Bayes Analysis Provides Evidence of Pathogenicity for the BRCA1c. 135-1G > T (IVS3-1) and BRCA2 c.7977-1G > C (IVS17-1) Variants Displaying In Vitro Splicing Results of Equivocal Clinical Significance

Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia.
Human Mutation (Impact Factor: 5.14). 02/2010; 31(2):E1141-5. DOI: 10.1002/humu.21181
Source: PubMed


Although in vitro splicing assays can provide useful information about the clinical interpretation of sequence variants in high-risk cancer genes such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, results can sometimes be difficult to interpret. The BRCA1 c.135-1G>T (IVS3-1G>T) variant has been shown to give rise to an in-frame deletion of exon 5 (BRCA1 c.135_212del) that is predicted to encode 26 amino acids. BRCA2 c.7977-1G>C (IVS17-1G>C) was shown to increase the expression of two naturally occurring transcripts that contain frameshifts (BRCA2, c.7977_8311del (exon 18 deletion); BRCA2, c.7806_8331del (exon 17&18 deletion)). In this study we conducted multifactorial likelihood analysis to evaluate the clinical significance of these two variants, including assessing variant segregation in families by Bayes analysis, and breast tumor pathology features suggestive of positive mutation status. Multifactorial analysis provided strong evidence for causality for both of these variants. The Bayes scores from a single family with BRCA1 c.135-1G>T was 9528:1, and incorporation of pathology features gave an overall likelihood of causality of 28108:1. The Bayes scores from five informative families with BRCA2 c.7977-1G>C was 47401:1, and the combined Bayes-pathology odds of causality was 29389:1. Multifactorial likelihood analysis indicates that the BRCA1 c.135-1G>T and BRCA2 c.7977-1G>C variants are disease-associated mutations which should be managed clinically in the same fashion as classical truncating mutations.

Download full-text


Available from: Sr Lakhani, Aug 18, 2015
25 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Multifactorial models developed for BRCA1/2 variant classification have proved very useful for delineating BRCA1/2 variants associated with very high risk of cancer, or with little clinical significance. Recent linkage of this quantitative assessment of risk to clinical management guidelines has provided a basis to standardize variant reporting, variant classification and management of families with such variants, and can theoretically be applied to any disease gene. As proof of principle, the multifactorial approach already shows great promise for application to the evaluation of mismatch repair gene variants identified in families with suspected Lynch syndrome. However there is need to be cautious of the noted limitations and caveats of the current model, some of which may be exacerbated by differences in ascertainment and biological pathways to disease for different cancer syndromes.
    Current opinion in genetics & development 06/2010; 20(3):315-23. DOI:10.1016/j.gde.2010.03.009 · 7.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the last few years, several studies have focused on the interpretation of unclassified variants (UVs) of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Analysis of UVs through a unique approach is not sufficient to understand their role in the development of tumors. Thus, it is clear that assembling results from different sources (genetic and epidemiological data, histopathological features, and in vitro and in silico analyses) represents a powerful way to classify such variants. Building reliable integrated models for UV classification requires the joining of many working groups to collaborative consortia, allowing data exchange and improvements of methods. This will lead to improvement in the predictivity of gene testing in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and, consequently, to an increase in the number of families that can be correctly classified as linked or unlinked to these genes, allowing more accurate genetic counseling and clinical management.
    Annals of Oncology 02/2011; 22 Suppl 1(suppl 1):i18-23. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdq661 · 7.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose carriers to early onset breast and ovarian cancer. A common problem in clinical genetic testing is interpretation of variants with unknown clinical significance. The Evidence-based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) consortium was initiated to evaluate and implement strategies to characterize the clinical significance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants. As an initial project of the ENIGMA Splicing Working Group, we report splicing and multifactorial likelihood analysis of 25 BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants from seven different laboratories. Splicing analysis was performed by reverse transcriptase PCR or mini gene assay, and sequencing to identify aberrant transcripts. The findings were compared to bioinformatic predictions using four programs. The posterior probability of pathogenicity was estimated using multifactorial likelihood analysis, including co-occurrence with a deleterious mutation, segregation and/or report of family history. Abnormal splicing patterns expected to lead to a non-functional protein were observed for 7 variants (BRCA1 c.441+2T>A, c.4184_4185+2del, c.4357+1G>A, c.4987-2A>G, c.5074G>C, BRCA2 c.316+5G>A, and c.8754+3G>C). Combined interpretation of splicing and multifactorial analysis classified an initiation codon variant (BRCA2 c.3G>A) as likely pathogenic, uncertain clinical significance for 7 variants, and indicated low clinical significance or unlikely pathogenicity for another 10 variants. Bioinformatic tools predicted disruption of consensus donor or acceptor sites with high sensitivity, but cryptic site usage was predicted with low specificity, supporting the value of RNA-based assays. The findings also provide further evidence that clinical RNA-based assays should be extended from analysis of invariant dinucleotides to routinely include all variants located within the donor and acceptor consensus splicing sites. Importantly, this study demonstrates the added value of collaboration between laboratories, and across disciplines, to collate and interpret information from clinical testing laboratories to consolidate patient management.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 07/2011; 132(3):1009-23. DOI:10.1007/s10549-011-1674-0 · 3.94 Impact Factor
Show more