Christian F Singer

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States

Are you Christian F Singer?

Claim your profile

Publications (283)1414.58 Total impact

  • Huong D Meeks · Honglin Song · Kyriaki Michailidou · Manjeet K Bolla · Joe Dennis · Qin Wang · Daniel Barrowdale · Debra Frost · Lesley McGuffog · Steve Ellis · [...] · Andrew Berchuck · Anthony Swerdlow · Georgia Chenevix-Trench · Alison M Dunning · Paul D P Pharoah · Per Hall · Douglas F Easton · Fergus J Couch · Amanda B Spurdle · David E Goldgar ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The K3326X variant in BRCA2 (BRCA2*c.9976A>T; p.Lys3326*; rs11571833) has been found to be associated with small increased risks of breast cancer. However, it is not clear to what extent linkage disequilibrium with fully pathogenic mutations might account for this association. There is scant information about the effect of K3326X in other hormone-related cancers. Methods: Using weighted logistic regression, we analyzed data from the large iCOGS study including 76 637 cancer case patients and 83 796 control patients to estimate odds ratios (ORw) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for K3326X variant carriers in relation to breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer risks, with weights defined as probability of not having a pathogenic BRCA2 variant. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling, we also examined the associations of K3326X with breast and ovarian cancer risks among 7183 BRCA1 variant carriers. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: The K3326X variant was associated with breast (ORw = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.40, P = 5.9x10(-) (6)) and invasive ovarian cancer (ORw = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.43, P = 3.8x10(-3)). These associations were stronger for serous ovarian cancer and for estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (ORw = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.70, P = 3.4x10(-5) and ORw = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.76, P = 4.1x10(-5), respectively). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, there was a statistically significant inverse association of the K3326X variant with risk of ovarian cancer (HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.84, P = .013) but no association with breast cancer. No association with prostate cancer was observed. Conclusions: Our study provides evidence that the K3326X variant is associated with risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers independent of other pathogenic variants in BRCA2. Further studies are needed to determine the biological mechanism of action responsible for these associations.
    Journal of the National Cancer Institute 11/2015; 108(2). DOI:10.1093/jnci/djv315 · 12.58 Impact Factor
  • C.F. Singer · M.K. Tea · G Pristauz · M Hubalek · C Rappaport · C.C. Riedl · T.H. Helbich ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An estimated 10 % of breast cancer cases exhibit a higher familial incidence, and functional mutations in BRCA (breast cancer-gene) 1 or 2 are responsible for the development of malignant tumors in approximately half of these cases. Women with a germline mutation in either of the two genes have a lifetime risk of up to 85 % to develop breast cancer, and of up to 60 % risk to develop ovarian cancer. This clinical practice guideline defines the individual and familial tumor constellations that represent an indication for BRCA germline testing. It also describes the therapeutic options (early detection programme vs prophylactic surgery) that arise from the result of a BRCA mutational analysis. This guideline further includes recommendations regarding the use of multigene panels and therapeutic aspects that arise from the selective use of poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with known BRCA1 or 2 mutations. It replaces the previous version of the "Clinical Practice Guideline for the Prevention and Early Detection of Breast- and Ovarian Cancer in women from HBOC (hereditary breast and ovarian cancer) families" which was published in 2012.
    Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 11/2015; DOI:10.1007/s00508-015-0880-x · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We reviewed the status of the use of the prophylactic long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim in gynecologic malignancies. Long-acting G-CSFs should not be used in weekly regimens. Filgrastim is not indicated in patients with febrile and/or severe neutropenia after administration of long-acting G-CSF in the same cycle. One study has shown a moderate effect on febrile neutropenia of ciprofloxacin when co-administered with pegfilgrastim. There is broad evidence from meta-analyses that pegfilgrastim effectively reduces severe neutropenia. In parallel, its adverse effects have been studied extensively. All-cause mortality was significantly reduced by pegfilgrastim. The glycopegylated long-acting G-CSF, lipegfilgrastim has demonstrated antineutropenic efficacy similar to that of pegfilgrastimin in one breast cancer study. In another pivitol non-small cell lung cancer study, impaired survival was observed in the lipegfilgrastim group during the first 30 days of study. The European Medicines Agency claimed more profound safety data to be provided for lipegfilgrastim by 2017.
    Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift 10/2015; 165(19). DOI:10.1007/s10354-015-0392-3
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to estimate the age-specific annual risks of breast cancer in a woman with a germline BRCA mutation and an affected first-degree relative according to the age of breast cancer diagnosis in the relative. Women with BRCA mutations with no previous diagnosis of breast cancer and with one first-degree relative with breast cancer were followed for breast cancers for a mean of 5.9 years (minimum 2 years). Age-specific annual breast cancer risks were calculated, according to the age of breast cancer diagnosis in the proband and the first-degree relative. 1114 cancer-free women with a BRCA mutation with a single first-degree relative with breast cancer were eligible for the study. 122 women (11.0 %) were diagnosed with incident breast cancer. The annual risk of breast cancer was 2.0 % for women with BRCA1 mutations and was 1.6 % for women with BRCA2 mutations. The age of breast cancer diagnosis in the first-degree relative did not affect the annual breast cancer risks for BRCA1 mutation carriers. For BRCA2 mutation carriers, the annual breast cancer risk was 4.5 % for women with a first-degree relative diagnosed with breast cancer under the age of 30 years and was 0.7 % for women with a relative diagnosed over the age of 60. Among women with BRCA2 mutations, a family history of early-onset breast cancer is a risk factor for developing breast cancer. Risk assessment for healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers should consider the ages of breast cancers diagnosed in first-degree relatives.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 10/2015; 154(1). DOI:10.1007/s10549-015-3596-8 · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • Source

