RAD51D

Gene Summary

Gene:RAD51D; RAD51 paralog D
Aliases: TRAD, R51H3, BROVCA4, RAD51L3
Location:17q12
Summary:The protein encoded by this gene is a member of the RAD51 protein family. RAD51 family members are highly similar to bacterial RecA and Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rad51, which are known to be involved in the homologous recombination and repair of DNA. This protein forms a complex with several other members of the RAD51 family, including RAD51L1, RAD51L2, and XRCC2. The protein complex formed with this protein has been shown to catalyze homologous pairing between single- and double-stranded DNA, and is thought to play a role in the early stage of recombinational repair of DNA. Alternative splicing results in multiple transcript variants. Read-through transcription also exists between this gene and the downstream ring finger and FYVE-like domain containing 1 (RFFL) gene. [provided by RefSeq, Jan 2011]
Databases:OMIM, HGNC, Ensembl, GeneCard, Gene
Protein:DNA repair protein RAD51 homolog 4
Source:NCBIAccessed: 30 August, 2019

Ontology:

What does this gene/protein do?
Show (8)

Cancer Overview

Research Indicators

Publications Per Year (1994-2019)
Graph generated 31 August 2019 using data from PubMed using criteria.

Literature Analysis

Mouse over the terms for more detail; many indicate links which you can click for dedicated pages about the topic.

  • Staging
  • Penetrance
  • Fanconi Anemia Complementation Group N Protein
  • Biomarkers, Tumor
  • Pedigree
  • Genetic Testing
  • p53 Protein
  • BRCA1 Protein
  • BRCA2 Protein
  • DNA Sequence Analysis
  • BRCA1
  • Prostate Cancer
  • Chromosome 17
  • Platinum Compounds
  • Triple Negative Breast Cancer
  • Ovarian Cancer
  • MutS Homolog 2 Protein
  • Stomach Cancer
  • Breast Cancer
  • Case-Control Studies
  • DNA Repair
  • CHEK2
  • Homologous Recombination
  • Fanconi Anemia Complementation Group Proteins
  • Genotype
  • Sequence Homology
  • High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
  • DNA Mutational Analysis
  • Germ-Line Mutation
  • BRCA2
  • Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome
  • DNA-Binding Proteins
  • Rad52 DNA Repair and Recombination Protein
  • Rad51 Recombinase
  • PTEN
  • Registries
  • Nuclear Proteins
  • Mutation
  • Genetic Predisposition
  • Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated Proteins
Tag cloud generated 30 August, 2019 using data from PubMed, MeSH and CancerIndex

Specific Cancers (6)

Data table showing topics related to specific cancers and associated disorders. Scope includes mutations and abnormal protein expression.

Note: list is not exhaustive. Number of papers are based on searches of PubMed (click on topic title for arbitrary criteria used).

Latest Publications: RAD51D (cancer-related)

Suszynska M, Klonowska K, Jasinska AJ, Kozlowski P
Large-scale meta-analysis of mutations identified in panels of breast/ovarian cancer-related genes - Providing evidence of cancer predisposition genes.
Gynecol Oncol. 2019; 153(2):452-462 [PubMed] Related Publications
OBJECTIVE: Germline mutations occurring in the highly penetrant genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are responsible for only certain cases of familial breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). Thus, the use of NGS multi-gene panel (MGP) testing has recently become very popular.
METHODS: To estimate a reliable BC and OC risk associated with pathogenic variants in the selected candidate BC/OC predisposition genes, a comprehensive meta-analysis of 48 MGP-based studies analyzing BC/OC patients was conducted. The role of 37 genes was evaluated, comparing, in total, the mutation frequency in ~120,000 BC/OC cases and ~120,000 controls, which guaranteed strong statistical support with high confidence for most analyzed genes.
RESULTS: We characterized the strategies of MGP analyses and the types and localizations of the identified mutations and showed that 13 and 11 of the analyzed genes were significantly associated with an increased BC and OC risk, respectively. The risk attributed to some of these genes (e.g., CDKN2A and PALB2 for BC) was similar to that observed for BRCA2. The analysis also showed a substantial difference in the profile of genes contributing to either BC or OC risk, including genes specifically associated with a high risk of OC but not BC (e.g., RAD51C, and RAD51D).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides strong statistical proof, defines the risk for many genes often considered candidates for BC/OC predisposition and excludes the role of other genes frequently analyzed in the MGPs. In the context of clinical diagnostics, the results support the knowledge-based interpretation of identified mutations.

Bonache S, Esteban I, Moles-Fernández A, et al.
Multigene panel testing beyond BRCA1/2 in breast/ovarian cancer Spanish families and clinical actionability of findings.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2018; 144(12):2495-2513 [PubMed] Related Publications
PURPOSE: Few and small studies have been reported about multigene testing usage by massively parallel sequencing in European cancer families. There is an open debate about what genes should be tested, and the actionability of some included genes is under research.
METHODS: We investigated a panel of 34 known high/moderate-risk cancer genes, including 16 related to breast or ovarian cancer (BC/OC) genes, and 63 candidate genes to BC/OC in 192 clinically suspicious of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) Spanish families without pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2).
RESULTS: We identified 16 patients who carried a high- or moderate-risk pathogenic variant in eight genes: 4 PALB2, 3 ATM, 2 RAD51D, 2 TP53, 2 APC, 1 BRIP1, 1 PTEN and 1 PMS2. These findings led to increased surveillance or prevention options in 12 patients and predictive testing in their family members. We detected 383 unique variants of uncertain significance in known cancer genes, of which 35 were prioritized in silico. Eighteen loss-of-function variants were detected in candidate BC/OC genes in 17 patients (1 BARD1, 1 ERCC3, 1 ERCC5, 2 FANCE, 1 FANCI, 2 FANCL, 1 FANCM, 1 MCPH1, 1 PPM1D, 2 RBBP8, 3 RECQL4 and 1 with SLX4 and XRCC2), three of which also carry pathogenic variants in known cancer genes.
CONCLUSIONS: Eight percent of the BRCA1/2 negative patients carry pathogenic variants in other actionable genes. The multigene panel usage improves the diagnostic yield in HBOC testing and it is an effective tool to identify potentially new candidate genes.

