No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Mutations in the BRCA1-associated RING domain (BARD1) gene in primary breast, ovarian and uterine cancers
Abstract
Germline alterations of BRCA 1 result in susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. The protein encoded by BACA1 interacts in vivo with the BRCA1-associated RING domain (BARD1) protein. Accordingly, BARD1 is likely to be a critical factor in BRCA1-mediated tumor suppression and may also serve as a target for tumorigenic lesions in some human cancers. We have now determined the genomic structure of BARD1 and performed a mutational analysis of 58 ovarian tumors, 50 breast tumors and 60 uterine tumors. Seven polymorphisms were detected within the 2.34 kb coding sequence of BARD1. Somatically acquired missense mutations were observed in one breast carcinoma and one endometrial tumor; in at least one of these cases, tumor formation was accompanied by loss of the wild-type BARD1 allele, following the paradigm for known tumor suppressor genes. In addition, a germline alteration of BARD1 was identified in a clear cell ovarian tumor (Gln564His); again, loss of the wild-type BARD1 allele was observed in the malignant cells of this patient. The Gln564His patient was also diagnosed with two other primary cancers: a synchronous lobular breast carcinoma and a stage IA clear cell endometrioid cancer confined to an endometrial polyp 6 years earlier. These findings suggest an occasional role for BARD1 mutations in the development of sporadic and hereditary tumors.
... Figure 1. Timeline of the major discoveries associated with BARD1 function and risk to breast and ovarian cancer [1,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]]. ...
... This led to the hypothesis that variants in BARD1 could encode an aberrant protein affecting the interaction with BRCA1 Figure 1. Timeline of the major discoveries associated with BARD1 function and risk to breast and ovarian cancer [1,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]]. ...
... The formation of a stable BRCA1-BARD1 complex was considered to be critical for BRCA1 function and thus BARD1 may play a role as an effector or regulator of BRCA1 [5]. This led to the hypothesis that variants in BARD1 could encode an aberrant protein affecting the interaction with BRCA1 and predispose to BC and/or OC, especially in hereditary cancer syndrome families not accounted for by BRCA1 or BRCA2 [6]. This study was the first report of molecular genetic analyses of BARD1 in cancer samples in 1998 [6] (Figure 1). ...
Soon after the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2 over 20 years ago, it became apparent that not all hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome families were explained by germline variants in these cancer predisposing genes, suggesting that other such genes have yet to be discovered. BRCA1-associated ring domain (BARD1), a direct interacting partner of BRCA1, was one of the earliest candidates investigated. Sequencing analyses revealed that potentially pathogenic BARD1 variants likely conferred a low–moderate risk to hereditary breast cancer, but this association is inconsistent. Here, we review studies of BARD1 as a cancer predisposing gene and illustrate the challenge of discovering additional cancer risk genes for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. We selected peer reviewed research articles that focused on three themes: (i) sequence analyses of BARD1 to identify potentially pathogenic germline variants in adult hereditary cancer syndromes; (ii) biological assays of BARD1 variants to assess their effect on protein function; and (iii) association studies of BARD1 variants in family-based and case-control study groups to assess cancer risk. In conclusion, BARD1 is likely to be a low–moderate penetrance breast cancer risk gene.
... Breast cancer-derived BARD1 variants C645R, V695L, and S761N [68,69] show decreased association with OLA1. The V695L variant shows loss of direct binding to OLA1 and decreased centrosomal localization and centrosome amplification by its overexpression; in addition, the variant fails to rescue the centrosome amplification induced by BARD1 knockdown in breast cancer cells. ...
... BRCA2, which interacts with BRCA1 and also localizes to the centrosome, plays a role in the regulation of centrosome duplication [89,90]. Germline mutations of BARD1 are present in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers [69,[91][92][93][94]. The role of BARD1, BRCA1, and BRCA2 in centrosome regulation may be important as tumor suppressors in hereditary breast cancer, as well as their function in DNA repair pathways. ...
Breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1)-associated RING domain protein 1 (BARD1) forms a heterodimer with BRCA1, a tumor suppressor associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. BRCA1/BARD1 functions in multiple cellular processes including DNA repair and centrosome regulation. Centrosomes are the major microtubule-organizing centers in animal cells and are critical for the formation of a bipolar mitotic spindle. BRCA1 and BARD1 localize to the centrosome during the cell cycle, and the BRCA1/BARD1 dimer ubiquitinates centrosomal proteins to regulate centrosome function. We identified Obg-like ATPase 1 (OLA1) and receptor for activated C kinase (RACK1) as BRCA1/BARD1-interating proteins that bind to BARD1 and BRCA1 and localize the centrosomes during the cell cycle. Cancer-derived variants of BRCA1, BARD1, OLA1, and RACK1 failed to interact, and aberrant expression of these proteins caused centrosome amplification due to centriole overduplication only in mammary tissue-derived cells. In S-G2 phase, the number of centrioles was higher in mammary tissue-derived cells than in cells from other tissues, suggesting their involvement in tissue-specific carcinogenesis by BRCA1 and BARD1 germline mutations. We described the function of BARD1 in centrosome regulation in cooperation with BRCA1/OLA1/RACK1, as well as the effect of their dysfunction on carcinogenesis.
... Due to the pronounced role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, different mutations and variants of BARD1 were first investigated in breast cancers and various gynecological cancers in the late 1990s and early 2000s [10][11][12]. The genetic changes in BARD1 include missense mutations, nonsense mutations, and deletions. ...
... The RING domain of BARD1 is mapped to exons 2 and 3 [19]. Its ANK repeats span from the end of exon 4 to exon 7 while its BRCT domain encompasses exons [8][9][10][11]. It is thought that the different isoforms may play a role in tumorigenesis through the disrupting of BARD1's important protein-protein interactions. These variations have been well-studied in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers, however, the presence and functional consequences of these alterations in other cancer types are still being investigated. ...
Breast Cancer 1 (BRCA1) gene is a well-characterized tumor suppressor gene, mutations of which are primarily found in women with breast and ovarian cancers. BRCA1-associated RING domain 1 (BARD1) gene has also been identified as an important tumor suppressor gene in breast, ovarian, and uterine cancers. Underscoring the functional significance of the BRCA1 and BARD1 interactions, prevalent mutations in the BRCA1 gene are found in its RING domain, through which it binds the RING domain of BARD1. BARD1-BRCA1 heterodimer plays a crucial role in a variety of DNA damage response (DDR) pathways, including DNA damage checkpoint and homologous recombination (HR). However, many mutations in both BARD1 and BRCA1 also exist in other domains that significantly affect their biological functions. Intriguingly, recent genome-wide studies have identified various single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), genetic alterations, and epigenetic modifications in or near the BARD1 gene that manifested profound effects on tumorigenesis in a variety of non-breast and non-gynecological cancers. In this review, we will briefly discuss the molecular functions of BARD1, including its BRCA1-dependent as well as BRCA1-independent functions. We will then focus on evaluating the common BARD1 related SNPs as well as genetic and epigenetic changes that occur in the non-BRCA1-dominant cancers, including neuroblastoma, lung, and gastrointestinal cancers. Furthermore, the pro- and anti-tumorigenic functions of different SNPs and BARD1 variants will also be discussed.
... Variants that affect binding between BRCA1 and BARD1 have been linked to familial breast cancer or are non-functional in the HDR assay [21,31,32]. Loss of BARD1 has been linked to increased susceptibility to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and is associated with loss of tumor suppressor activity [4,13,[33][34][35][36]. The importance of BARD1 in cancer development indicates how significant it is to determine whether BARD1 VUS are benign or pathogenic. ...
... Fig 2B lanes1,2,14,15,23,24,29,30,33,34,41,42, 53, 54, 65, 66, 77, 78, 90, 91, 100,101). Though the expression levels of missense variants differed, they all expressed at higher levels than the endogenous BARD1. ...
