HRD Testing of Ovarian Cancer in Routine Practice: What Are We Dealing With?

Assessment of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status is now essential for ovarian cancer patient management. The aim of our study was to analyze the influence of ethnic variations, tumor purity, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) on the determination of HRD scores as well as to evaluate feasibility of HRD testing with the Amoy HRD Focus Assay in routine clinical practice. The HRD status, including the BRCA status and genomic scar score (GSS), was analyzed in 452 ovarian cancer specimens. The successful rate of HRD testing was 86% (388/452). The BRCA mutational rate was 29% (114/388); 252 samples (65%) were classified as HRD-positive. Our data demonstrate the feasibility of internal HRD testing by the AmoyDx HRD Focus Panel for high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC), showing results similar to other methods. The HRD rate in the Russian population is very similar to those of other European populations, as is the BRCA mutation frequency. The most substantial contribution to HRD level diversity is testing criteria depending on intrahospital arrangements. The analysis shows that biallelic BRCA alterations had higher GSS compared with those with monoallelic inactivation, consistent with positive HRD status. The study indicates that grades 1-2 of the pathological response caused by chemotherapy affect HRD scores and suggests controlling for tumor purity of 40% or more as a critical factor for GSS measurement.

A spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline deleterious variants in ovarian cancer in Russia.

PURPOSE: Pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are essential biomarkers of an increased breast and ovarian cancer risk and tumor sensitivity to poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors. In Russia, eight PVs were thought to be the most common, among which BRCA1 c.5266dup is the most frequently identified one. METHODS: We show the distribution of BRCA1/2 PVs identified with quantitative PCR and targeted next-generation sequencing in 1399 ovarian cancer patients recruited into the study from 72 Russian regions in 2015-2021. RESULTS: The most abundant PVs were c.5266dup (41.0%), c.4035del (7.0%), c.1961del (6.3%), c.181 T > G (5.2%), c.3756_3759del (1.8%), c.3700_3704del (1.5%), and c.68_69del (1.5%), all found in BRCA1 and known to be recurrent in Russia. Several other frequent PVs were identified: c.5152 + 1G > T (1.2%), c.1687C > T (1.0%), c.4689C > G (0.9%), c.1510del (0.6%), c.2285_2286del (0.6%) in the BRCA1 gene; and c.5286 T > G (1.2%), c.2808_2811del (0.8%), c.3847_3848del (0.8%), c.658_659del (0.7%), c.7879A > T (0.6%), in the BRCA2 gene. For the most common PV in the BRCA2 gene c.5286 T > G, we suggested that it arose about 700 years ago and is a new founder mutation. CONCLUSION: This study extends our knowledge about the BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants variability.

Abnormal promoter DNA hypermethylation of the integrin, nidogen, and dystroglycan genes in breast cancer.

Cell transmembrane receptors and extracellular matrix components play a pivotal role in regulating cell activity and providing for the concerted integration of cells in the tissue structures. We have assessed DNA methylation in the promoter regions of eight integrin genes, two nidogen genes, and the dystroglycan gene in normal breast tissues and breast carcinomas (BC). The protein products of these genes interact with the basement membrane proteins LAMA1, LAMA2, and LAMB1; abnormal hypermethylation of the LAMA1, LAMA2, and LAMB1 promoters in BC has been described in our previous publications. In the present study, the frequencies of abnormal promoter hypermethylation in BC were 13% for ITGA1, 31% for ITGA4, 4% for ITGA7, 39% for ITGA9, 38% for NID1, and 41% for NID2. ITGA2, ITGA3, ITGA6, ITGB1, and DAG1 promoters were nonmethylated in normal and BC samples. ITGA4, ITGA9, and NID1 promoter hypermethylation was associated with the HER2 positive tumors, and promoter hypermethylation of ITGA1, ITGA9, NID1 and NID2 was associated with a genome-wide CpG island hypermethylated BC subtype. Given that ITGA4 is not expressed in normal breast, one might suggest that its abnormal promoter hypermethylation in cancer is non-functional and is thus merely a passenger epimutation. Yet, this assumption is not supported by our finding that it is not associated with a hypermethylated BC subtype. ITGA4 acquires expression in a subset of breast carcinomas, and methylation of its promoter may be preventive against expression in some tumors. Strong association of abnormal ITGA4 hypermethylation with the HER2 positive tumors (p = 0.0025) suggests that simultaneous presence of both HER2 and integrin α4 receptors is not beneficial for tumor cells. This may imply HER2 and integrin α4 signaling pathways interactions that are yet to be discovered.

