Purpose: BRCA1/2 mutations increase the risk of breast and prostate cancer in men. Common genetic variants modify cancer risks for female carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. We investigated—for the first time to our knowledge—associations of common genetic variants with breast and prostate cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/ 2 mutations and implications for cancer risk prediction. Materials and Methods: We genotyped 1,802 male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 by using the custom Illumina OncoArray. We investigated the combined effects of established breast and prostate cancer susceptibility variants on cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations by constructing weighted polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using published effect estimates as weights. Results: In male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, PRS that was based on 88 female breast cancer susceptibility variants was associated with breast cancer risk (odds ratio per standard deviation of PRS, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.56; P = 8.6 × 10⁻⁶). Similarly, PRS that was based on 103 prostate cancer susceptibility variants was associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio per SD of PRS, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81; P = 3.2 × 10⁻⁹). Large differences in absolute cancer risks were observed at the extremes of the PRS distribution. For example, prostate cancer risk by age 80 years at the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS varies from 7% to 26% for carriers of BRCA1 mutations and from 19% to 61% for carriers of BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Conclusion: PRSs may provide informative cancer risk stratification for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations that might enable these men and their physicians to make informed decisions on the type and timing of breast and prostate cancer risk management.

Fanconi anemia (FA) is caused by biallelic mutations in FA genes. Monoallelic mutations in five of these genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, BRIP1 and RAD51C) increase the susceptibility to breast/ovarian cancer and are used in clinical diagnostics as bona-fide hereditary cancer genes. Increasing evidence suggests that monoallelic mutations in other FA genes could predispose to tumor development, especially breast cancer. The objective of this study is to assess the mutational spectrum of 14 additional FA genes (FANCA, FANCB, FANCC, FANCD2, FANCE, FANCF, FANCG, FANCI, FANCL, FANCM, FANCP, FANCQ, FANCR and FANCU) in a cohort of hereditary cancer patients, to compare with local cancer-free controls as well as GnomAD. A total of 1021 hereditary cancer patients and 194 controls were analyzed using our next generation custom sequencing panel. We identified 35 pathogenic variants in eight genes. A significant association with the risk of breast cancer/breast and ovarian cancer was found for carriers of FANCA mutations (odds ratio (OR) = 3.14 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4–6.17, p = 0.003). Two patients with early-onset cancer showed a pathogenic FA variant in addition to another germline mutation, suggesting a modifier role for FA variants. Our results encourage a comprehensive analysis of FA genes in larger studies to better assess their role in cancer risk.

Next generation sequencing panels have been developed for hereditary cancer, although there is some debate about their cost-effectiveness compared to exome sequencing. The performance of two panels is compared to exome sequencing. Twenty-four patients were selected: ten with identified mutations (control set) and fourteen suspicious of hereditary cancer but with no mutation (discovery set). TruSight Cancer (94 genes) and a custom panel (122 genes) were assessed alongside exome sequencing. Eighty-three genes were targeted by the two panels and exome sequencing. More than 99% of bases had a read depth of over 30x in the panels, whereas exome sequencing covered 94%. Variant calling with standard settings identified the 10 mutations in the control set, with the exception ofMSH6c.255dupC using TruSight Cancer. In the discovery set, 240 unique non-silent coding and canonic splice-site variants were identified in the panel genes, 7 of them putatively pathogenic (inATM,BARD1,CHEK2,ERCC3,FANCL,FANCM,MSH2). The three approaches identified a similar number of variants in the shared genes. Exomes were more expensive than panels but provided additional data. In terms of cost and depth, panels are a suitable option for genetic diagnostics, although exomes also identify variants in non-targeted genes.

We wanted to implement an NGS strategy to globally analyze hereditary cancer with diagnostic quality while retaining the same degree of understanding and control we had in pre-NGS strategies. To do this, we developed the I2HCP panel, a custom bait library covering 122 hereditary cancer genes. We improved bait design, tested different NGS platforms and created a clinically driven custom data analysis pipeline. The I2HCP panel was developed using a training set of hereditary colorectal cancer, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and neurofibromatosis patients and reached an accuracy, analytical sensitivity and specificity greater than 99%, which was maintained in a validation set. I2HCP changed our diagnostic approach, involving clinicians and a genetic diagnostics team from panel design to reporting. The new strategy improved diagnostic sensitivity, solved uncertain clinical diagnoses and identified mutations in new genes. We assessed the genetic variation in the complete set of hereditary cancer genes, revealing a complex variation landscape that coexists with the disease-causing mutation. We developed, validated and implemented a custom NGS-based strategy for hereditary cancer diagnostics that improved our previous workflows. Additionally, the existence of a rich genetic variation in hereditary cancer genes favors the use of this panel to investigate their role in cancer risk.

Background and aim The majority of mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations causing Lynch syndrome (LS) occur either in MLH1 or MSH2. However, the relative contribution of PMS2 is less well defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of PMS2 in LS by assessing the pathogenicity of variants of unknown significance (VUS) detected in the mutational analysis of PMS2 in a series of Spanish patients. Methods From a cohort of 202 LS suspected patients, 13 patients showing loss of PMS2 expression in tumours were screened for germline mutations in PMS2, using a long range PCR based strategy and multiplex ligation dependent probe amplification (MLPA). Pathogenicity assessment of PMS2 VUS was performed evaluating clinicopathological data, frequency in control population and in silico and in vitro analyses at the RNA and protein level. Results Overall 25 different PMS2 DNA variants were detected. Fourteen were classified as polymorphisms. Nine variants were classified as pathogenic: seven alterations based on their molecular nature and two after demonstrating a functional defect (c.538-3C>G affected mRNA processing and c.137G>T impaired MMR activity). The c.1569C>G variant was classified as likely neutral while the c.384G>A remained as a VUS. We have also shown that the polymorphic variant c.59G>A is MMR proficient. Conclusions Pathogenic PMS2 mutations were detected in 69% of patients harbouring LS associated tumours with loss of PMS2 expression. In all, PMS2 mutations account for 6% of the LS cases identified. The comprehensive functional analysis shown here has been useful in the classification of PMS2 VUS and contributes to refining the role of PMS2 in LS.