    Cancer Research 08/2015; 75(15 Supplement):LB-197-LB-197. DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-LB-197 · 9.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In Austria, 700 women are diagnosed every year with ovarian carcinoma. Approximately 15 % of the patients with epithelial ovarian cancer have a germline mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. The increased incidence of breast and/or ovarian cancer in genetically related family members has given rise to the term “hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome” (HBOC). Some 25–55 % of these in-family diseases are attributed to germline mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2, and approximately 5–10 % to other known tumor predisposition syndromes. The remaining persons may carry mutations in as yet unidentified genes. HBOC caused by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is an autosomal dominant disorder with high penetrance. BRCA1 and BRCA2 encode for so-called tumor suppressor proteins. Inherited functional mutations of these genes cause loss of function of the respective allele. Loss of function of the second allele causes complete loss of the corresponding protein and facilitates the development of a malignancy. The Association of Gynecologic Oncology recommends that testing for a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 should be offered to all patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. When mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, or other cancer-susceptibility genes have been identified, patients with ovarian carcinoma can be treated with new, innovative therapies. This recommendation is intended as a standard guideline for genetic testing of patients with an ovarian carcinoma.
    Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 06/2015; 127(15-16). DOI:10.1007/s00508-015-0814-7 · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is an accepted treatment approach in early-stage breast cancer. In contrast, the potential role of postneoadjuvant chemotherapy after taxane-containing NACT remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate postneoadjuvant chemotherapy and further prognostic factors that predict outcome in women without pathologic complete remission (pCR). A total of 377 patients with breast cancer who received preoperative chemotherapy were included in this retrospective study. Patients without standard NACT (6 cycles of epirubicin with docetaxel) or primary metastatic breast cancer and locally advanced, inoperable cancer were excluded from further analysis (n = 186). This resulted in a study population of 191 women (30 [15.7%] with pCR; 161 [84.3%] without pCR). Major outcome parameters were event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). The following parameters were tested for their prognostic role: postneoadjuvant chemotherapy, patient age, breast cancer subtype (luminal/HER2-negative tumors, HER2-positive tumors, and triple-negative tumors), histological grade, pCR, residual lymph node invasion, and residual invasive tumor size. At a median follow-up of 54 months, 51 disease relapses (26.7%) and 21 deaths (11%) were observed. In a comparison of patients with pCR with those without, no significant differences in EFS or OS were observed. Postneoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with shorter OS in patients without pCR. In this population, which included a high percentage of patients with luminal cancers, pCR did not predict for improved OS. Postneoadjuvant chemotherapy showed no discernible benefit even in subgroups with aggressive tumor biology or significant remaining tumor burden. The use of such treatment should therefore be discouraged outside of clinical trials. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Clinical Breast Cancer 06/2015; 26(6). DOI:10.1016/j.clbc.2015.06.007 · 2.11 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adjuvant endocrine therapy compromises bone health in patients with breast cancer, causing osteopenia, osteoporosis, and fractures. Antiresorptive treatments such as bisphosphonates prevent and counteract these side-effects. In this trial, we aimed to investigate the effects of the anti-RANK ligand antibody denosumab in postmenopausal, aromatase inhibitor-treated patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. In this prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, postmenopausal patients with early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving treatment with aromatase inhibitors were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either denosumab 60 mg or placebo administered subcutaneously every 6 months in 58 trial centres in Austria and Sweden. Patients were assigned by an interactive voice response system. The randomisation schedule used a randomly permuted block design with block sizes 2 and 4, stratified by type of hospital regarding Hologic device for DXA scans, previous aromatase inhibitor use, and baseline bone mineral density. Patients, treating physicians, investigators, data managers, and all study personnel were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time from randomisation to first clinical fracture, analysed by intention to treat. As an additional sensitivity analysis, we also analysed the primary endpoint on the per-protocol population. Patients were treated until the prespecified number of 247 first clinical fractures was reached. This trial is ongoing (patients are in follow-up) and is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2005-005275-15, and with, number NCT00556374. Between Dec 18, 2006, and July 22, 2013, 