The BARD1 protein, which heterodimerizes with BRCA1, is encoded by a known breast cancer susceptibility gene. While several BARD1 variants have been identified as pathogenic, many more missense variants exist that do not occur frequently enough to assign a clinical risk. In this paper, whole exome sequencing of over 10,000 cancer samples from 33 cancer types identified from somatic mutations and loss of heterozygosity in tumors 76 potentially cancer-associated BARD1 missense and truncation variants. These variants were tested in a functional assay for homology-directed repair (HDR), as HDR deficiencies have been shown to correlate with clinical pathogenicity for BRCA1 variants. From these 76 variants, 4 in the ankyrin repeat domain and 5 in the BRCT domain were found to be non-functional in HDR. Two known benign variants were found to be functional in HDR, and three known pathogenic variants were non-functional, supporting the notion that the HDR assay can be used to predict the clinical risk of BARD1 variants. The identification of HDR-deficient variants in the ankyrin repeat domain indicates there are DNA repair functions associated with this domain that have not been closely examined. In order to examine whether BARD1-associated loss of HDR function results in DNA damage sensitivity, cells expressing non-functional BARD1 variants were treated with ionizing radiation or cisplatin. These cells were found to be more sensitive to DNA damage, and variations in the residual HDR function of non-functional variants did not correlate with variations in sensitivity. These findings improve the understanding of BARD1 functional domains in DNA repair and support that this functional assay is useful for predicting the cancer association of BARD1 variants.
... It is now apparent that mutations of several other genes, such as BARD1, PALB2 (Partner And Localizer Of BRCA2) and BRIP1 (BRCA1 Interacting Protein C-Terminal Helicase 1) [24], contribute to familial breast cancer. BARD1 mutations are expected to account for additional cases of non-BRCA1/2 inherited breast cancer and have been reported in non-BRCA mutated breast cancer families [25][26][27][28]. A recent work has suggested BARD1 as cancer-associated gene in ovarian cancer by a case-control association analysis between 1915 patients and Exome Sequencing Project (ESP, http://varianttools.sourceforge.net/Annotation/EVS) ...
... and a mutation frequency of 0.18% [29]. Thus, most of the published data are consistent with BARD1 involvement in breast and ovarian cancers susceptibility [12][13][14][15][16][25][26][27][28][29]. Indeed, BARD1 is now included on clinical gene panels for testing for susceptibility to these two tumors. ...
BRCA1 Associated RING Domain 1 (BARD1) encodes a protein which interacts with the N-terminal region of BRCA1 in vivo and in vitro. The full length (FL) BARD1 mRNA includes 11 exons and encodes a protein comprising of six domains (N-terminal RING-finger domain, three Ankyrin repeats and two C-terminal BRCT domains) with different functions. Emerging data suggest that BARD1 can have both tumor-suppressor gene and oncogene functions in tumor initiation and progression. Indeed, whereas FL BARD1 protein acts as tumor-suppressor with and without BRCA1 interactions, aberrant splice variants of BARD1 have been detected in various cancers and have been shown to play an oncogenic role. Further evidence for a dualistic role came with the identification of BARD1 as a neuroblastoma predisposition gene in our genome wide association study which has demonstrated that single nucleotide polymorphisms in BARD1 can correlate with risk or can protect against cancer based on their association with the expression of FL and splice variants of BARD1. This review is an overview of how BARD1 functions in tumorigenesis with opposite effects in various types of cancer.
... Nonetheless, continued analyses in C. elegans will be instrumental in defining the fundamental roles of BRCA1-BARD1 in the context of a whole organism. BARD1 serves an accessory role to ensure BRCA1-mediated polyubiquitylation and nuclear localization BARD1 was identified as a BRCA1 interacting protein and mutations in BARD1 also lead to an increased incidence of cancer [2,6,76]. Structural work defined the contact sites between the two proteins at the helices adjacent to the RING domains and demonstrated that only BRCA1 binds E2s for ubiquitin transfer, while BARD1 is required to stimulate BRCA1's E3 ligase activity [15,77,78]. ...
