| Literature DB >> 28881617 |
Ed Dicks1, Honglin Song1, Susan J Ramus2,3, Elke Van Oudenhove4, Jonathan P Tyrer1, Maria P Intermaggio2, Siddhartha Kar1, Patricia Harrington1, David D Bowtell5,6,7,8, Aocs Study Group5,9,10, Mine S Cicek11, Julie M Cunningham11, Brooke L Fridley12, Jennifer Alsop1, Mercedes Jimenez-Linan13, Anna Piskorz4, Teodora Goranova4, Emma Kent14, Nadeem Siddiqui15, James Paul16, Robin Crawford17, Samantha Poblete18, Shashi Lele18, Lara Sucheston-Campbell19, Kirsten B Moysich19, Weiva Sieh20, Valerie McGuire20, Jenny Lester21, Kunle Odunsi18, Alice S Whittemore20, Natalia Bogdanova22,23,24, Matthias Dürst25, Peter Hillemanns26, Beth Y Karlan21, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj27, Usha Menon27, Marc Tischkowitz28, Douglas Levine29, James D Brenton4, Thilo Dörk22, Ellen L Goode11, Simon A Gayther21,30, D P Paul Pharoah1,31.
Abstract
We analyzed whole exome sequencing data in germline DNA from 412 high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas Project and identified 5,517 genes harboring a predicted deleterious germline coding mutation in at least one HGSOC case. Gene-set enrichment analysis showed enrichment for genes involved in DNA repair (p = 1.8×10-3). Twelve DNA repair genes - APEX1, APLF, ATX, EME1, FANCL, FANCM, MAD2L2, PARP2, PARP3, POLN, RAD54L and SMUG1 - were prioritized for targeted sequencing in up to 3,107 HGSOC cases, 1,491 cases of other epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) subtypes and 3,368 unaffected controls of European origin. We estimated mutation prevalence for each gene and tested for associations with disease risk. Mutations were identified in both cases and controls in all genes except MAD2L2, where we found no evidence of mutations in controls. In FANCM we observed a higher mutation frequency in HGSOC cases compared to controls (29/3,107 cases, 0.96 percent; 13/3,368 controls, 0.38 percent; P=0.008) with little evidence for association with other subtypes (6/1,491, 0.40 percent; P=0.82). The relative risk of HGSOC associated with deleterious FANCM mutations was estimated to be 2.5 (95% CI 1.3 - 5.0; P=0.006). In summary, whole exome sequencing of EOC cases with large-scale replication in case-control studies has identified FANCM as a likely novel susceptibility gene for HGSOC, with mutations associated with a moderate increase in risk. These data may have clinical implications for risk prediction and prevention approaches for high-grade serous ovarian cancer in the future and a significant impact on reducing disease mortality.Entities:
Keywords: DNA repair; next generation sequencing; ovarian cancer; susceptibility genes
Year: 2017 PMID: 28881617 PMCID: PMC5584218 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.15871
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Frequency of somatic and germline mutations in 12 candidate susceptibility genes in 412 high-grade serous ovarian cancer cases from TCGA and germline mutations in up to 4,508 ovarian cancer cases and 3,368 controls
| Gene | Somatic variants(412 TCGA cases) | Germline mutations | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mutationa | LOHb | TCGA cases | HG serouscases (%) | Other cases | Controls | P-valuec | |
| 2 (0.49) | 29 | 1 (0.24) | 1 (0.03) | 2 (0.13) | 3 (0.09) | 0.52 | |
