Louise-Marie Chevalier1,2, Amandine Billaud1,2, Sabrina Fronteau2, Jonathan Dauvé2, Anne Patsouris2, Véronique Verriele2, Alain Morel3,4. 1. Université d'Angers, Inserm, CRCINA, 49000, Angers, France. 2. Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest - Paul Papin, 49000, Angers, France. 3. Université d'Angers, Inserm, CRCINA, 49000, Angers, France. Alain.morel@ico.unicancer.fr. 4. Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest - Paul Papin, 49000, Angers, France. Alain.morel@ico.unicancer.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The identification of pretherapeutic somatic BRCA variants can have considerable clinical impact given that they affect response to the new poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-targeted therapy. One major issue with this type of testing is the identification of splicing variants of uncertain significance (VUS) on degraded somatic messenger RNA. It is therefore important to be able to quickly characterize these splice variants. OBJECTIVE: As part of PARP inhibitor targeted therapy, we have investigated a method for the direct confirmation of potential pathogenic somatic splice variants of BRCA1 found in fixed tumor samples. Previously these VUS have commonly only been tested by in silico analysis. METHODS: Five BRCA1 variants affecting splicing were characterized from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) ovarian carcinoma tissues by next-generation sequencing (NGS). Three patient samples had already been functionally characterized and were used as controls. Total somatic RNA from samples was extracted, reverse-transcribed, and amplified with several primer pairs encompassing the target exon. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products were analyzed by capillary gel electrophoresis to assess possible changes in size due to splicing alterations. Finally, we confirmed our results by cloning, followed by Sanger sequencing, and analyzed the expression of the aberrant forms. RESULTS: Our molecular approach made it possible to visualize the splicing outcomes of three variants (c.5194-2A>G, c.5434C>G, and c.547+1G>A) already identified and present in databases and/or identified with prediction tools (ClinVar, UMD, ARUP Utah database, and Human Splice Finder splices sites prediction) and to confirm their exon skipping consequences, their expression in tumors, and thus their pathogenicity. The c.4484+5G>A variant was not found in databases and was predicted to have no impact on splicing, but was found to display altered processing in tumor tissue. This variant also had a major detrimental impact on transcriptional expression. CONCLUSION: In a break from purely in silico approaches, we propose a simple and rapid pretherapeutic functional analysis of somatic BRCA1 variants potentially involved in splicing alterations. This approach will allow more ovarian cancer patients to benefit from new therapies targeting PARP.
BACKGROUND: The identification of pretherapeutic somatic BRCA variants can have considerable clinical impact given that they affect response to the new poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-targeted therapy. One major issue with this type of testing is the identification of splicing variants of uncertain significance (VUS) on degraded somatic messenger RNA. It is therefore important to be able to quickly characterize these splice variants. OBJECTIVE: As part of PARP inhibitor targeted therapy, we have investigated a method for the direct confirmation of potential pathogenic somatic splice variants of BRCA1 found in fixed tumor samples. Previously these VUS have commonly only been tested by in silico analysis. METHODS: Five BRCA1 variants affecting splicing were characterized from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) ovarian carcinoma tissues by next-generation sequencing (NGS). Three patient samples had already been functionally characterized and were used as controls. Total somatic RNA from samples was extracted, reverse-transcribed, and amplified with several primer pairs encompassing the target exon. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products were analyzed by capillary gel electrophoresis to assess possible changes in size due to splicing alterations. Finally, we confirmed our results by cloning, followed by Sanger sequencing, and analyzed the expression of the aberrant forms. RESULTS: Our molecular approach made it possible to visualize the splicing outcomes of three variants (c.5194-2A>G, c.5434C>G, and c.547+1G>A) already identified and present in databases and/or identified with prediction tools (ClinVar, UMD, ARUP Utah database, and Human Splice Finder splices sites prediction) and to confirm their exon skipping consequences, their expression in tumors, and thus their pathogenicity. The c.4484+5G>A variant was not found in databases and was predicted to have no impact on splicing, but was found to display altered processing in tumor tissue. This variant also had a major detrimental impact on transcriptional expression. CONCLUSION: In a break from purely in silico approaches, we propose a simple and rapid pretherapeutic functional analysis of somatic BRCA1 variants potentially involved in splicing alterations. This approach will allow more ovarian cancerpatients to benefit from new therapies targeting PARP.
Authors: Anne Ml Jansen; Heleen M van der Klift; Marieke Ae Roos; Jaap Dh van Eendenburg; Carli Mj Tops; Juul T Wijnen; Frederik J Hes; Hans Morreau; Tom van Wezel Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Christophe Béroud; Stanley I Letovsky; Corey D Braastad; Sandrine M Caputo; Olivia Beaudoux; Yves Jean Bignon; Brigitte Bressac-De Paillerets; Myriam Bronner; Crystal M Buell; Gwenaëlle Collod-Béroud; Florence Coulet; Nicolas Derive; Christina Divincenzo; Christopher D Elzinga; Céline Garrec; Claude Houdayer; Izabela Karbassi; Sarab Lizard; Angela Love; Danièle Muller; Narasimhan Nagan; Camille R Nery; Ghadi Rai; Françoise Revillion; David Salgado; Nicolas Sévenet; Olga Sinilnikova; Hagay Sobol; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Christine Toulas; Edwin Trautman; Dominique Vaur; Paul Vilquin; Katelyn S Weymouth; Alecia Willis; Marcia Eisenberg; Charles M Strom Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 4.878
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: 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: Hannah Farmer; Nuala McCabe; Christopher J Lord; Andrew N J Tutt; Damian A Johnson; Tobias B Richardson; Manuela Santarosa; Krystyna J Dillon; Ian Hickson; Charlotte Knights; Niall M B Martin; Stephen P Jackson; Graeme C M Smith; Alan Ashworth Journal: Nature Date: 2005-04-14 Impact factor: 69.504