Hoyer J, Vasileiou G, Uebe S, et al.
Addition of triple negativity of breast cancer as an indicator for germline mutations in predisposing genes increases sensitivity of clinical selection criteria.
BMC Cancer. 2018; 18(1):926 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. 12-15% of all tumors are triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). So far, TNBC has been mainly associated with mutations in BRCA1. The presence of other predisposing genes seems likely since DNA damage repair is a complex process that involves several genes. Therefore we investigated if mutations in other genes are involved in cancer development and whether TNBC is an additional indicator of mutational status besides family history and age of onset.
METHODS: We performed a germline panel-based screening of 10 high and low-moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D and TP53) in 229 consecutive individuals affected with TNBC unselected for age, family history or bilateral disease. Within this cohort we compared the number of mutation carriers fulfilling clinical selection criteria with the total number of carriers identified.
RESULTS: Age at diagnosis ranged from 23 to 80 years with an average age of 50.2 years. In 57 women (24.9%) we detected a pathogenic mutation, with a higher frequency (29.7%) in the group manifesting cancer before 60 years. Deleterious BRCA1 mutations occurred in 14.8% of TNBC patients. These were predominantly recurrent frameshift mutations (24/34, 70.6%). Deleterious BRCA2 mutations occurred in 5.7% of patients, all but one (c.1813dupA) being unique. While no mutations were found in CDH1 and TP53, 10 mutations were detected in one of the six other predisposition genes. Remarkably, neither of the ATM, RAD51D, CHEK2 and PALB2 mutation carriers had a family history. Furthermore, patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations were not significantly younger than mutation negative women (p = 0.3341). Most importantly, among the 57 mutation carriers, ten (17.5%) would be missed using current clinical testing criteria including five (8%) with BRCA1/2 mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our data confirm and expand previous studies of a high frequency of germline mutations in genes associated with ineffective repair of DNA damage in women with TNBCs. Neither age of onset, contralateral disease nor family history were able to discern all mutation positive individuals. Therefore, TNBC should be considered as an additional criterion for panel based genetic testing.

Xu MD, Liu SL, Zheng BB, et al.
The radiotherapy-sensitization effect of cantharidin: Mechanisms involving cell cycle regulation, enhanced DNA damage, and inhibited DNA damage repair.
Pancreatology. 2018; 18(7):822-832 [PubMed] Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Cantharidin is an inhibitor of protein phosphatase 2 A (PP2A), and has been frequently used in clinical practice. In our previous study, we proved that cantharidin could arrest cell cycle in G2/M phase. Since cells at G2/M phase are sensitive to radiotherapy, in the present study, we investigated the radiotherapy-sesitization effect of cantharidin and the potential mechanisms involved.
METHODS: Cell growth was determined by MTT assay. Cell cycle was evaluated by flow cytometry. DNA damage was visualized by phospho-Histone H2A.X staining. Expression of mRNA was tested by microarray assay and real-time PCR. Clinical information and RNA-Seq expression data were derived from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) pancreatic cancer cohort. Survival analysis was obtained by Kaplan-Meier estimates.
RESULTS: Cantharidin strengthened the growth inhibition effect of irradiation. Cantharidin drove pancreatic cancer cells out of quiescent G0/G1 phase and arrested cell cycle in G2/M phase. As a result, cantharidin strengthened DNA damage which was induced by irradiation. Moreover, cantharidin repressed expressions of several genes participating in DNA damage repair, including UBE2T, RPA1, GTF2HH5, LIG1, POLD3, RMI2, XRCC1, PRKDC, FANC1, FAAP100, RAD50, RAD51D, RAD51B and DMC1, through JNK, ERK, PKC, p38 and/or NF-κB pathway dependent manners. Among these genes, worse overall survival for pancreatic cancer patients were associated with high mRNA expressions of POLD3, RMI2, PRKDC, FANC1, RAD50 and RAD51B, all of which could be down-regulated by cantharidin.
CONCLUSION: Cantharidin can sensitize pancreatic cancer cells to radiotherapy. Multiple mechanisms, including cell cycle regulation, enhanced DNA damage, and inhibited DNA damage repair, may be involved.

Castéra L, Harter V, Muller E, et al.
Landscape of pathogenic variations in a panel of 34 genes and cancer risk estimation from 5131 HBOC families.
Genet Med. 2018; 20(12):1677-1686 [PubMed] Related Publications
PURPOSE: Integration of gene panels in the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) requires a careful evaluation of the risk associated with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs) detected in each gene. Here we analyzed 34 genes in 5131 suspected HBOC index cases by next-generation sequencing.
METHODS: Using the Exome Aggregation Consortium data sets plus 571 individuals from the French Exome Project, we simulated the probability that an individual from the Exome Aggregation Consortium carries a PV and compared it to the estimated frequency within the HBOC population.
RESULTS: Odds ratio conferred by PVs within BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, ATM, BRIP1, CHEK2, and MSH6 were estimated at 13.22 [10.01-17.22], 8.61 [6.78-10.82], 8.22 [4.91-13.05], 4.54 [2.55-7.48], 5.23 [1.46-13.17], 3.20 [2.14-4.53], 2.49 [1.42-3.97], 1.67 [1.18-2.27], and 2.50 [1.12-4.67], respectively. PVs within RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 were associated with ovarian cancer family history (OR = 11.36 [5.78-19.59], 12.44 [2.94-33.30] and 3.82 [1.66-7.11]). PALB2 PVs were associated with bilateral breast cancer (OR = 16.17 [5.48-34.10]) and BARD1 PVs with triple-negative breast cancer (OR = 11.27 [3.37-25.01]). Burden tests performed in both patients and the French Exome Project population confirmed the association of PVs of BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51C with HBOC.
CONCLUSION: Our results validate the integration of PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D in the diagnosis of HBOC and suggest that the other genes are involved in an oligogenic determinism.