The tumor suppressor BRCA1-BARD1 complex regulates many cellular processes; of critical importance to its tumor suppressor function is its role in genome integrity. Although RING E3 ubiquitin ligase activity is the only known enzymatic activity of the complex, the in vivo requirement for BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ubiquitin ligase activity has been controversial. Here we probe the role of BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ubiquitin ligase activity in vivo using C. elegans. Genetic, cell biological, and biochemical analyses of mutants defective for E3 ligase activity suggest there is both E3 ligase-dependent and independent functions of the complex in the context of DNA damage repair and meiosis. We show that E3 ligase activity is important for nuclear accumulation of the complex and specifically to concentrate at meiotic recombination sites but not at DNA damage sites in proliferating germ cells. While BRCA1 alone is capable of monoubiquitylation, BARD1 is required with BRCA1 to promote polyubiquitylation. We find that the requirement for E3 ligase activity and BARD1 in DNA damage signaling and repair can be partially alleviated by driving the nuclear accumulation and self-association of BRCA1. Our data suggest that in addition to E3 ligase activity, BRCA1 may serve a structural role for DNA damage signaling and repair while BARD1 plays an accessory role to enhance BRCA1 function.
... These mutations have no impact on recruitment to HDR [23], as opposed to the comparable mutation in BRCA1 BRCT (S1598F) [6]. Furthermore, the BRCA1/BARD1 heterodimer interaction was disrupted by BARD1 or BRACA1 mutations associated with the presence of breast cancer, such as mutations of the RING finger domain [24,25], missense mutations [26][27][28], and alterations of ANK sequences that are involved in the regulation of transcription [29]. In addition, the heterodimer, with the help of cleavage stimulation factor subunit 1 (CSTF1), inhibits inappropriate mRNA polyadenylation at DNA repair sites [30,31]. ...
The full-length BRCA1-associated RING domain 1 (BARD1) gene encodes a 777-aa protein. BARD1 displays a dual role in cancer development and progression as it acts as a tumor suppressor and an oncogene. Structurally, BARD1 has homologous domains to BRCA1 that aid their heterodimer interaction to inhibit the progression of different cancers such as breast and ovarian cancers following the BRCA1-dependant pathway. In addition, BARD1 was shown to be involved in other pathways that are involved in tumor suppression (BRCA1-independent pathway) such as the TP53-dependent apoptotic signaling pathway. However, there are abundant BARD1 isoforms exist that are different from the full-length BARD1 due to nonsense and frameshift mutations, or deletions were found to be associated with susceptibility to various cancers including neuroblastoma, lung, breast, and cervical cancers. This article reviews the spectrum of BARD1 full-length genes and its different isoforms and their anticipated associated risk. Additionally, the study also highlights the role of BARD1 as an oncogene in breast cancer patients and its potential uses as a prognostic/diagnostic biomarker and as a therapeutic target for cancer susceptibility testing and treatment.
... New candidate genes where the association with HBC and/or HBOC is still unknown include BARD1, MRE11, RAD50, and NBN (Table S1). BARD1, which encodes a BRCA1 interacting protein, was proposed as a candidate risk gene soon after the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2 [31,136,137]. MRE11, RAD50, and NBN, which were proposed as candidates a decade after the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2 [138,139], encode proteins of the MRN complex, a multi-protein structure that has been shown to play an important role in sensing double stranded DNA breaks for DNA repair (reviewed in [34]). Thus far, there have been reports investigating variants in BARD1, MRE11, and NBN in FCs, but not RAD50. ...
