Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) Score Predicts Response to Platinum-Containing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Triple-Negative Breast CancerPURPOSE: BRCA1/2-mutated and some sporadic triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) have DNA repair defects and are sensitive to DNA-damaging therapeutics. Recently, three independent DNA-based measures of genomic instability were developed on the basis of loss of heterozygosity (LOH), telomeric allelic imbalance (TAI), and large-scale state transitions (LST). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We assessed a combined homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score, an unweighted sum of LOH, TAI, and LST scores, in three neoadjuvant TNBC trials of platinum-containing therapy. We then tested the association of HR deficiency, defined as HRD score ≥42 or BRCA1/2 mutation, with response to platinum-based therapy. RESULTS: In a trial of neoadjuvant platinum, gemcitabine, and iniparib, HR deficiency predicted residual cancer burden score of 0 or I (RCB 0/I) and pathologic complete response (pCR; OR = 4.96, P = 0.0036; OR = 6.52, P = 0.0058). HR deficiency remained a significant predictor of RCB 0/I when adjusted for clinical variables (OR = 5.86, P = 0.012). In two other trials of neoadjuvant cisplatin therapy, HR deficiency predicted RCB 0/I and pCR (OR = 10.18, P = 0.0011; OR = 17.00, P = 0.0066). In a multivariable model of RCB 0/I, HR deficiency retained significance when clinical variables were included (OR = 12.08, P = 0.0017). When restricted to BRCA1/2 nonmutated tumors, response was higher in patients with high HRD scores: RCB 0/I P = 0.062, pCR P = 0.063 in the neoadjuvant platinum, gemcitabine, and iniparib trial; RCB 0/I P = 0.0039, pCR P = 0.018 in the neoadjuvant cisplatin trials. CONCLUSIONS: HR deficiency identifies TNBC tumors, including BRCA1/2 nonmutated tumors more likely to respond to platinum-containing therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 22(15); 3764-73. ©2016 AACR.
Carboplatin in BRCA1/2-mutated and triple-negative breast cancer BRCAness subgroups: the TNT TrialPatterns of genomic loss of heterozygosity predict homologous recombination repair defects in epithelial ovarian cancerBACKGROUND: Defects in BRCA1, BRCA2, and other members of the homologous recombination pathway have potential therapeutic relevance when used to support agents that introduce or exploit double-stranded DNA breaks. This study examines the association between homologous recombination defects and genomic patterns of loss of heterozygosity (LOH). METHODS: Ovarian tumours from two independent data sets were characterised for defects in BRCA1, BRCA2, and RAD51C, and LOH profiles were generated. Publically available data were downloaded for a third independent data set. The same analyses were performed on 57 cancer cell lines. RESULTS: Loss of heterozygosity regions of intermediate size were observed more frequently in tumours with defective BRCA1 or BRCA2 (P=10(-11)). The homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score was defined as the number of these regions observed in a tumour sample. The association between HRD score and BRCA deficiency was validated in two independent ovarian cancer data sets (P=10(-5) and 10(-29)), and identified breast and pancreatic cell lines with BRCA defects. CONCLUSION: The HRD score appears capable of detecting homologous recombination defects regardless of aetiology or mechanism. This score could facilitate the use of PARP inhibitors and platinum in breast, ovarian, and other cancers.
Incidence and Outcome of <i>BRCA</i> Mutations in Unselected Patients with Triple Receptor-Negative Breast CancerPURPOSE: To investigate the incidence of germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutations in unselected patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and determine the prognostic significance of carrying a mutation. METHODS: DNA was obtained from 77 TNBC and normal tissues. BRCA1/2 exons/flanking regions were sequenced from tumor and patients classified as mutant or wild type (WT). Sequencing was repeated from normal tissue to identify germline and somatic mutations. Patient characteristics were compared with chi-square. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to determine the independent association of mutation status with outcome. RESULTS: Median age was 51 years (27-83 years). Fifteen patients (19.5%) had BRCA mutations: 12 (15.6%) in BRCA1 (one somatic), and 3 (3.9%) in BRCA2. Patients with BRCA mutations tended to be younger than WT, (P = 0.005). Grade, histology, and stage were not associated with mutation status. At a median follow-up of 43 months (7-214 months), there were 33 (42.9%) recurrences and 35 (45.5%) deaths. Five-year recurrence-free survival estimates were 51.7% for WT versus 86.2% for patients with mutations, (P = 0.031); and 5-year overall survival estimates were 52.8% for WT versus 73.3% for patients with mutations (P = 0.225). After adjustment, patients with BRCA mutations had a significantly better RFS (HR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.045-0.79, P = 0.016) compared with WT. CONCLUSIONS: In this unselected cohort of TNBC, we found a 19.5% incidence of BRCA mutations. Genetic testing should be discussed with patients with TNBC. Patients with TNBC with BRCA mutations had a significantly lower risk of relapse.
Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for <scp><i>BRCA</i></scp><i>1</i> and <scp><i>BRCA</i></scp><i>2</i> testing using next‐generation sequencing with a 25‐gene panelBACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows for simultaneous sequencing of multiple cancer susceptibility genes and, for an individual, may be more efficient and less expensive than sequential testing. The authors assessed the frequency of deleterious germline mutations among individuals with breast cancer who were referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) gene testing using a panel of 25 genes associated with inherited cancer predisposition. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using NGS in 2158 individuals, including 1781 who were referred for commercial BRCA1/2 gene testing (cohort 1) and 377 who had detailed personal and family history and had previously tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations (cohort 2). RESULTS: Mutations were identified in 16 genes, most frequently in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2. Among the participants in cohort 1, 9.3% carried a BRCA1/2 mutation, 3.9% carried a mutation in another breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility gene, and 0.3% carried an incidental mutation in another cancer susceptibility gene unrelated to breast or ovarian cancer. In cohort 2, the frequency of mutations in breast/ovarian-associated genes other than BRCA1/2 was 2.9%, and an additional 0.8% had an incidental mutation. In cohort 1, Lynch syndrome-related mutations were identified in 7 individuals. In contrast to BRCA1/2 mutations, neither age at breast cancer diagnosis nor family history of ovarian or young breast cancer predicted for other mutations. The frequency of mutations in genes other than BRCA1/2 was lower in Ashkenazi Jews compared with non-Ashkenazi individuals (P=.026). CONCLUSIONS: Using an NGS 25-gene panel, the frequency of mutations in genes other than BRCA1/2 was 4.3%, and most mutations (3.9%) were identified in genes associated with breast/ovarian cancer.