Schayek H, Korach H, Laitman Y, et al.
Mutational analysis of candidate genes in Israeli male breast cancer cases.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018; 170(2):399-404 [PubMed] Related Publications
PURPOSE: To define the mutational spectrum of several candidate gene mutations in Israeli male breast cancer cases.
METHODS: MBC cases counselled at the Oncogenetics unit, Sheba Medical Center from January 1998 to June 2017 were included. Relevant clinical and oncological data and cancer phenotype were retrieved. All participants were genotyped for the predominant Jewish BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations using a chip-based assay. Those who tested negative were further genotyped for three recurring mutations in CHEK2 (c.1100delC, p.S428F, p.I157T), and single mutations in the FANCM (c.5791C>T), and RAD51D (c.556C>T) genes, by direct sequencing. The ethics committee approved the study.
RESULTS: Overall, 61 MBC were identified and genotyped, 41 (67.2%) were Ashkenazim, age at diagnosis was 58.1 ± 12.6 years, and 31 (50.8%) had a family history of cancer. Of genotyped individuals, one (1.6%) harboured the 185delAG* BRCA1 mutation, 7 (11.4%) the 6174delT*BRCA2 mutation and 2 (3.2%) other recurring mutations in BRCA2 (overall 10/61-16.4% BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers). Of BRCA-negative cases, 3/51 (5.9%) carried the p.S428F *CHEK2 mutation. None was a carrier of the other genotyped mutations in CHEK2, FANCM or RAD51D.
CONCLUSION: BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2 germline mutations contribute to inherited predisposition to MBC in Israel.

Hauke J, Horvath J, Groß E, et al.
Gene panel testing of 5589 BRCA1/2-negative index patients with breast cancer in a routine diagnostic setting: results of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.
Cancer Med. 2018; 7(4):1349-1358 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
The prevalence of germ line mutations in non-BRCA1/2 genes associated with hereditary breast cancer (BC) is low, and the role of some of these genes in BC predisposition and pathogenesis is conflicting. In this study, 5589 consecutive BC index patients negative for pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations and 2189 female controls were screened for germ line mutations in eight cancer predisposition genes (ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53). All patients met the inclusion criteria of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer for germ line testing. The highest mutation prevalence was observed in the CHEK2 gene (2.5%), followed by ATM (1.5%) and PALB2 (1.2%). The mutation prevalence in each of the remaining genes was 0.3% or lower. Using Exome Aggregation Consortium control data, we confirm significant associations of heterozygous germ line mutations with BC for ATM (OR: 3.63, 95%CI: 2.67-4.94), CDH1 (OR: 17.04, 95%CI: 3.54-82), CHEK2 (OR: 2.93, 95%CI: 2.29-3.75), PALB2 (OR: 9.53, 95%CI: 6.25-14.51), and TP53 (OR: 7.30, 95%CI: 1.22-43.68). NBN germ line mutations were not significantly associated with BC risk (OR:1.39, 95%CI: 0.73-2.64). Due to their low mutation prevalence, the RAD51C and RAD51D genes require further investigation. Compared with control datasets, predicted damaging rare missense variants were significantly more prevalent in CHEK2 and TP53 in BC index patients. Compared with the overall sample, only TP53 mutation carriers show a significantly younger age at first BC diagnosis. We demonstrate a significant association of deleterious variants in the CHEK2, PALB2, and TP53 genes with bilateral BC. Both, ATM and CHEK2, were negatively associated with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumor phenotypes. A particularly high CHEK2 mutation prevalence (5.2%) was observed in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive tumors.

Sánchez-Bermúdez AI, Sarabia-Meseguer MD, García-Aliaga Á, et al.
Mutational analysis of RAD51C and RAD51D genes in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families from Murcia (southeastern Spain).
Eur J Med Genet. 2018; 61(6):355-361 [PubMed] Related Publications
RAD51C and RAD51D have been defined as susceptibility genes for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome in several studies. In the present study, a mutation analysis of these genes was performed on non BRCA1/2 families. RAD51C and RAD51D genes were analyzed in 141 and 77 families, respectively. The analysis included direct sequencing and multiple ligation probe analysis. The RAD51C pathogenic variant c.404G > A was identified in a breast and ovarian cancer family (0.7%), while the RAD51D pathogenic variant c.694C > T was described in an ovarian cancer family (1.3%). Moreover, three unknown clinical significance variants were detected: c.307T > G in RAD51C, and c.413A > G and c.715C > T in RAD51D. No large genomic rearrangements (LGRs) were found. RAD51D carriers suffered from premenopausal ovarian tumors. These results increase our knowledge about the RAD51C and RAD51D mutation spectrum and support the notion that these genes should be included in the gene panel testing performed on patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome.

Manchanda R, Patel S, Gordeev VS, et al.
Cost-effectiveness of Population-Based BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 Mutation Testing in Unselected General Population Women.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018; 110(7):714-725 [PubMed] Related Publications
Background: The cost-effectiveness of population-based panel testing for high- and moderate-penetrance ovarian cancer (OC)/breast cancer (BC) gene mutations is unknown. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 mutation testing compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH) testing in unselected general population women.
Methods: A decision-analytic model comparing lifetime costs and effects of criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing is compared with BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing in those fulfilling clinical criteria/strong FH of cancer (≥10% BRCA1/BRCA2 probability) and all women age 30 years or older. Analyses are presented for UK and US populations. Identified carriers undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 carriers can opt for magnetic resonance imaging/mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) enabled model uncertainty evaluation. Outcomes include OC, BC, and additional heart disease deaths. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), OC incidence, BC incidence, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. The time horizon is lifetime and perspective is payer.
Results: Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing, clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is cost-effective (ICER = £7629.65/QALY or $49 282.19/QALY; 0.04 days' life-expectancy gained). Population-based testing for BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 mutations is the most cost-effective strategy compared with current policy: ICER = £21 599.96/QALY or $54 769.78/QALY (9.34 or 7.57 days' life-expectancy gained). At £30 000/QALY and $100 000/QALY willingness-to-pay thresholds, population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 panel testing is the preferred strategy in 83.7% and 92.7% of PSA simulations; criteria/FH-based panel testing is preferred in 16.2% and 5.8% of simulations, respectively. Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing can prevent 1.86%/1.91% of BC and 3.2%/4.88% of OC in UK/US women: 657/655 OC cases and 2420/2386 BC cases prevented per million.
Conclusions: Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is more cost-effective than any clinical criteria/FH-based strategy. Clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is more cost-effective than BRCA1/BRCA2 testing alone.