Abnormal Hypermethylation of CpG Dinucleotides in Promoter Regions of Matrix Metalloproteinases Genes in Breast Cancer and Its Relation to Epigenomic Subtypes and HER2 Overexpression.

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and their tissue inhibitors (TIMPs) substantially contribute to the regulation of intercellular interactions and thereby play a role in maintaining the tissue structure and function. We examined methylation of a subset of 5'-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3' (CpG) dinucleotides in promoter regions of the MMP2, MMP11, MMP14, MMP15, MMP16, MMP17, MMP21, MMP23B, MMP24, MMP25, MMP28, TIMP1, TIMP2, TIMP3, and TIMP4 genes by methylation-sensitive restriction enzyme digestion PCR. In our collection of 183 breast cancer samples, abnormal hypermethylation was observed for CpGs in MMP2, MMP23B, MMP24, MMP25, and MMP28 promoter regions. The non-methylated status of the examined CpGs in promoter regions of MMP2, MMP23B, MMP24, MMP25, and MMP28 in tumors was associated with low HER2 expression, while the group of samples with abnormal hypermethylation of at least two of these MMP genes was significantly enriched with HER2-positive tumors. Abnormal methylation of MMP24 and MMP25 was significantly associated with a CpG island hypermethylated breast cancer subtype discovered by genome-wide DNA bisulfite sequencing. Our results indicate that abnormal hypermethylation of at least several MMP genes promoters is a secondary event not directly functional in breast cancer (BC) pathogenesis. We suggest that it is elevated and/or ectopic expression, rather than methylation-driven silencing, that might link MMPs to tumorigenesis.

Genome-wide methylotyping resolves breast cancer epigenetic heterogeneity and suggests novel therapeutic perspectives.

Aim: To provide a breast cancer (BC) methylotype classification by genome-wide CpG islands bisulfite DNA sequencing. Materials & methods: XmaI-reduced representation bisulfite sequencing DNA methylation sequencing method was used to profile DNA methylation of 110 BC samples and 6 normal breast samples. Intrinsic DNA methylation BC subtypes were elicited by unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis, and cluster-specific differentially methylated genes were identified. Results & conclusion: Overall, six distinct BC methylotypes were identified. BC cell lines constitute a separate group extremely highly methylated at the CpG islands. In turn, primary BC samples segregate into two major subtypes, highly and moderately methylated. Highly and moderately methylated superclusters, each incorporate three distinct epigenomic BC clusters with specific features, suggesting novel perspectives for personalized therapy.

Methylation of the BIN1 gene promoter CpG island associated with breast and prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Loss of BIN1 tumor suppressor expression is abundant in human cancer and its frequency exceeds that of genetic alterations, suggesting the role of epigenetic regulators (DNA methylation). BIN1 re-expression in the DU145 prostate cancer cell line after 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine treatment was recently reported but no methylation of the BIN1 promoter CpG island was found in DU145. METHODS: Methylation-sensitive arbitrarily-primed PCR was used to detect genomic loci abnormally methylated in breast cancer. BIN1 CpG island fragment was identified among the differentially methylated loci as a result of direct sequencing of the methylation-sensitive arbitrarily-primed PCR product and subsequent BLAST alliance. BIN1 CpG island cancer related methylation in breast and prostate cancers was confirmed by bisulphite sequencing and its methylation frequency was evaluated by methylation sensitive PCR. Loss of heterozygosity analysis of the BIN1 region was performed with two introgenic and one closely adjacent extragenic microsatellite markers.BIN1 expression was evaluated by real-time RT-PCR. RESULTS: We have identified a 3'-part of BIN1 promoter CpG island among the genomic loci abnormally methylated in breast cancer. The fragment proved to be methylated in 18/99 (18%) and 4/46 (9%) breast and prostate tumors, correspondingly, as well as in MCF7 and T47D breast cancer cell lines, but was never methylated in normal tissues and lymphocytes as well as in DU145 and LNCaP prostate cancer cell lines. The 5'-part of the CpG island revealed no methylation in all samples tested. BIN1 expression losses were detected in MCF7 and T47D cells and were characteristic of primary breast tumors (10/13; 77%), while loss of heterozygosity was a rare event in tissue samples (2/22 informative cases; 9%) and was ruled out for MCF7. CONCLUSION: BIN1 promoter CpG island is composed of two parts differing drastically in the methylation patterns in cancer. This appears to be a common feature of cancer related genes and demands further functional significance exploration. Although we have found no evidence of the functional role of such a non-core methylation in BIN1 expression regulation, our data do not altogether rule this possibility out.