3425 eligible patients were enrolled into the trial, of whom 3420 were randomly assigned to receive denosumab 60 mg (n=1711) or placebo (n=1709) subcutaneously every 6 months. Compared with the placebo group, patients in the denosumab group had a significantly delayed time to first clinical fracture (hazard ratio [HR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·39-0·65], p<0·0001). The overall lower number of fractures in the denosumab group (92) than in the placebo group (176) was similar in all patient subgroups, including in patients with a bone mineral density T-score of -1 or higher at baseline (n=1872, HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·31-0·64], p<0·0001) and in those with a bone mineral density T-score of less than -1 already at baseline (n=1548, HR 0·57 [95% CI 0·40-0·82], p=0·002). The patient incidence of adverse events in the safety analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug) did not differ between the denosumab group (1366 events, 80%) and the placebo group (1334 events, 79%), nor did the numbers of serious adverse events (521 vs 511 [30% in each group]). The main adverse events were arthralgia and other aromatase-inhibitor related symptoms; no additional toxicity from the study drug was reported. Despite proactive adjudication of every potential osteonecrosis of the jaw by an international expert panel, no cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported. 93 patients (3% of the full analysis set) died during the study, of which one death (in the denosumab group) was thought to be related to the study drug. Adjuvant denosumab 60 mg twice per year reduces the risk of clinical fractures in postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors, and can be administered without added toxicity. Since a main side-effect of adjuvant breast cancer treatment can be substantially reduced by the addition of denosumab, this treatment should be considered for clinical practice. Amgen. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    The Lancet 05/2015; 386(9992). DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60995-3 · 45.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the adverse effect of alcohol in the development of breast cancer among women in the general population, we evaluated whether a similar association exists among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Information regarding baseline daily alcohol consumption was abstracted from a research questionnaire for 3067 BRCA mutation carriers enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Women were followed biennially until the date of the last follow-up questionnaire, date of breast cancer diagnosis, date of prophylactic bilateral mastectomy, or date of death. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) for invasive breast cancer associated with alcohol consumed at or prior to completion of the baseline questionnaire. After a mean of 5.4 years of follow-up, we observed 259 incident cases of primary invasive breast cancer. Compared with non-users, the adjusted RRs were 1.06 (95 % CI 0.78-1.44) for ever use and 1.08 (0.79-1.47) for current alcohol use. For women in the highest versus lowest quintile of cumulative alcohol consumption, the RR was 0.94 (95 % CI 0.63-1.40; P trend = 0.65). Our findings suggest that alcohol consumption is not a risk factor for breast cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 05/2015; 151(2). DOI:10.1007/s10549-015-3393-4 · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Clinical genetic testing is commercially available for rs61764370, an inherited variant residing in a KRAS 3' UTR microRNA binding site, based on suggested associations with increased ovarian and breast cancer risk as well as with survival time. However, prior studies, emphasizing particular subgroups, were relatively small. Therefore, we comprehensively evaluated ovarian and breast cancer risks as well as clinical outcome associated with rs61764370. Methods: Centralized genotyping and analysis were performed for 140,012 women enrolled in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (15,357 ovarian cancer patients; 30,816 controls), the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (33,530 breast cancer patients; 37,640 controls), and the Consortium of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (14,765 BRCA1 and 7904 BRCA2 mutation carriers). Results: We found no association with risk of ovarian cancer (OR=0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.04, p=0.74) or breast cancer (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01, p=0.19) and results were consistent among mutation carriers (BRCA1, ovarian cancer HR=1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23, p=0.14, breast cancer HR=1.04, 95% CI 0.97-1.12, p=0.27; BRCA2, ovarian cancer HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.13, p=0.34, breast cancer HR=1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19, p=0.35). Null results were also obtained for associations with overall survival following ovarian cancer (HR=0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.07, p=0.38), breast cancer (HR=0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06, p=0.38), and all other previously-reported associations. Conclusions: rs61764370 is not associated with risk of ovarian or breast cancer nor with clinical outcome for patients with these cancers. Therefore, genotyping this variant has no clinical utility related to the prediction or management of these cancers.
    Gynecologic Oncology 05/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.04.034 · 3.77 Impact Factor