Golmard L, Castéra L, Krieger S, et al.
Contribution of germline deleterious variants in the RAD51 paralogs to breast and ovarian cancers.
Eur J Hum Genet. 2017; 25(12):1345-1353 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
RAD51 paralogs (RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, XRCC2, and XRCC3) have recently been involved in breast and ovarian cancer predisposition: RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D in ovarian cancer, RAD51B and XRCC2 in breast cancer. The aim of this study was to estimate the contribution of deleterious variants in the five RAD51 paralogs to breast and ovarian cancers. The five RAD51 paralog genes were analyzed by next-generation sequencing technologies in germline DNA from 2649 consecutive patients diagnosed with breast and/or ovarian cancer. Twenty-one different deleterious variants were identified in the RAD51 paralogs in 30 patients: RAD51B (n = 4), RAD51C (n = 12), RAD51D (n = 7), XRCC2 (n = 2), and XRCC3 (n = 5). The overall deleterious variant rate was 1.13% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-1.55%) (30/2649), including 15 variants in breast cancer only cases (15/2063; 0.73% (95% CI: 0.34-1.11%)) and 15 variants in cases with at least one ovarian cancer (15/570; 2.63% (95% CI: 1.24-4.02%)). This study is the first evaluation of the five RAD51 paralogs in breast and ovarian cancer predisposition and it demonstrates that deleterious variants can be present in breast cancer only cases. Moreover, this is the first time that XRCC3 deleterious variants have been identified in breast and ovarian cancer cases.

Manchanda R, Menon U
Setting the Threshold for Surgical Prevention in Women at Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer.
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018; 28(1):34-42 [PubMed] Related Publications
The number of ovarian cancer cases is predicted to rise by 14% in Europe and 55% worldwide over the next 2 decades. The current absence of a screening program, rising drug/treatment costs, and only marginal improvements in survival seen over the past 30 years suggest the need for maximizing primary surgical prevention to reduce the burden of ovarian cancer. Primary surgical prevention through risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is well established as the most effective method for preventing ovarian cancer. In the UK, it has traditionally been offered to high-risk women (>10% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer) who have completed their family. The cost-effectiveness of RRSO in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers older than 35 years is well established. Recently, RRSO has been shown to be cost-effective in postmenopausal women at lifetime ovarian cancer risks of 5% or greater and in premenopausal women at lifetime risks greater than 4%. The acceptability, uptake, and satisfaction with RRSO at these intermediate-risk levels remain to be established. Prospective outcome data on risk-reducing salpingectomy and delayed-oophorectomy for preventing ovarian cancer is lacking, and hence, this is best offered for primary prevention within the context and safe environment of a clinical trial. An estimated 63% of ovarian cancers occur in women with greater than 4% lifetime risk and 53% in those with 5% or greater lifetime-risk. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy can be offered for primary surgical prevention to women at intermediate risk levels (4%-5% to 10%). This includes unaffected women who have completed their family and have RAD51C, RAD51D, or BRIP1 gene mutations; first-degree relatives of women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer; BRCA mutation-negative women from high-risk breast-and-ovarian cancer or ovarian-cancer-only families. In those with BRCA1, RAD51C/RAD51D/MMR mutations and the occasional families with a history of ovarian cancer in their 40s, surgery needs to be considered at younger than 45. In other moderate-risk gene mutation carriers and those with polygenic risk, RRSO needs be considered at 50. There is need for establishment/expansion of well-defined pathways to increase clinical access to RRSO. It is time to lower the risk threshold for RRSO to enable introduction of a targeted primary prevention approach, which could significantly impact the future burden of ovarian cancer.

Harter P, Hauke J, Heitz F, et al.
Prevalence of deleterious germline variants in risk genes including BRCA1/2 in consecutive ovarian cancer patients (AGO-TR-1).
PLoS One. 2017; 12(10):e0186043 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Identification of families at risk for ovarian cancer offers the opportunity to consider prophylactic surgery thus reducing ovarian cancer mortality. So far, identification of potentially affected families in Germany was solely performed via family history and numbers of affected family members with breast or ovarian cancer. However, neither the prevalence of deleterious variants in BRCA1/2 in ovarian cancer in Germany nor the reliability of family history as trigger for genetic counselling has ever been evaluated.
METHODS: Prospective counseling and germline testing of consecutive patients with primary diagnosis or with platinum-sensitive relapse of an invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. Testing included 25 candidate and established risk genes. Among these 25 genes, 16 genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, NBN, PMS2, PTEN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, STK11, TP53) were defined as established cancer risk genes. A positive family history was defined as at least one relative with breast cancer or ovarian cancer or breast cancer in personal history.
RESULTS: In total, we analyzed 523 patients: 281 patients with primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer and 242 patients with relapsed disease. Median age at primary diagnosis was 58 years (range 16-93) and 406 patients (77.6%) had a high-grade serous ovarian cancer. In total, 27.9% of the patients showed at least one deleterious variant in all 25 investigated genes and 26.4% in the defined 16 risk genes. Deleterious variants were most prevalent in the BRCA1 (15.5%), BRCA2 (5.5%), RAD51C (2.5%) and PALB2 (1.1%) genes. The prevalence of deleterious variants did not differ significantly between patients at primary diagnosis and relapse. The prevalence of deleterious variants in BRCA1/2 (and in all 16 risk genes) in patients <60 years was 30.2% (33.2%) versus 10.6% (18.9%) in patients ≥60 years. Family history was positive in 43% of all patients. Patients with a positive family history had a prevalence of deleterious variants of 31.6% (36.0%) versus 11.4% (17.6%) and histologic subtype of high grade serous ovarian cancer versus other showed a prevalence of deleterious variants of 23.2% (29.1%) and 10.2% (14.8%), respectively. Testing only for BRCA1/2 would miss in our series more than 5% of the patients with a deleterious variant in established risk genes.
CONCLUSIONS: 26.4% of all patients harbor at least one deleterious variant in established risk genes. The threshold of 10% mutation rate which is accepted for reimbursement by health care providers in Germany was observed in all subgroups analyzed and neither age at primary diagnosis nor histo-type or family history sufficiently enough could identify a subgroup not eligible for genetic counselling and testing. Genetic testing should therefore be offered to every patient with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer and limiting testing to BRCA1/2 seems to be not sufficient.