The French Canadian population of the province of Quebec has been recognized for its contribution to research in medical genetics, especially in defining the role of heritable pathogenic variants in cancer predisposing genes. Multiple carriers of a limited number of pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2, the major risk genes for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome families, have been identified in French Canadians, which is in stark contrast to the array of over 2000 different pathogenic variants reported in each of these genes in other populations. As not all such cancer syndrome families are explained by BRCA1 and BRCA2, newly proposed gene candidates identified in other populations have been investigated for their role in conferring risk in French Canadian cancer families. For example, multiple carriers of distinct variants were identified in PALB2 and RAD51D. The unique genetic architecture of French Canadians has been attributed to shared ancestry due to common ancestors of early settlers of this population with origins mainly from France. In this review, we discuss the merits of genetically characterizing cancer predisposing genes in French Canadians of Quebec. We focused on genes that have been implicated in hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome families as they have been the most thoroughly characterized cancer syndromes in this population. We describe how genetic analyses of French Canadians have facilitated: (i) the classification of variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2; (ii) the identification and classification of variants in newly proposed breast and/or ovarian cancer predisposing genes; and (iii) the identification of a new breast cancer predisposing gene candidate, RECQL. The genetic architecture of French Canadians provides a unique opportunity to evaluate new candidate cancer predisposing genes regardless of the population in which they were identified.
... Most studies indicate that BARD1 is indispensable for BRCA1 function and depletion of BARD1 leads to highly similar phenotypes as observed for BRCA1 mutants. Mutations in BARD1 have been identified in patients with breast, ovarian and other cancer types, although at a lower frequency than BRCA1 mutations (Thai et al., 1998;Ghimenti et al., 2002). Further, as with BRCA1, loss of BARD1 results in embryonic lethality in mice as well as defects in HR leading to chromosomal instability (McCarthy et al., 2003). ...
Meiosis is a specialized cell cycle that results in the production of haploid gametes for sexual reproduction. During meiosis, homologous chromosomes are connected by chiasmata, the physical manifestation of crossovers. Crossovers are formed by the repair of intentionally induced double strand breaks by homologous recombination and facilitate chromosome alignment on the meiotic spindle and proper chromosome segregation. While it is well established that the tumor suppressors BRCA1 and BRCA2 function in DNA repair and homologous recombination in somatic cells, the functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in meiosis have received less attention. Recent studies in both mice and the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans have provided insight into the roles of these tumor suppressors in a number of meiotic processes, revealing both conserved and organism-specific functions. BRCA1 forms an E3 ubiquitin ligase as a heterodimer with BARD1 and appears to have regulatory roles in a number of key meiotic processes. BRCA2 is a very large protein that plays an intimate role in homologous recombination. As women with no indication of cancer but carrying BRCA mutations show decreased ovarian reserve and accumulated oocyte DNA damage, studies in these systems may provide insight into why BRCA mutations impact reproductive success in addition to their established roles in cancer.
... Moreover, somatic alterations of the BARD1 gene have been identified in different tumors, such as BC and uterine cancer [183], generating new opportunities for the future treatment of these tumors. ...
Breast and ovarian cancers are some of the most common tumors in females, and the genetic predisposition is emerging as one of the key risk factors in the development of these two malignancies. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are the best-known genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, recent advances in molecular techniques, Next-Generation Sequencing in particular, have led to the identification of many new genes involved in the predisposition to breast and/or ovarian cancer, with different penetrance estimates. TP53, PTEN, STK11, and CDH1 have been identified as high penetrance genes for the risk of breast/ovarian cancers. Besides them, PALB2, BRIP1, ATM, CHEK2, BARD1, NBN, NF1, RAD51C, RAD51D and mismatch repair genes have been recognized as moderate and low penetrance genes, along with other genes encoding proteins involved in the same pathways, possibly associated with breast/ovarian cancer risk. In this review, we summarize the past and more recent findings in the field of cancer predisposition genes, with insights into the role of the encoded proteins and the associated genetic disorders. Furthermore, we discuss the possible clinical utility of genetic testing in terms of prevention protocols and therapeutic approaches.
