Rodrigo Santa Cruz Guindalini1,2,3, Andrew Song1, James D Fackenthal1, Olufunmilayo I Olopade1, Dezheng Huo1,4. 1. Department of Medicine, Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Department of Radiology and Oncology, The State of Sao Paulo Cancer Institute, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, Sao Paulo, Brazil. 3. Clínica de Oncologia (CLION), Clínica de Assistência à Mulher (CAM) Group, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. 4. Department of Public Health Sciences, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic anticipation, the earlier onset of disease in successive generations, has been reported in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), but little is known about its underlying mechanisms. Ascertainment bias has been suggested as a reason in previous studies. Likewise, cohort effect, which may be caused by environmental factors, can be misinterpreted as genetic anticipation. METHODS: The authors reviewed the pedigrees of 176 kindreds, segregating those with deleterious mutations in breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/BRCA2) who had at least 2 consecutive generations of the same cancer (breast or ovarian). By using mutation probabilities as analytical weights in weighted random-effect models, generational differences in the age at onset of breast/ovarian cancer were calculated. The analyses were further controlled for ascertainment bias by excluding probands and adjusting for birth-cohort effect in the anticipation models. RESULTS: The mean age at the onset of breast cancer for the probands' generation was 41.9 years, which was 6.8 years and 9.8 years earlier than the parents' and grandparents' generations, respectively. The anticipation effect for breast cancer remained significant after excluding the probands. There was a birth-cohort effect: patients who were born in 1930s and 1940s had breast cancer 5.0 years and 7.6 years earlier than patients who were born before 1920. The difference in breast cancer age of onset across generations was no longer significant after adjusting for birth-cohort effect. CONCLUSIONS: The observed anticipation effect was driven mainly by a decrease in age of onset across birth cohorts, underscoring the need for risk-reducing interventions that target changing environmental/lifestyle factors in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers. Cancer 2016;122:1913-20.
BACKGROUND: Genetic anticipation, the earlier onset of disease in successive generations, has been reported in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), but little is known about its underlying mechanisms. Ascertainment bias has been suggested as a reason in previous studies. Likewise, cohort effect, which may be caused by environmental factors, can be misinterpreted as genetic anticipation. METHODS: The authors reviewed the pedigrees of 176 kindreds, segregating those with deleterious mutations in breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/BRCA2) who had at least 2 consecutive generations of the same cancer (breast or ovarian). By using mutation probabilities as analytical weights in weighted random-effect models, generational differences in the age at onset of breast/ovarian cancer were calculated. The analyses were further controlled for ascertainment bias by excluding probands and adjusting for birth-cohort effect in the anticipation models. RESULTS: The mean age at the onset of breast cancer for the probands' generation was 41.9 years, which was 6.8 years and 9.8 years earlier than the parents' and grandparents' generations, respectively. The anticipation effect for breast cancer remained significant after excluding the probands. There was a birth-cohort effect: patients who were born in 1930s and 1940s had breast cancer 5.0 years and 7.6 years earlier than patients who were born before 1920. The difference in breast cancer age of onset across generations was no longer significant after adjusting for birth-cohort effect. CONCLUSIONS: The observed anticipation effect was driven mainly by a decrease in age of onset across birth cohorts, underscoring the need for risk-reducing interventions that target changing environmental/lifestyle factors in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers. Cancer 2016;122:1913-20.
Keywords:
ascertainment bias; breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/BRCA2); cohort effect; genetic anticipation; hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome
Authors: A Bergman; Z Einbeigi; U Olofsson; Z Taib; A Wallgren; P Karlsson; J Wahlström; T Martinsson; M Nordling Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Xiang-Hui Ning; Ning Zhang; Teng Li; Peng-Jie Wu; Xi Wang; Xue-Ying Li; Shuang-He Peng; Jiang-Yi Wang; Jin-Chao Chen; Kan Gong Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: D Ford; D F Easton; M Stratton; S Narod; D Goldgar; P Devilee; D T Bishop; B Weber; G Lenoir; J Chang-Claude; H Sobol; M D Teare; J Struewing; A Arason; S Scherneck; J Peto; T R Rebbeck; P Tonin; S Neuhausen; R Barkardottir; J Eyfjord; H Lynch; B A Ponder; S A Gayther; M Zelada-Hedman Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Kenneth P Tercyak; Suzanne M Bronheim; Nicole Kahn; Hillary A Robertson; Bruno J Anthony; Darren Mays; Suzanne C O'Neill; Susan K Peterson; Susan Miesfeldt; Beth N Peshkin; Tiffani A DeMarco Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Rita K Schmutzler; Eitan Friedman; Eric Hahnen; Corinna Ernst; Julika Borde; Yael Laitman; Britta Blümcke; Dieter Niederacher; Konstantin Weber-Lassalle; Christian Sutter; Andreas Rump; Norbert Arnold; Shan Wang-Gohrke; Judit Horváth; Andrea Gehrig; Gunnar Schmidt; Véronique Dutrannoy; Juliane Ramser; Julia Hentschel; Alfons Meindl; Christopher Schroeder; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Christoph Engel; Karoline Kuchenbaecker Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 4.638