Eoh KJ, Kim JE, Park HS, et al.
Detection of Germline Mutations in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Using Multi-gene Panels: Beyond BRCA1/2.
Cancer Res Treat. 2018; 50(3):917-925 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
Purpose: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows simultaneous sequencing of multiple cancer susceptibility genes and may represent a more efficient and less expensive approach than sequential testing. We assessed the frequency of germline mutations in individuals with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), using multi-gene panels and NGS.
Materials and Methods: Patients with EOC (n=117) with/without a family history of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited consecutively, from March 2016 toDecember 2016.GermlineDNAwas sequenced using 35-gene NGS panel, in order to identify mutations. Upon the detection of a genetic alteration using the panel, results were cross-validated using direct sequencing.
Results: Thirty-eight patients (32.5%) had 39 pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations in eight genes, including BRCA1 (n=21), BRCA2 (n=10), BRIP1 (n=1), CHEK2 (n=2), MSH2 (n=1), POLE (n=1), RAD51C (n=2), and RAD51D (n=2). Among 64 patients with a family history of cancer, 27 (42.2%) had 27 pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations, and six (9.3%) had mutations in genes other than BRCA1/2, such as CHECK2, MSH2, POLE, and RAD51C. Fifty-five patients (47.0%) were identified to carry only variants of uncertain significance.
Conclusion: Using the multi-gene panel test, we found that, of all patients included in our study, 32.5% had germline cancer-predisposing mutations. NGS was confirmed to substantially improve the detection rates of a wide spectrum of mutations in EOC patients compared with those obtained with the BRCA1/2 testing alone.

Lilyquist J, LaDuca H, Polley E, et al.
Frequency of mutations in a large series of clinically ascertained ovarian cancer cases tested on multi-gene panels compared to reference controls.
Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 147(2):375-380 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
OBJECTIVES: Given the lack of adequate screening modalities, knowledge of ovarian cancer risks for carriers of pathogenic alterations in predisposition genes is important for decisions about risk-reduction by salpingo-oophorectomy. We sought to determine which genes assayed on multi-gene panels are associated with ovarian cancer, the magnitude of the associations, and for which clinically meaningful associations could be ruled out.
METHODS: 7768 adult ovarian cancer cases of European ancestry referred to a single clinical testing laboratory underwent multi-gene panel testing for detection of pathogenic alterations in known or suspected ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. A targeted capture approach was employed to assay each of 19 genes for the presence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic alterations. Mutation frequencies in ovarian cancer cases were compared to mutation frequencies in individuals from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC). Analyses stratified by family and personal history of other cancers and age at diagnosis were also performed.
RESULTS: Significant associations (p<0.001) were identified between alterations in 11 genes and ovarian cancer, with eight of these displaying ≥5-fold increased risk (BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, MSH2, MSH6, RAD51C, RAD51D). Relative risks of ovarian cancer greater than two-fold were also observed for ATM, but could reliably be ruled out for RAD50 and CHEK2.
CONCLUSIONS: These results will inform clinical management of women found to carry pathogenic alterations in genes tested on multi-gene panels. The knowledge that some genes are not associated with OC can reduce concerns of women found to carry pathogenic alterations in those genes.

Hallamies S, Pelttari LM, Poikonen-Saksela P, et al.
CHEK2 c.1100delC mutation is associated with an increased risk for male breast cancer in Finnish patient population.
BMC Cancer. 2017; 17(1):620 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Several susceptibility genes have been established for female breast cancer, of which mutations in BRCA1 and especially in BRCA2 are also known risk factors for male breast cancer (MBC). The role of other breast cancer genes in MBC is less well understood.
METHODS: In this study, we have genotyped 68 MBC patients for the known breast or ovarian cancer associated mutations in the Finnish population in CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and FANCM genes.
RESULTS: CHEK2 c.1100delC mutation was found in 4 patients (5.9%), which is significantly more frequent than in the control population (OR: 4.47, 95% CI 1.51-13.18, p = 0.019). Four CHEK2 I157T variants were also detected, but the frequency did not significantly differ from population controls (p = 0.781). No RAD51C, RAD51D, PALB2, or FANCM mutations were found.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the CHEK2 c.1100delC mutation is associated with an increased risk for MBC in the Finnish population.

Domchek SM
Reversion Mutations with Clinical Use of PARP Inhibitors: Many Genes, Many Versions.
Cancer Discov. 2017; 7(9):937-939 [PubMed] Related Publications
Reversion mutations associated with PARP inhibitor resistance have been identified in tumors with

Lee BH
Commentary on: "Inherited DNA-repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer." Pritchard CC, Mateo J, Walsh MF, De Sarkar N, Abida W, Beltran H, Garofalo A, Gulati R, Carreira S, Eeles R, Elemento O, Rubin MA, Robinson D, Lonigro R, Hussain M, Chinnaiyan A, Vinson J, Filipenko J, Garraway L, Taplin ME, AlDubayan S, Han GC, Beightol M, Morrissey C, Nghiem B, Cheng HH, Montgomery B, Walsh T, Casadei S, Berger M, Zhang L, Zehir A, Vijai J, Scher HI, Sawyers C, Schultz N, Kantoff PW, Solit D, Robson M, Van Allen EM, Offit K, de Bono J, Nelson PS. N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 4;375(5):443-53.
Urol Oncol. 2017; 35(9):575-576 [PubMed] Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Inherited mutations in DNA-repair genes such as BRCA2 are associated with increased risks of lethal prostate cancer. Although the prevalence of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with localized prostate cancer who are unselected for family predisposition is insufficient to warrant routine testing, the frequency of such mutations in patients with metastatic prostate cancer has not been established.
METHODS: We recruited 692 men with documented metastatic prostate cancer who were unselected for family history of cancer or age at diagnosis. We isolated germline DNA and used multiplex sequencing assays to assess mutations in 20 DNA-repair genes associated with autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndromes.
RESULTS: A total of 84 germline DNA-repair gene mutations that were presumed to be deleterious were identified in 82 men (11.8%); mutations were found in 16 genes, including BRCA2 (37 men [5.3%]), ATM (11 [1.6%]), CHEK2 (10 [1.9% of 534 men with data]), BRCA1 (6 [0.9%]), RAD51D (3 [0.4%]), and PALB2 (3 [0.4%]). Mutation frequencies did not differ according to whether a family history of prostate cancer was present or according to age at diagnosis. Overall, the frequency of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic prostate cancer significantly exceeded the prevalence of 4.6% among 499 men with localized prostate cancer (P<0.001), including men with high-risk disease, and the prevalence of 2.7% in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, which includes 53,105 persons without a known cancer diagnosis (P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In our multicenter study, the incidence of germline mutations in genes mediating DNA-repair processes among men with metastatic prostate cancer was 11.8%, which was significantly higher than the incidence among men with localized prostate cancer. The frequencies of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic disease did not differ significantly according to age at diagnosis or family history of prostate cancer. (Funded by Stand Up To Cancer and others.).

