PURPOSE: Although CHEK2 is a well-established cancer gene, questions remain including whether risks vary substantially between different variants and whether biallelic carriers have higher risks than heterozygotes. We report on a cohort of individuals with CHEK2 pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (collectively, PV) in order to better characterize this gene. METHODS: We retrospectively queried samples submitted for multi-gene hereditary cancer testing to identify individuals with CHEK2 PVs and assessed differences in phenotypes among various genotypes. RESULTS: CHEK2 PVs were identified in 2508 individuals, including 32 individuals with biallelic CHEK2 PVs. Breast (female, 59.9% and male, 11.8%), prostate (20.1%), and colorectal (3.5%), were among the most frequently reported cancers. Select missense PVs showed similar cancer prevalence to truncating PVs while some others showed lower prevalence. No significant differences were observed between biallelic carriers and heterozygotes. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support that some, but not all, CHEK2 missense PVs demonstrate lower cancer prevalence; further studies are needed to continue characterizing possible variant specific risks. In addition, biallelic CHEK2 PVs do not appear to be associated with a more severe phenotype than single CHEK2 PVs. Furthermore, co-occurrences with PVs in other cancer risk genes are common among CHEK2 heterozygotes and often warrant additional management.
PURPOSE: Although CHEK2 is a well-established cancer gene, questions remain including whether risks vary substantially between different variants and whether biallelic carriers have higher risks than heterozygotes. We report on a cohort of individuals with CHEK2 pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (collectively, PV) in order to better characterize this gene. METHODS: We retrospectively queried samples submitted for multi-gene hereditary cancer testing to identify individuals with CHEK2 PVs and assessed differences in phenotypes among various genotypes. RESULTS:CHEK2 PVs were identified in 2508 individuals, including 32 individuals with biallelic CHEK2 PVs. Breast (female, 59.9% and male, 11.8%), prostate (20.1%), and colorectal (3.5%), were among the most frequently reported cancers. Select missense PVs showed similar cancer prevalence to truncating PVs while some others showed lower prevalence. No significant differences were observed between biallelic carriers and heterozygotes. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support that some, but not all, CHEK2 missense PVs demonstrate lower cancer prevalence; further studies are needed to continue characterizing possible variant specific risks. In addition, biallelic CHEK2 PVs do not appear to be associated with a more severe phenotype than single CHEK2 PVs. Furthermore, co-occurrences with PVs in other cancer risk genes are common among CHEK2 heterozygotes and often warrant additional management.
Authors: Aglaya G Iyevleva; Svetlana N Aleksakhina; Anna P Sokolenko; Sofia V Baskina; Aigul R Venina; Elena I Anisimova; Ilya V Bizin; Alexandr O Ivantsov; Yana V Belysheva; Alexandra P Chernyakova; Alexandr V Togo; Evgeny N Imyanitov Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Peter Švajdler; Peter Vasovčák; Marián Švajdler; Monika Šedivcová; Veronika Urbán; Michal Michal; Roman Mezencev Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 6.639