  • Cancer Research 05/2015; 75(9 Supplement):P3-11-06-P3-11-06. DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-P3-11-06 · 9.33 Impact Factor

  • Cancer Research 05/2015; 75(9 Supplement):S2-06-S2-06. DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-S2-06 · 9.33 Impact Factor
  • Source

    Journal of Immunological Methods 04/2015; 419. DOI:10.1016/j.jim.2015.04.003 · 1.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) is a known marker for apoptotic balance and cell detoxification. Recently, an association of baseline GGT levels and breast cancer incidence, tumor progression and chemotherapy resistance was shown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of pre-therapeutic GGT levels, clinical-pathological parameters and survival in patients with primary metastatic breast cancer (PMBC). Methods: In this multicenter analysis, pre-therapeutic GGT levels and clinical-pathological parameters of 114 patients diagnosed with PMBC between 1996 and 2012 were evaluated. The association between GGT levels and clinical-pathological parameters were analysed. Patients were stratified into four GGT risk-groups (GGT < 18.00 U/L: normal low, 18.00 to 35.99 U/L: normal high, 36.00 to 71.99 U/L: elevated and ≥ 72.00 U/L: highly elevated) and survival analyses were performed. Findings: Patients in the high risk GGT group had a poorer overall survival, when compared to the low risk group with five-year overall survival rates of 39.5% and 53.7% (p = 0.04), respectively. Patients with larger breast tumors had a trend towards higher GGT levels (p = 0.053). Pre-therapeutic GGT levels were not associated with indicators of aggressive tumor biology such as HER2-status, triple negative histology, or poorly differentiated cancers. Conclusion: Pre-therapeutic GGT serum level might serve as a novel prognostic factor for overall-survival in patients with PMBC.
    PLoS ONE 04/2015; 10(4):e0125317. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0125317 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals carrying pathogenic mutations in BRCA1/2 genes have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in DNA double strand break repair, DNA alterations that can be caused by exposure to reactive oxygen species, a main source of which are mitochondria. Mitochondrial genome variations affect electron transport chain efficiency and reactive oxygen species production. Individuals from different mitochondrial haplogroups differ in their metabolism and sensitivity to oxidative stress. Variability in mitochondrial genetic background can alter reactive oxygen species production, leading to cancer risk. Here we test the hypothesis that mitochondrial haplogroups modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We genotyped 22214 (11421 affected, 10793 unaffected) mutation carriers belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 for 129 mitochondrial polymorphisms using the iCOGS array. Haplogroup inference and association detection were performed using a phylogenetic approach. ALTree was applied to explore the reference mitochondrial evolutionary tree and detect subclades enriched for affected or unaffected individuals. We discovered that subclade T1a1 was depleted in affected BRCA2 mutation carriers than the rest of clade T, (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.55 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34-0.88, p-value = 0.01). Compared with the most frequent haplogroup in the general population i.e. H and T clade, the T1a1 haplogroup has an HR = 0.62 (95% CI = 0.40-0.95, p-value = 0.03). We also identified three potential susceptibility loci, including G13708A/rs28359178, which has demonstrated an inverse association with familial breast cancer risk. This study illustrates how original approaches like the phylogeny-based method we used can empower classical molecular epidemiological studies aimed at identifying association or risk modification effects.
    Breast cancer research: BCR 04/2015; 17(1):61. DOI:10.1186/s13058-015-0567-2 · 5.49 Impact Factor
  • Source