The BRCA1/BARD1 complex plays a key role in the repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in both somatic cells and germ cells. However, the underlying molecular mechanism by which this complex mediates DSB repair is not fully understood. Here, we examined the XY body of male germ cells, where DSBs are accumulated. We show that the recruitment of the BRCA1/BARD1 complex to the unsynapsed axis of the XY body is mediated by pre-ribosomal RNA (pre-rRNA). Similarly, the BRCA1/BARD1 complex associates with pre-rRNA in somatic cells, which not only forms nuclear foci in response to DSBs, but also targets the BRCA1/BARD1 complex to DSBs. The interactions between the BRCT domains of the BRCA1/BARD1 complex and pre-rRNA induce liquid–liquid phase separations, which may be the molecular basis of DSB-induced nuclear foci formation of the BRCA1/BARD1 complex. Moreover, cancer-associated mutations in the BRCT domains of BRCA1 and BARD1 abolish their interactions with pre-rRNA. Pre-rRNA also mediates BRCA1-dependent homologous recombination, and suppression of pre-rRNA biogenesis sensitizes cells to PARP inhibitor treatment. Collectively, this study reveals that pre-rRNA is a functional partner of the BRCA1/BARD1 complex in the DSB repair.
The functional domains of BARD1, comprise the Ankyrin Repeat Domain (ARD), C-Terminal domains (BRCTs), and a linker between ARD and the BRCTs, which are known to bind to Cleavage stimulation Factor complex-subunit of 50 kDa (CstF-50). The pathogenic mutation Q564H in the BARD1 ARD-linker-BRCT region has been reported to abrogate the binding between BARD1 and CstF-50. Intermediate penetrance variants of BARD1 are associated with the occurrence of breast cancer. Therefore, seven missense variants of unknown significance (VUS), L447V, P454L, N470S, V507M, I509T, C557S, and Q564H of BARD1, reported in the ARD domain and the linker region were evaluated via molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. The mutants revealed statistically significantly different distributions of RMSD (root mean square deviation), residuewise RMSF (root mean square fluctuation), Rg (radius of gyration), SASA (solvent accessible surface area), and COM (centre of mass)-to-COM distance between the ARD and the BRCT repeat, between the wild type and each mutant. The secondary structural composition of the mutants was slightly altered relative to that of the wild type. However, the reported in-silico based prediction require further validation using in-vitro, biophysical and structure-based approachCommunicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.
The BRCA1-BARD1 complex is a crucial tumor suppressor E3 ubiquitin ligase involved in DNA double-stranded break repair. The BRCA1-BARD1 RING domains interact with UBE2D3 through the BRCA1 interface and this complex flexibly tether to the nucleosome core particle (NCP), where BRCA1 and BARD1 interacts with histone H2A and H2B of NCP. Mutations in the BRCA1-BARD1 RING domains have been linked to familial breast and ovarian cancer. Seven mutations were analyzed to understand their effect on the binding interface of protein partners and changes in conformational dynamics. Molecular dynamics simulations revealed that mutant complexes were less conformationally flexible than the wildtype complex. Protein-protein interaction profiling showed the importance of specific molecular interactions, hotspot and hub residues, and some of these were lost in the mutant complexes. Two mutations (BRCA1L51W-K65R and BARD1C53W) hindered significant interaction between protein partners and may prevent signaling for ubiquitination of histones in NCP and other cellular targets. The structural compactness and reduced significant interaction in mutant complexes may be the possible reason of preventing ubiquitination and hinder DNA repair, resulting cancer.
