathogenic variant. Two BRCA1 dosage variants were found during germline screens, representing 2.0% (2/98) of patients with a pathogenic variant that would have been missed through tumour testing alone.

Conclusions

Parallel germline and tumour BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing maximises the detection of pathogenic variants in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

Tweetable abstract

Parallel germline and tumour testing maximises BRCA pathogenic variant detection in ovarian cancer.

SUBMITTER: Frugtniet B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9298909 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors targeting BRCA1/2 mutations are available for treating patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer. These treatments may be more appropriately directed to patients who might respond if the tumor tissue is additionally tested by next-generation sequencing with a multi-gene panel and Sanger sequencing of a blood sample. In this study, we compared the results obtained using the next-generation sequencing multi-gene panel to a known germline BRCA1/2 mutational state determined by conventional Sanger sequencing to evaluate the landscape of somatic mutations in high-grade serous ovarian cancer tumors. METHODS:Cancer tissue from 98 patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer who underwent Sanger sequencing for germline BRCA1/2 analysis were consecutively analyzed for somatic mutations using a next-generation sequencing 170-gene panel. RESULTS:Twenty-four patients (24.5%) showed overall BRCA1/2 mutations. Seven patients (7.1%) contained only somatic BRCA1/2 mutations with wild-type germline BRCA1/2, indicating acquired mutation of BRCA1/2. Three patients (3.1%) showed reversion of germline BRCA1 mutations. Among the 14 patients (14.3%) with both germline and somatic mutations in BRCA1/2, two patients showed different variations of BRCA1/2 mutations. The next-generation sequencing panel test for somatic mutation detected other pathogenic variations including RAD51D and ARID1A, which are possible targets of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. Compared to conventional Sanger sequencing alone, next-generation sequencing-based tissue analysis increased the number of candidates for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment from 17.3% (17/98) to 26.5% (26/98). CONCLUSIONS:Somatic mutation analysis by next-generation sequencing, in addition to germline BRCA1/2 mutation analysis, should become the standard of care for managing women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer to widen the indication of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors.

Project description:BackgroundBRCA1 expression can be lost by a variety of mechanisms including germline or somatic mutation and promotor hypermethylation. Given the potential importance of BRCA1 loss as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in high-grade serous ovarian cancer, we sought to evaluate the utility of BRCA1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) in screening for BRCA1 loss by germline, somatic, and epigenetic mechanisms.Patients and methodsPatients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had previously undergone germline BRCA1 testing were identified. Samples from each tumor were stained for BRCA1 and reviewed independently by two pathologists blinded to BRCA status. Tumors with abnormal BRCA1 IHC and wild-type germline testing underwent further evaluation for somatic BRCA1 mutations and promoter hypermethylation. McNemar's test was used to determine the association of BRCA1 IHC with germline BRCA1 mutations and BRCA1 loss through any mechanism. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), and the log-rank test was used to assess differences between groups.ResultsInter-rater reliability between the two pathologists on BRCA IHC interpretation was very good (kappa coefficient 0.865, P = 0.16; McNemar's test). BRCA1 IHC was abnormal in 36% (48/135) of cases. When compared with germline BRCA1 status, BRCA1 IHC had a high negative predictive value (95.4%) but a low positive predictive value (PPV, 52.1%). When accounting for promoter hypermethylation and somatic mutations as alternative methods of BRCA1 loss, the PPV rose to 87.5%. Five-year OS rate was 49.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.3% to 69.3%] for patients with germline BRCA1 mutations, 50.4% (95% CI 27.5% to 69.5%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and abnormal IHC, and 52.1% (95% CI 38.4% to 64.2%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and normal IHC (P = 0.92).ConclusionsBRCA1 IHC interpretation was a highly reproducible and accurate modality for detecting germline, somatic, or epigenetic mechanisms of BRCA1 loss. These results support further development of BRCA1 IHC as a potential biomarker for BRCA1 loss in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

Project description:PurposeTo provide recommendations on genetic and tumor testing for women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer based on available evidence and expert consensus.MethodsA literature search and prospectively defined study selection criteria sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and comparative observational studies published from 2007 through 2019. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence.ResultsThe systematic review identified 19 eligible studies. The evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, and RCTs.RecommendationsAll women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer should have germline genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. In women who do not carry a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant, somatic tumor testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants should be performed. Women with identified germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes should be offered treatments that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in the upfront and the recurrent setting. Women diagnosed with clear cell, endometrioid, or mucinous ovarian cancer should be offered somatic tumor testing for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). Women with identified dMMR should be offered FDA-approved treatment based on these results. Genetic evaluations should be conducted in conjunction with health care providers familiar with the diagnosis and management of hereditary cancer. First- or second-degree blood relatives of a patient with ovarian cancer with a known germline pathogenic cancer susceptibility gene variant should be offered individualized genetic risk evaluation, counseling, and genetic testing. Clinical decision making should not be made based on a variant of uncertain significance. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer should have testing at the time of diagnosis.