  • C Staudigl · N Concin · C Grimm · G Pfeiler · R Nehoda · CF Singer · S Polterauer ·

    Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 04/2015; 75(03). DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1548624 · 0.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE: Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists. OBJECTIVE:To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Observational study of women who were ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents. We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position. We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk. EXPOSURES:Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Breast and ovarian cancer risks. RESULTS:Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10(-9)). We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002). We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 04/2015; 313(13):1347-61. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.5985 · 35.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While interplay between BRCA1 and AURKA-RHAMM-TPX2-TUBG1 regulates mammary epithelial polarization, common genetic variation in HMMR (gene product RHAMM) may be associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Following on these observations, we further assessed the link between the AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 functional module and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Forty-one single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers and subsequently analyzed using a retrospective likelihood approach. The association of HMMR rs299290 with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers was confirmed: per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 - 1.15, p = 1.9 x 10-4 (false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted p = 0.043). Variation in CSTF1, located next to AURKA, was also found to be associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs2426618 per-allele HR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.16, p = 0.005 (FDR-adjusted p = 0.045). Assessment of pairwise interactions provided suggestions (FDR-adjusted pinteraction values > 0.05) for deviations from the multiplicative model for rs299290 and CSTF1 rs6064391, and rs299290 and TUBG1 rs11649877 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following these suggestions, the expression of HMMR and AURKA or TUBG1 in sporadic breast tumors was found to potentially interact, influencing patients' survival. Together, the results of this study support the hypothesis of a causative link between altered function of AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 and breast carcinogenesis in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. PMID: 25830658 [PubMed - in process]
    PLoS ONE 04/2015; 10(4). DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0120020 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the breast cancer screening efficacy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a high-risk population and in various population subgroups. In a single-center, prospective, nonrandomized comparison study, BRCA mutation carriers and women with a high familial risk (> 20% lifetime risk) for breast cancer were offered screening with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI every 12 months. Diagnostic performance was compared between individual modalities and their combinations. Further comparisons were based on subpopulations dichotomized by screening rounds, mutation status, age, and breast density. There were 559 women with 1,365 complete imaging rounds included in this study. The sensitivity of MRI (90.0%) was significantly higher (P < .001) than that of mammography (37.5%) and ultrasound (37.5%). Of 40 cancers, 18 (45.0%) were detected by MRI alone. Two cancers were found by mammography alone (a ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] with microinvasion and a DCIS with < 10-mm invasive areas). This did not lead to a significant increase of sensitivity compared with using MRI alone (P = .15). No cancers were detected by ultrasound alone. Similarly, of 14 DCISs, all were detected by MRI, whereas mammography and ultrasound each detected five DCISs (35.7%). Age, mutation status, and breast density had no influence on the sensitivity of MRI and did not affect the superiority of MRI over mammography and ultrasound. MRI allows early detection of familial breast cancer regardless of patient age, breast density, or risk status. The added value of mammography is limited, and there is no added value of ultrasound in women undergoing MRI for screening. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 02/2015; 33(10). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.56.8626 · 18.43 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

4k Citations
1,414.58 Total Impact Points


  • 2015
    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
      New York, New York, United States
  • 2003-2015
    • Medical University of Vienna
      • • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
      • • Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna
      • • Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin I
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2013
    • Mississippi University for Women
      Колумбус, Mississippi, United States
    • Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
      • Department of Cancer Medicine
      Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • 2012
    • Treatment Research Institute, Philadelphia PA
      Filadelfia, Pennsylvania, United States
  • 2010-2012
    • University of Cambridge
      • Department of Public Health and Primary Care
      Cambridge, England, United Kingdom
    • Queensland Institute of Medical Research
      Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    • НИИ онкологии им.Н.Н. Петрова
      Sankt-Peterburg, St.-Petersburg, Russia
  • 1999-2011
    • University of Vienna
      • Department of Gynecology
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2009
    • Pantarhei Bioscience
      Zeist, Utrecht, Netherlands
  • 2002-2008
    • Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Experimental and Clinical Traumatology
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2007
    • Ghent University
      Gand, Flemish, Belgium
  • 2006
    • Harvard University
      Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
  • 2000-2002
    • Ludwig Boltzmann-Cluster Oncology (LB-CO) | Medical University Vienna
      Wien, Vienna, Austria