| 0 | 52 | 1 (0.24) | 3 (0.10) | 1 (0.07) | 3 (0.09) | 0.91 | |
| 2 (0.49) | 10 | 1 (0.24) | 18 (0.60) | 8 (0.54) | 28 (0.83) | 0.34 | |
| 1 (0.24) | 34 | 2 (0.49) | 1 (0.03) | 0 | 0 | - | |
| 1 (0.24) | 31 | 1 (0.24) | 6 (0.20) | 1 (0.07) | 13 (0.39) | 0.22 | |
| 1 (0.24) | 42 | 3 (0.73) | 15 (0.50) | 10 (0.67) | 26 (0.77) | 0.09 | |
| 2 (0.49) | 12 | 1 (0.24) | 4 (0.13) | 1 (0.20) | 6 (0.18) | 0.80 | |
| 0 | 18 | 1 (0.24) | 2 (0.07) | 1 (0.07) | 2 (0.06) | 0.71 | |
| 2 (0.49) | 10 | 5 (1.21) | 92 (3.1) | 40 (2.7) | 121 (3.6) | 0.16 | |
| 2 (0.49) | 40 | 1 (0.24) | 4 (0.13) | 4 (0.27) | 4 (0.12) | 0.97 | |
| 2 (0.49) | 41 | 1 (0.24) | 29 (0.96) | 6 (0.40) | 13 (0.39) | 0.008 | |
| 1 (0.24) | 30 | 1 (0.24) | 4 (0.13) | 3 (0.20) | 5 (0.15) | 0.65 | |
a germline mutation
b Loss of heterozygosity
c Comparison of high-grade serous cases with controls
Characteristics of ovarian cancer case-control populations analyzed in this study
| Study | Country | Controls | Cases | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | Mean age(range) | Number | Mean age(range) | High-grade | (%) | Stage3/4 | (%)d | ||
| AOC | Australia | 629 | 57 (20-80) | 589 | 61 (23-80) | 516 | (88) | 515 | (88) |
| CAMc | UK | 0 | NA | 325 | 64 (19-90) | 196 | (60) | 237 | (79) |
| GRRa | USA | 0 | NA | 124 | 49 (21-83) | 50 | (40) | NA | |
| HJO/HMO | Germany/Belarus | 519 | 36 (18-68) | 341 | 58 (18-88) | 107 | (32) | 153 | (45) |
| ICNc | UK | 0 | NA | 422 | 57 (24-79) | 293 | (69) | 31 | (86) |
| LAX | USA | 209 | 62 (34-90) | 175 | 62 (32-88) | 175 | (100) | 159 | (92) |
| MAY | USA | 660 | 63 (26-93) | 650 | 64 (23-91) | 630 | (97) | 581 | (89) |
| RMHb | UK | 0 | NA | 61 | 53 (27-73) | 61 | (100) | NA | |
| SEA | UK | 835 | 53 (29-66) | 700 | 57 (24-74) | 349 | (50) | 388 | (70) |
| SROc | UK | 0 | NA | 627 | 57 (18-84) | 318 | (51) | 507 | (81) |
| STA | USA | 147 | 48 (20-64) | 151 | 53 (23-64) | 116 | (77) | 111 | (74) |
| UKO | UK | 369 | 65 (52-78) | 353 | 61 (25-90) | 267 | (75) | 242 | (72) |
All studies are case-control studies except for: a familial ovarian cancer registry study, b case only hospital study and c case only clinical trial; d % of those with known stage
Figure 1Distribution of predicted deleterious mutations in the FANCM gene in ovarian cancer cases and controls with respect to both the translated protein and the exonic architecture of the coding sequence
Black lines indicate mutations identified in cases only; blue lines indicate mutations detected both cases and controls. No mutations were identified in controls only. Where a mutation was identified in more than one subject, the number of times the mutation was detected is given in brackets.
Figure 2Estimated cumulative risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in women with a germline truncating mutation in FANCM: Black line – population risk based on UK incidence data for 2009
Blue line – estimated risk to FANCM carriers (dashed lines 80% confidence limits): A. average risks; B. risks to FANCM carriers at the 80th centile of a polygenic risk distribution based on 18 known common risk alleles; C. risks to FANCM carriers at the 80th centile of a risk distribution based on 18 known common risk alleles together with known lifestyle risk factors.