Rivera B, Di Iorio M, Frankum J, et al.
Functionally Null
Cancer Res. 2017; 77(16):4517-4529 [PubMed] Related Publications
RAD51D is a key player in DNA repair by homologous recombination (HR), and

Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ
Commentary on "Inherited DNA-repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer". Pritchard CC, Mateo J, Walsh MF, De Sarkar N, Abida W, Beltran H, Garofalo A, Gulati R, Carreira S, Eeles R, Elemento O, Rubin MA, Robinson D, Lonigro R, Hussain M, Chinnaiyan A, Vinson J, Filipenko J, Garraway L, Taplin ME, AlDubayan S, Han GC, Beightol M, Morrissey C, Nghiem B, Cheng HH, Montgomery B, Walsh T, Casadei S, Berger M, Zhang L, Zehir A, Vijai J, Scher HI, Sawyers C, Schultz N, Kantoff PW, Solit D, Robson M, Van Allen EM, Offit K, de Bono J, Nelson PS. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(5):443-53.
Urol Oncol. 2017; 35(8):536-537 [PubMed] Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Inherited mutations in DNA-repair genes such as BRCA2 are associated with increased risks of lethal prostate cancer. Although the prevalence of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with localized prostate cancer who are unselected for family predisposition is insufficient to warrant routine testing, the frequency of such mutations in patients with metastatic prostate cancer has not been established.
METHODS: We recruited 692 men with documented metastatic prostate cancer who were unselected for family history of cancer or age at diagnosis. We isolated germline DNA and used multiplex sequencing assays to assess mutations in 20 DNA-repair genes associated with autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndromes.
RESULTS: A total of 84 germline DNA-repair gene mutations that were presumed to be deleterious were identified in 82 men (11.8%); mutations were found in 16 genes, including BRCA2 (37 men [5.3%]), ATM (11 [1.6%]), CHEK2 (10 [1.9% of 534 men with data]), BRCA1 (6 [0.9%]), RAD51D (3 [0.4%]), and PALB2 (3 [0.4%]). Mutation frequencies did not differ according to whether a family history of prostate cancer was present or according to age at diagnosis. Overall, the frequency of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic prostate cancer significantly exceeded the prevalence of 4.6% among 499 men with localized prostate cancer (P<0.001), including men with high-risk disease, and the prevalence of 2.7% in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, which includes 53,105 persons without a known cancer diagnosis (P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In our multicenter study, the incidence of germline mutations in genes mediating DNA-repair processes among men with metastatic prostate cancer was 11.8%, which was significantly higher than the incidence among men with localized prostate cancer. The frequencies of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic disease did not differ significantly according to age at diagnosis or family history of prostate cancer.

Stafford JL, Dyson G, Levin NK, et al.
Reanalysis of BRCA1/2 negative high risk ovarian cancer patients reveals novel germline risk loci and insights into missing heritability.
PLoS One. 2017; 12(6):e0178450 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
While up to 25% of ovarian cancer (OVCA) cases are thought to be due to inherited factors, the majority of genetic risk remains unexplained. To address this gap, we sought to identify previously undescribed OVCA risk variants through the whole exome sequencing (WES) and candidate gene analysis of 48 women with ovarian cancer and selected for high risk of genetic inheritance, yet negative for any known pathogenic variants in either BRCA1 or BRCA2. In silico SNP analysis was employed to identify suspect variants followed by validation using Sanger DNA sequencing. We identified five pathogenic variants in our sample, four of which are in two genes featured on current multi-gene panels; (RAD51D, ATM). In addition, we found a pathogenic FANCM variant (R1931*) which has been recently implicated in familial breast cancer risk. Numerous rare and predicted to be damaging variants of unknown significance were detected in genes on current commercial testing panels, most prominently in ATM (n = 6) and PALB2 (n = 5). The BRCA2 variant p.K3326*, resulting in a 93 amino acid truncation, was overrepresented in our sample (odds ratio = 4.95, p = 0.01) and coexisted in the germline of these women with other deleterious variants, suggesting a possible role as a modifier of genetic penetrance. Furthermore, we detected loss of function variants in non-panel genes involved in OVCA relevant pathways; DNA repair and cell cycle control, including CHEK1, TP53I3, REC8, HMMR, RAD52, RAD1, POLK, POLQ, and MCM4. In summary, our study implicates novel risk loci as well as highlights the clinical utility for retesting BRCA1/2 negative OVCA patients by genomic sequencing and analysis of genes in relevant pathways.

Kondrashova O, Nguyen M, Shield-Artin K, et al.
Secondary Somatic Mutations Restoring
Cancer Discov. 2017; 7(9):984-998 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
High-grade epithelial ovarian carcinomas containing mutated

Heng J, Zhang F, Guo X, et al.
Integrated analysis of promoter methylation and expression of telomere related genes in breast cancer.
Oncotarget. 2017; 8(15):25442-25454 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
Telomeres at the ends of eukaryotic chromosomes play a critical role in tumorgenesis. Using microfluidic PCR and next-generation bisulfite sequencing technology, we investigated the promoter methylation of 29 telomere related genes in paired tumor and normal tissues from 184 breast cancer patients. The expression of significantly differentially methylated genes was quantified using qPCR method.We observed that the average methylation level of the 29 telomere related genes was significant higher in tumor than that in normal tissues (P = 4.30E-21). A total of 4 genes (RAD50, RTEL, TERC and TRF1) showed significant hyper-methylation in breast tumor tissues. RAD51D showed significant methylation difference among the four breast cancer subtypes. The methylation of TERC showed significant association with ER status of breast cancer. The expression profiles of the 4 hyper-methylated genes showed significantly reduced expression in tumor tissues. The integration analysis of methylation and expression of these 4 genes showed a good performance in breast cancer prediction (AUC = 0.947).Our results revealed the methylation pattern of telomere related genes in breast cancer and suggested a novel 4-gene panel might be a valuable biomarker for breast cancer diagnosis.

