BACKGROUND: Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 (breast cancer 1, early onset; MIM 113705) increase breast and ovarian cancer [B(O)C] risk; however, many variants cannot be readily classified as deleterious or neutral. Unclassified variants (UVs) pose serious problems in genetic counseling. RNA-splicing analysis is essential for the assessment of many UVs. METHODS: Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis was used to genotype the BRCA1 c.591C>T variant in 685 index cases of B(O)C families, 326 sporadic breast cancer cases, and 450 healthy controls from Spain. In silico tools were used to predict the effect of the c.591C>T variant on splicing. In vitro splicing analysis was performed in 7 c.591C>T carriers and 10 noncarriers. cDNAs were PCR-amplified with primers designed to detect BRCA1 alternative splicing isoforms. The products were analyzed by capillary electrophoresis. Peak areas were used to quantify the relative abundance of each isoform. Sequencing through exonic single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) enabled us to discriminate wild-type and variant transcripts. RESULTS: c.591C>T was detected in B(O)C families (1.5%), breast cancer cases (0.3%), and controls (0.9%). c.591C>T induced BRCA1 exon 9 skipping and modified the relative expression of Delta(9,10), Delta(9,10,11B), Delta11B, and full-length isoforms. The mean ratio of Delta(9,10) to the full-length isoform increased from 0.25 in noncarriers to 1.5 in carriers. The mean Delta(9,10,11B)/Delta11B ratio increased from 0.2 to 4. Overall expression levels of c.591C>T and wild-type alleles were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a nonpathogenic role for the BRCA1 c.591C>T variant. Naturally occurring alternative splicing isoforms need to be considered when assessing the role of BRCA1 UVs on splicing.
BACKGROUND: Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 (breast cancer 1, early onset; MIM 113705) increase breast and ovarian cancer [B(O)C] risk; however, many variants cannot be readily classified as deleterious or neutral. Unclassified variants (UVs) pose serious problems in genetic counseling. RNA-splicing analysis is essential for the assessment of many UVs. METHODS: Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis was used to genotype the BRCA1 c.591C>T variant in 685 index cases of B(O)C families, 326 sporadic breast cancer cases, and 450 healthy controls from Spain. In silico tools were used to predict the effect of the c.591C>T variant on splicing. In vitro splicing analysis was performed in 7 c.591C>T carriers and 10 noncarriers. cDNAs were PCR-amplified with primers designed to detect BRCA1 alternative splicing isoforms. The products were analyzed by capillary electrophoresis. Peak areas were used to quantify the relative abundance of each isoform. Sequencing through exonic single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) enabled us to discriminate wild-type and variant transcripts. RESULTS: c.591C>T was detected in B(O)C families (1.5%), breast cancer cases (0.3%), and controls (0.9%). c.591C>T induced BRCA1 exon 9 skipping and modified the relative expression of Delta(9,10), Delta(9,10,11B), Delta11B, and full-length isoforms. The mean ratio of Delta(9,10) to the full-length isoform increased from 0.25 in noncarriers to 1.5 in carriers. The mean Delta(9,10,11B)/Delta11B ratio increased from 0.2 to 4. Overall expression levels of c.591C>T and wild-type alleles were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a nonpathogenic role for the BRCA1 c.591C>T variant. Naturally occurring alternative splicing isoforms need to be considered when assessing the role of BRCA1 UVs on splicing.
Authors: Barbara Wappenschmidt; Alexandra A Becker; Jan Hauke; Ute Weber; Stefanie Engert; Juliane Köhler; Karin Kast; Norbert Arnold; Kerstin Rhiem; Eric Hahnen; Alfons Meindl; Rita K Schmutzler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-12-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alberto Acedo; David J Sanz; Mercedes Durán; Mar Infante; Lucía Pérez-Cabornero; Cristina Miner; Eladio A Velasco Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2012-05-25 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Maxime P Vallée; Tonya L Di Sera; David A Nix; Andrew M Paquette; Michael T Parsons; Russel Bell; Andrea Hoffman; Frans B L Hogervorst; David E Goldgar; Amanda B Spurdle; Sean V Tavtigian Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Miguel de la Hoya; Omar Soukarieh; Irene López-Perolio; Ana Vega; Logan C Walker; Yvette van Ierland; Diana Baralle; Marta Santamariña; Vanessa Lattimore; Juul Wijnen; Philip Whiley; Ana Blanco; Michela Raponi; Jan Hauke; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Alexandra Becker; Thomas V O Hansen; Raquel Behar; KConFaB Investigators; Diether Niederacher; Norbert Arnold; Bernd Dworniczak; Doris Steinemann; Ulrike Faust; Wendy Rubinstein; Peter J Hulick; Claude Houdayer; Sandrine M Caputo; Laurent Castera; Tina Pesaran; Elizabeth Chao; Carole Brewer; Melissa C Southey; Christi J van Asperen; Christian F Singer; Jan Sullivan; Nicola Poplawski; Phuong Mai; Julian Peto; Nichola Johnson; Barbara Burwinkel; Harald Surowy; Stig E Bojesen; Henrik Flyger; Annika Lindblom; Sara Margolin; Jenny Chang-Claude; Anja Rudolph; Paolo Radice; Laura Galastri; Janet E Olson; Emily Hallberg; Graham G Giles; Roger L Milne; Irene L Andrulis; Gord Glendon; Per Hall; Kamila Czene; Fiona Blows; Mitul Shah; Qin Wang; Joe Dennis; Kyriaki Michailidou; Lesley McGuffog; Manjeet K Bolla; Antonis C Antoniou; Douglas F Easton; Fergus J Couch; Sean Tavtigian; Maaike P Vreeswijk; Michael Parsons; Huong D Meeks; Alexandra Martins; David E Goldgar; Amanda B Spurdle Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2016-03-23 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Ane Y Steffensen; Mette Dandanell; Lars Jønson; Bent Ejlertsen; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Finn C Nielsen; Thomas vO Hansen Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2014-03-26 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Michelle Wong-Brown; Mary McPhillips; Margaret Gleeson; Allan D Spigelman; Cliff J Meldrum; Susan Dooley; Rodney J Scott Journal: Hered Cancer Clin Pract Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 2.857