Rare germline large rearrangements in the BRCA1/2 genes and eight candidate genes in 472 patients with breast cancer predisposition.

Hereditary breast cancers account for up to 5-10 % of breast cancers and a majority are related to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. However, many families with breast cancer predisposition do not carry any known mutations for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. We explored the incidence of rare large rearrangements in the coding, noncoding and flanking regions of BRCA1/2 and in eight other candidate genes--CHEK2, BARD1, ATM, RAD50, RAD51, BRIP1, RAP80 and PALB2. A dedicated zoom-in CGH-array was applied to screen for rearrangements in 472 unrelated French individuals from breast-ovarian cancer families that were being followed in eight French oncogenetic laboratories. No new rearrangement was found neither in the genomic regions of BRCA1/2 nor in candidate genes, except for the CHEK2 and BARD1 genes. Three heterozygous deletions were detected in the 5' and 3' flanking regions of BRCA1. One large deletion introducing a frameshift was identified in the CHEK2 gene in two families and one heterozygous deletion was detected within an intron of BARD1. The study demonstrates the usefulness of CGH-array in routine genetic analysis and, aside from the CHEK2 rearrangements, indicates there is a very low incidence of large rearrangements in BRCA1/2 and in the other eight candidate genes in families already explored for BRCA1/2 mutations. Finally, next-generation sequencing should bring new information about point mutations in intronic and flanking regions and also medium size rearrangements.

Care homes' use of medicines study: prevalence, causes and potential harm of medication errors in care homes for older people.

INTRODUCTION: Care home residents are at particular risk from medication errors, and our objective was to determine the prevalence and potential harm of prescribing, monitoring, dispensing and administration errors in UK care homes, and to identify their causes. METHODS: A prospective study of a random sample of residents within a purposive sample of homes in three areas. Errors were identified by patient interview, note review, observation of practice and examination of dispensed items. Causes were understood by observation and from theoretically framed interviews with home staff, doctors and pharmacists. Potential harm from errors was assessed by expert judgement. RESULTS: The 256 residents recruited in 55 homes were taking a mean of 8.0 medicines. One hundred and seventy-eight (69.5%) of residents had one or more errors. The mean number per resident was 1.9 errors. The mean potential harm from prescribing, monitoring, administration and dispensing errors was 2.6, 3.7, 2.1 and 2.0 (0 = no harm, 10 = death), respectively. Contributing factors from the 89 interviews included doctors who were not accessible, did not know the residents and lacked information in homes when prescribing; home staff's high workload, lack of medicines training and drug round interruptions; lack of team work among home, practice and pharmacy; inefficient ordering systems; inaccurate medicine records and prevalence of verbal communication; and difficult to fill (and check) medication administration systems. CONCLUSIONS: That two thirds of residents were exposed to one or more medication errors is of concern. The will to improve exists, but there is a lack of overall responsibility. Action is required from all concerned.