Tedaldi G, Tebaldi M, Zampiga V, et al.
Multiple-gene panel analysis in a case series of 255 women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.
Oncotarget. 2017; 8(29):47064-47075 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
As new genes predisposing to breast (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) are constantly emerging, the use of panels of genes analyzed by Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) is increasing in clinical diagnostics. The identification of a large number of new germline mutations allows for deeper knowledge of cancer predisposition, although raising many questions about patient management.BC and OC patients recruited by our counseling service between 2012-2015 were included in this study. DNA was extracted from peripheral blood and a panel of 94 genes involved in hereditary tumors was analyzed by NGS. Patient clinical features of BC and OC and cancer family history were collected and compared to the patient genetic profile.A total of 255 women were analyzed, 57 of whom had a pathogenic mutation in BRCA1/2 genes, and 17 carried pathogenic mutations in other genes, such as PALB2, ATM, BRIP1, RAD51D, MSH6, PPM1D, RECQL4, ERCC3, TSC2, SLX4 and other Fanconi anemia genes.Patients with a pathogenic mutation in genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 showed no significant difference from the BRCA1/2-mutated carriers with respect to age at diagnosis and clinical features, suggesting that mutations in other genes could pose a high risk of cancer development.These patients had a much higher percentage of bilateral breast cancer (BBC) and a lower rate of OC than BRCA-mutated patients and patients with no pathogenic mutations: as a consequence, the surveillance protocol should be customized to the patient genetic characteristics.

Couch FJ, Shimelis H, Hu C, et al.
Associations Between Cancer Predisposition Testing Panel Genes and Breast Cancer.
JAMA Oncol. 2017; 3(9):1190-1196 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
Importance: Germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose to an increased lifetime risk of breast cancer. However, the relevance of germline variants in other genes from multigene hereditary cancer testing panels is not well defined.
Objective: To determine the risks of breast cancer associated with germline variants in cancer predisposition genes.
Design, Setting, and Participants: A study population of 65 057 patients with breast cancer receiving germline genetic testing of cancer predisposition genes with hereditary cancer multigene panels. Associations between pathogenic variants in non-BRCA1 and non-BRCA2 predisposition genes and breast cancer risk were estimated in a case-control analysis of patients with breast cancer and Exome Aggregation Consortium reference controls. The women underwent testing between March 15, 2012, and June 30, 2016.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast cancer risk conferred by pathogenic variants in non-BRCA1 and non-BRCA2 predisposition genes.
Results: The mean (SD) age at diagnosis for the 65 057 women included in the analysis was 48.5 (11.1) years. The frequency of pathogenic variants in 21 panel genes identified in 41 611 consecutively tested white women with breast cancer was estimated at 10.2%. After exclusion of BRCA1, BRCA2, and syndromic breast cancer genes (CDH1, PTEN, and TP53), observed pathogenic variants in 5 of 16 genes were associated with high or moderately increased risks of breast cancer: ATM (OR, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.22-3.62), BARD1 (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.31-3.63), CHEK2 (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.31-1.67), PALB2 (OR, 7.46; 95% CI, 5.12-11.19), and RAD51D (OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.21-7.88). Conversely, variants in the BRIP1 and RAD51C ovarian cancer risk genes; the MRE11A, RAD50, and NBN MRN complex genes; the MLH1 and PMS2 mismatch repair genes; and NF1 were not associated with increased risks of breast cancer.
Conclusions and Relevance: This study establishes several panel genes as high- and moderate-risk breast cancer genes and provides estimates of breast cancer risk associated with pathogenic variants in these genes among individuals qualifying for clinical genetic testing.

Ring KL, Garcia C, Thomas MH, Modesitt SC
Current and future role of genetic screening in gynecologic malignancies.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217(5):512-521 [PubMed] Related Publications
The world of hereditary cancers has seen exponential growth in recent years. While hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome account for the majority of mutations encountered by gynecologists, newly identified deleterious genetic mutations continue to be unearthed with their associated risks of malignancies. However, these advances in genetic cancer predispositions then force practitioners and their patients to confront the uncertainties of these less commonly identified mutations and the fact that there is limited evidence to guide them in expected cancer risk and appropriate risk-reduction strategies. Given the speed of information, it is imperative to involve cancer genetics experts when counseling these patients. In addition, coordination of screening and care in conjunction with specialty high-risk clinics, if available, allows for patients to have centralized management for multiple cancer risks under the guidance of physicians with experience counseling these patients. The objective of this review is to present the current literature regarding genetic mutations associated with gynecologic malignancies as well to propose screening and risk-reduction options for these high-risk patients.

Afghahi A, Telli ML, Kurian AW
Genetics of triple-negative breast cancer: Implications for patient care.
Curr Probl Cancer. 2016 Mar - Aug; 40(2-4):130-140 [PubMed] Related Publications
Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), defined as lacking expression of the estrogen and progesterone receptors (ER/PR) and amplification of the HER2 oncogene, often have a more aggressive disease course than do patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, including higher rates of visceral and central nervous system metastases, early cancer recurrences and deaths. Triple-negative breast cancer is associated with a young age at diagnosis and both African and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry, the latter due to three common founder mutations in the highly penetrant cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2). In the past decade, there has been a surge both in genetic testing technology and in patient access to such testing. Advances in genetic testing have enabled more rapid and less expensive commercial sequencing than could be imagined only a few years ago. Massively parallel, next-generation sequencing allows the simultaneous analysis of many different genes. Studies of TNBC patients in the current era have revealed associations of TNBC with mutations in several moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, including PALB2, BARD1, BRIP1, RAD51C and RAD51D. Interestingly, many of these genes, like BRCA1/2, are involved in homologous recombination DNA double-stranded repair. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of pathogenic germline gene mutations associated with TNBC and the early detection and prevention strategies for women at risk of developing this high-risk breast cancer subtype. Furthermore, we discuss recent the advances in targeted therapies for TNBC patients with a hereditary predisposition, including the role of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancers.

