RESUMO
There is emerging evidence about the predictive role of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), but this is less defined in gastrointestinal (GI) and thoracic malignancies. We reviewed whole genome (WGS) and transcriptomic (RNA-Seq) data from advanced GI and thoracic cancers in the Personalized OncoGenomics trial (NCT02155621) to evaluate HRD scores and single base substitution (SBS)3, which is associated with BRCA1/2 mutations and potentially predictive of defective HRD. HRD scores were calculated by sum of loss of heterozygosity, telomeric allelic imbalance, and large-scale state transitions scores. Regression analyses examined the association between HRD and time to progression on platinum (TTPp). We included 223 patients with GI (n = 154) or thoracic (n = 69) malignancies. TTPp was associated with SBS3 (p < 0.01) but not HRD score in patients with GI malignancies, whereas neither was associated with TTPp in thoracic malignancies. Tumors with gBRCA1/2 mutations and a somatic second alteration exhibited high SBS3 and HRD scores, but these signatures were also present in several tumors with germline but no somatic second alterations, suggesting silencing of the wild-type allele or BRCA1/2 haploinsufficiency. Biallelic inactivation of an HR gene, including loss of XRCC2 and BARD1, was identified in BRCA1/2 wild-type HRD tumors and these patients had prolonged response to platinum. Thoracic cases with high HRD score were associated with high RECQL5 expression (p ≤ 0.025), indicating another potential mechanism of HRD. SBS3 was more strongly associated with TTPp in patients with GI malignancies and may be complementary to using HRD and BRCA status in identifying patients who benefit from platinum therapy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC) have a 20% chance of carrying a BRCA1 or 2 mutation. Not all undergo genetic testing, and there is a large legacy group of untested patients. Their female first-degree relatives (FDR) may not qualify for testing unless they have specific ethnicity, or personal/family cancer history. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate risk-reducing strategies for these FDR who are ineligible for testing. METHODS: A Markov Monte Carlo simulation model estimated the costs and benefits of 3 strategies for female FDR of HGSC patients whose BRCA status is unknown: (1) no BRCA testing; (2) universal BRCA testing, followed by risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) for mutation carriers; (3) universal RRBSO, without BRCA testing. Effectiveness was estimated in quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains over a 50-year time horizon. Sensitivity analyses accounted for uncertainty around various parameters. RESULTS: Universal BRCA testing for female FDR of women with HGSC yielded a higher average QALY gain at acceptable cost compared to no BRCA testing, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $7888 per QALY. Universal BRCA testing was more effective and less costly than universal RRBSO (19.20 QALYs vs. 18.52 QALYs, and $10,135 vs. $14,231, respectively). Results were stable over wide ranges of plausible costs and estimates. Compliance with hormone replacement therapy had to exceed 79.3% for universal RRBSO to be the most effective strategy. CONCLUSION: BRCA mutation testing should be offered to all female first-degree relatives of women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer when BRCA mutation status is unknown.
