RAD51 foci as a functional biomarker of homologous recombination repair and PARP inhibitor resistance in germline BRCA-mutated breast cancer.

Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2)-deficient tumors display impaired homologous recombination repair (HRR) and enhanced sensitivity to DNA damaging agents or to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi). Their efficacy in germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-mutated metastatic breast cancers has been recently confirmed in clinical trials. Numerous mechanisms of PARPi resistance have been described, whose clinical relevance in gBRCA-mutated breast cancer is unknown. This highlights the need to identify functional biomarkers to better predict PARPi sensitivity. Patients and methods: We investigated the in vivo mechanisms of PARPi resistance in gBRCA1 patient-derived tumor xenografts (PDXs) exhibiting differential response to PARPi. Analysis included exome sequencing and immunostaining of DNA damage response proteins to functionally evaluate HRR. Findings were validated in a retrospective sample set from gBRCA1/2-cancer patients treated with PARPi. Results: RAD51 nuclear foci, a surrogate marker of HRR functionality, were the only common feature in PDX and patient samples with primary or acquired PARPi resistance. Consistently, low RAD51 was associated with objective response to PARPi. Evaluation of the RAD51 biomarker in untreated tumors was feasible due to endogenous DNA damage. In PARPi-resistant gBRCA1 PDXs, genetic analysis found no in-frame secondary mutations, but BRCA1 hypomorphic proteins in 60% of the models, TP53BP1-loss in 20% and RAD51-amplification in one sample, none mutually exclusive. Conversely, one of three PARPi-resistant gBRCA2 tumors displayed BRCA2 restoration by exome sequencing. In PDXs, PARPi resistance could be reverted upon combination of a PARPi with an ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) inhibitor. Conclusion: Detection of RAD51 foci in gBRCA tumors correlates with PARPi resistance regardless of the underlying mechanism restoring HRR function. This is a promising biomarker to be used in the clinic to better select patients for PARPi therapy. Our study also supports the clinical development of PARPi combinations such as those with ATM inhibitors.

Germline BRCA testing is moving from cancer risk assessment to a predictive biomarker for targeting cancer therapeutics

Purpose: Originally, BRCA testing was used for risk assessment and prevention strategies for breast and ovarian cancer. Nowadays, BRCA status may influence therapeutic decision making at cancer diagnosis. Our objective was to analyze whether the medical advances have changed the burden and pattern of referral, and the pathogenic mutation detection rate. Methods: We included 969 probands from our hereditary cancer registry who undertook a full BRCA analysis between 2006 and 2014. Chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables. Results: The number of genetic tests have raised from 28 to 170, representing a sixfold increase. In 2006, we tested 1.6 relatives/proband while this proportion was four in 2014. Overall, 20 % harbored a deleterious mutation and 11 % had a variant of unknown significance (VUS). There has been a downward trend in the detection rate of VUS. Testing patients with breast cancer during neoadjuvancy has raised from 4 to 25 % (p = 0.002), while testing them during remission has decreased from 79 to 29 % (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients assessed during the first 6 months after their cancer diagnosis has increased from 3 to 34 % (p = 0.001). Risk reducing mastectomy and salpingoophorectomy have raised from 0 to 24 %, and from 36 to 65 %, respectively. Conclusions: BRCA testing has experienced a sixfold increase, the number of relatives being tested has doubled, and the test is being performed at earlier phases of the disease. It is necessary to adequate the health resources to preserve the BRCA genetic counseling quality while incorporating BRCA testing for therapeutic decision making

No disponible

Germline BRCA testing is moving from cancer risk assessment to a predictive biomarker for targeting cancer therapeutics.