Andrews L, Mutch DG
Hereditary Ovarian Cancer and Risk Reduction.
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017; 41:31-48 [PubMed] Related Publications
Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome in a majority of families and 14% of epithelial ovarian cancer cases. Despite next-generation sequencing, other identified genes (Lynch Syndrome, RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1) account for only a small proportion of cases. The risk of ovarian cancer by age 70 is approximately 40% for BRCA1 and 18% for BRCA2. Most of these cancers are high-grade serous cancers that predominantly arise in the fimbriae of the fallopian tube. Ovarian screening does not improve outcomes, so women at high risk are recommended to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy around the age of 40, followed by hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Specimens should be carefully examined for occult malignancy. Mutation carriers may benefit from newly developed poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors. Genetic testing should only be performed after careful counseling, particularly if testing involves the testing of panels of genes that may identify unsuspected disease predisposition or confusing variants of uncertain significance.

Jalkh N, Chouery E, Haidar Z, et al.
Next-generation sequencing in familial breast cancer patients from Lebanon.
BMC Med Genomics. 2017; 10(1):8 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
BACKGROUND: Familial breast cancer (BC) represents 5 to 10% of all BC cases. Mutations in two high susceptibility BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes explain 16-40% of familial BC, while other high, moderate and low susceptibility genes explain up to 20% more of BC families. The Lebanese reported prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 deleterious mutations (5.6% and 12.5%) were lower than those reported in the literature.
METHODS: In the presented study, 45 Lebanese patients with a reported family history of BC were tested using Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) technique followed by Sanger sequencing validation.
RESULTS: Nineteen pathogenic mutations were identified in this study. These 19 mutations were found in 13 different genes such as: ABCC12, APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, ERCC6, MSH2, POLH, PRF1, SLX4, STK11 and TP53.
CONCLUSIONS: In this first application of WES on BC in Lebanon, we detected six BRCA1 and BRCA2 deleterious mutations in seven patients, with a total prevalence of 15.5%, a figure that is lower than those reported in the Western literature. The p.C44F mutation in the BRCA1 gene appeared twice in this study, suggesting a founder effect. Importantly, the overall mutation prevalence was equal to 40%, justifying the urgent need to deploy WES for the identification of genetic variants responsible for familial BC in the Lebanese population.

Graffeo R, Livraghi L, Pagani O, et al.
Time to incorporate germline multigene panel testing into breast and ovarian cancer patient care.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016; 160(3):393-410 [PubMed] Related Publications
PURPOSE: Genetic evaluation is increasingly becoming an integral part of the management of women with newly diagnosed breast and ovarian cancer (OC), and of individuals at high risk for these diseases. Genetic counseling and testing have been incorporated into oncological care to help and complete management and treatment strategies. Risk assessment and early detection strategies in individuals with BRCA1/2 mutations and with Lynch syndrome have been quite extensively studied, whereas much less is known about the management of mutation carriers with less common high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes (PTEN, TP53, STK11, CDH1), and particularly those who carry mutations in moderate-penetrance genes (e.g., PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, NF1, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1).
METHODS: The latter patient groups represent important ongoing research opportunities to enable informed counseling about appropriate clinical management.
CONCLUSION: We summarize the current guidelines for the management of high and moderate-penetrance mutations for breast and OC susceptibility. Continuous updating of guidelines for proper clinical management of these individuals is ongoing because of rapid advances in technology and knowledge in this field. Thus, we exhort the use of multigene panels for the assessment of cancer risk beyond the classic predisposition syndromes as a new standard of care in cancer genetics. We further support an increase of genetic counselors in Europe and use of their expertise to support genetic testing in specialist multidisciplinary teams.

Ma H, Song T, Wang T, Wang S
Influence of Human p53 on Plant Development.
PLoS One. 2016; 11(9):e0162840 [PubMed] Free Access to Full Article Related Publications
Mammalian p53 is a super tumor suppressor and plays a key role in guarding genome from DNA damage. However, p53 has not been found in plants which do not bear cancer although they constantly expose to ionizing radiation of ultraviolet light. Here we introduced p53 into the model plant Arabidopsis and examined p53-conferred phenotype in plant. Most strikingly, p53 caused early senescence and fasciation. In plants, fasciation has been shown as a result of the elevated homologous DNA recombination. Consistently, a reporter with overlapping segments of the GUS gene (1445) showed that the frequency of homologous recombination was highly induced in p53-transgenic plants. In contrast to p53, SUPPRESSOR OF NPR1-1 INDUCIBLE 1 (SNI1), as a negative regulator of homologous recombination in plants, is not present in mammals. Comet assay and clonogenic survival assay demonstrated that SNI1 inhibited DNA damage repair caused by either ionizing radiation or hydroxyurea in human osteosarcoma U2OS cancer cells. RAD51D is a recombinase in homologous recombination and functions downstream of SNI1 in plants. Interestingly, p53 rendered the sni1 mutants madly branching of inflorescence, a phenotype of fasciation, whereas rad51d mutant fully suppressed the p53-induced phenotype, indicating that human p53 action in plant is mediated by the SNI1-RAD51D signaling pathway. The reciprocal species-swap tests of p53 and SNI1 in human and Arabidopsis manifest that these species-specific proteins play a common role in homologous recombination across kingdoms of animals and plants.

Disclaimer: This site is for educational purposes only; it can not be used in diagnosis or treatment.

Cite this page: Cotterill SJ. RAD51D, Cancer Genetics Web: http://www.cancer-genetics.org/RAD51D.htm Accessed:

Creative Commons License
This page in Cancer Genetics Web by Simon Cotterill is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Note: content of abstracts copyright of respective publishers - seek permission where appropriate.

 [Home]    Page last revised: 30 August, 2019     Cancer Genetics Web, Established 1999