PURPOSE: Originally, BRCA testing was used for risk assessment and prevention strategies for breast and ovarian cancer. Nowadays, BRCA status may influence therapeutic decision making at cancer diagnosis. Our objective was to analyze whether the medical advances have changed the burden and pattern of referral, and the pathogenic mutation detection rate. METHODS: We included 969 probands from our hereditary cancer registry who undertook a full BRCA analysis between 2006 and 2014. Chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables. RESULTS: The number of genetic tests have raised from 28 to 170, representing a sixfold increase. In 2006, we tested 1.6 relatives/proband while this proportion was four in 2014. Overall, 20 % harbored a deleterious mutation and 11 % had a variant of unknown significance (VUS). There has been a downward trend in the detection rate of VUS. Testing patients with breast cancer during neoadjuvancy has raised from 4 to 25 % (p = 0.002), while testing them during remission has decreased from 79 to 29 % (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients assessed during the first 6 months after their cancer diagnosis has increased from 3 to 34 % (p = 0.001). Risk reducing mastectomy and salpingoophorectomy have raised from 0 to 24 %, and from 36 to 65 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BRCA testing has experienced a sixfold increase, the number of relatives being tested has doubled, and the test is being performed at earlier phases of the disease. It is necessary to adequate the health resources to preserve the BRCA genetic counseling quality while incorporating BRCA testing for therapeutic decision making.

Altered gene expression signature of early stages of the germ line supports the pre-meiotic origin of human spermatogenic failure.

The molecular basis of spermatogenic failure (SpF) is still largely unknown. Accumulating evidence suggests that a series of specific events such as meiosis, are determined at the early stage of spermatogenesis. This study aims to assess the expression profile of pre-meiotic genes of infertile testicular biopsies that might help to define the molecular phenotype associated with human deficiency of sperm production. An accurate quantification of testicular mRNA levels of genes expressed in spermatogonia was carried out by RT-qPCR in individuals showing SpF owing to germ cell maturation defects, Sertoli cell-only syndrome or conserved spermatogenesis. In addition, the gene expression profile of SpF was compared with that of testicular tumour, which is considered to be a severe developmental disease of germ cell differentiation. Protein expression from selected genes was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Our results indicate that SpF is accompanied by differences in expression of certain genes associated with spermatogonia in the absence of any apparent morphological and/or numerical change in this specific cell type. In SpF testicular samples, we observed down-regulation of genes involved in cell cycle (CCNE1 and POLD1), transcription and post-transcription regulation (DAZL, RBM15 and DICER1), protein degradation (FBXO32 and TM9SF2) and homologous recombination in meiosis (MRE11A and RAD50) which suggests that the expression of these genes is critical for a proper germ cell development. Interestingly, a decrease in the CCNE1, DAZL, RBM15 and STRA8 cellular transcript levels was also observed, suggesting that the gene expression capacity of spermatogonia is altered in SpF contributing to an unsuccessful sperm production. Altogether, these data point to the spermatogenic derangement being already determined at, or arising in, the initial stages of the germ line.

Molecular evaluation of CFTR sequence variants in male infertility of testicular origin.

Although the involvement of the CFTR gene has been well established in congenital agenesia of vas deferens, its role in non-obstructive (NOb) infertility is still a matter of debate. In order to definitively define the involvement of the CFTR gene in spermatogenic impairment and a potential synergistic contribution to known genetic and clinical factors, genetic variants in the entire coding sequence and the immediately flanking regions of the CFTR gene, along with a thorough clinical evaluation, were analysed in 83 NOb infertile patients and 87 clinically well-defined fertile individuals as controls. The results of our study showed no statistical difference between CFTR carrier frequency in the infertile and fertile population. Specifically, the IVS8-6(5T) allele carrier frequency was similar in NOb infertile patients when compared with fertile men, but it is noteworthy that, when fertile men were classified into having optimal and suboptimal fertility, no 5T allele was found among the 35 men with optimal fertility parameters. In conclusion, extensive CFTR analysis in infertile individuals and fertile population as adequate control definitively excludes the involvement of the CFTR gene variants in sperm production and stresses the importance of carefully identifying those individuals with obstructive defects, in whom CFTR screening will be beneficial.