BRCA1-associated RING domain 1 (BARD1) constitutes a heterodimeric complex with BRAC1 that triggers several essential biological functions that regulate gene transcription and DNA double-stranded break repair mechanism. BARD1 gene was discovered in 1996 to interact with BRCA1 directly and encodes a 777-aa protein. Interestingly, the BARD1 has a dual role in breast cancer development and progression. It acts as a tumor suppressor and oncogene; therefore, it is included on panels of clinical genes as a prognostic marker. Structurally, BARD1 has homologous domains to BRCA1 that aid their heterodimer interaction to inhibit the progression of different cancers, including breast and ovarian cancers. In addition to the BRCA1-independent pathway, other pathways are involved in tumor suppression, such as the TP53-dependent apoptotic signaling pathway. However, there are abundant BARD1 isoforms that are different from full-length BARD1 due to nonsense and frameshift mutations and deletions associated with susceptibility to cancer, such as neuroblastoma, lung cancer, cervical cancer, and breast cancer. In the current chapter, we shed light on the spectrum of BARD1 full-length genes and isoform mutations and their associated risk with breast cancer. The chapter also highlights the role of BARD1 as an oncogene in breast cancer patients and its uses as a prognostic biomarker for cancer susceptibility testing and treatment
Cancer is a major health problem in oral and breast tissues. The development of breast cancer results in higher
incidences of mortality. Hence great strides have been made in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
Prevailing treatment options are invasive and non- specific, killing healthy cells as well as cancerous ones. It
has been found that many apoptotic genes can serve as possible targets in cancer therapy. The mutated
apoptotic genes and disrupted gene expression pathways result in inactivation of caspases and death receptors
leading to reduced apoptosis of aberrant cancer cells. Identifying and targeting these genes may be an
opportunistic option in tailored cancer treatment for times to come.
Breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1) is closely related to the BRCA2 (breast cancer type 2 susceptibility protein) and BARD1 (BRCA1-associated RING domain-1) proteins. The homodimers were formed through their RING fingers; however they form more compact heterodimers preferentially, influencing BRCA1 residues 1–109 and BARD1 residues 26–119. We implemented an integrative computational pipeline to screen all the mutations in BRCA1 and identify the most significant mutations influencing the Protein-Protein Interactions (PPI) in the BRCA1-BARD1 protein complex. The amino acids involved in the PPI regions were identified from the PDBsum database with the PDB ID: 1JM7. We screened 2118 missense mutations in BRCA1 and none in BARD1 for pathogenicity and stability and analyzed the amino acid sequences for conserved residues. We identified the most significant mutations from these screenings as V11G, M18K, L22S, and T97R positioned in the PPI regions of the BRCA1-BARD1 protein complex. We further performed protein-protein docking using the ZDOCK server. The native protein-protein complex showed the highest binding score of 2118.613, and the V11G mutant protein complex showed the least binding score of 1992.949. The other three mutation protein complexes had binding scores between the native and V11G protein complexes. Finally, a molecular dynamics simulation study using GROMACS was performed to comprehend changes in the BRCA1-BARD1 complex's binding pattern due to the mutation. From the analysis, we observed the highest deviation with lowest compactness and a decrease in the intramolecular h-bonds in the BRCA1-BARD1 protein complex with the V11G mutation compared to the native complex or the complexes with other mutations.
OLA1 is a P-loop ATPase, implicated in centrosome duplication through the interactions with tumor suppressors BRCA1 and BARD1. Disruption of the interaction of OLA1 with BARD1 results in centrosome amplification. However, the molecular interplay and mechanism of the OLA1-BARD1 complex remain elusive. Here, we use a battery of biophysical, biochemical, and structural analyses to elucidate the molecular basis of the OLA1-BARD1 interaction. Our structural and enzyme kinetics analyses show this nucleotide-dependent interaction enhances the ATPase activity of OLA1 by increasing the turnover number (kcat). Unlike canonical GTPase activating proteins that act directly on the catalytic G domain, the BARD1 BRCT domain binds to the OLA1 TGS domain via a highly conserved BUDR motif. A cancer related mutation V695L on BARD1 is known to associate with centrosome abnormality. The V695L mutation reduces the BARD1 BRCT-mediated activation of OLA1. Crystallographic snapshot of the BRCT V695L mutant at 1.88 Å reveals this mutation perturbs the OLA1 binding site, resulting in reduced interaction. Altogether, our findings suggest the BARD1 BRCT domain serves as an ATPase activating protein to control OLA1 allosterically.
The breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1) and its partner – the BRCA1-associated RING domain protein 1 (BARD1) – are key players in a plethora of fundamental biological functions including, among others, DNA repair, replication fork protection, cell cycle progression, telomere maintenance, chromatin remodeling, apoptosis and tumor suppression. However, mutations in their encoding genes transform them into dangerous threats, and substantially increase the risk of developing cancer and other malignancies during the lifetime of the affected individuals. Understanding how BRCA1 and BARD1 perform their biological activities therefore not only provides a powerful mean to prevent such fatal occurrences but can also pave the way to the development of new targeted therapeutics. Thus, through this review work we aim at presenting the major efforts focused on the functional characterization and structural insights of BRCA1 and BARD1, per se and in combination with all their principal mediators and regulators, and on the multifaceted roles these proteins play in the maintenance of human genome integrity.
p50, the mature product of NFKB1, is constitutively produced from its precursor, p105. Here, we identify BARD1 as a p50-interacting factor. p50 directly associates with the BARD1 BRCT domains via a C-terminal phospho-serine motif. This interaction is induced by ATR and results in mono-ubiquitination of p50 by the BARD1/BRCA1 complex. During the cell cycle, p50 is mono-ubiquitinated in S phase and loss of this post-translational modification increases S phase progression and chromosomal breakage. Genome-wide studies reveal a substantial decrease in p50 chromatin enrichment in S phase and Cycln E is identified as a factor regulated by p50 during the G1 to S transition. Functionally, interaction with BARD1 promotes p50 protein stability and consistent with this, in human cancer specimens, low nuclear BARD1 protein strongly correlates with low nuclear p50. These data indicate that p50 mono-ubiquitination by BARD1/BRCA1 during the cell cycle regulates S phase progression to maintain genome integrity.
Rapid advancement in research, especially in the arena of nanoparticles with biological applications, have led to the development of new diagnostics and treatment prospects. Cancer occurring in the breast poses a major public health problem worldwide. Application of nanotechnology to treat these cancers comes across as a revolutionary approach. The importance of understanding the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of nanoformulation in the body, and reviewing their clinical significance, is highlighted and explained in this chapter.
Introduction:
In the past five years, multi-gene panels have replaced the practice of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in cases of suspected inherited breast cancer susceptibility. A variety of genes have been included on these panels without certainty of their clinical utility. Pertinent current and historical literature was reviewed to provide an up-to-date snapshot of the changing landscape of the use of gene panel tests in the context of breast cancer.
Areas covered:
Following a recent review of the evidence, ten genes have been found to have definitive evidence of increased breast cancer risk with variable penetrance. Here, we review the recent changes to the practice of multi-gene panel use in breast cancer diagnoses, including an update on next generation sequencing, alternative models of genetic testing, considerations when ordering these panel tests, and recommendations for management in identified carriers for a variety of genes. A comparison of screening recommendations and carrier frequencies from recent studies are also explored. Lastly, we consider what the future of hereditary oncologic genetic testing holds.
Expert opinion:
The transition to multi-gene panels in breast cancer patients has improved the likelihood of capturing a rare variant in a well-established gene associated with hereditary breast cancer (e.g. BRCA1 and BRCA2, TP53). There is also an increase in the likelihood of uncovering an uncertain result. This could be in the form of a variant of uncertain significance, or a pathogenic variant in a gene with questionable breast cancer risk-association. Concurrently, a changing landscape of who orders genetic tests will improve access to genetic testing. This pervasiveness of genetic testing must be accompanied with increased genetic literacy in all healthcare providers, and access to support from genetics professionals for management of patients and at-risk family members.
In addition to several well-established breast cancer (BC) susceptibility genes, the contribution of other candidate genes to BC risk remains mostly undefined. BARD1 is a potentially predisposing BC gene, however, the rarity of its mutations and an insufficient family/study size have hampered corroboration and estimation of the associated cancer risks. To clarify the role of BARD1 mutations in BC predisposition, a comprehensive case-control association study of a recurring nonsense mutation c.1690C>T (p.Q564X) was performed, comprising ~14,000 unselected BC patients and ~5900 controls from Polish and Belarusian populations. For comparisons, two BARD1 variants of unknown significance were also genotyped. We detected the highest number of BARD1 variants in BC cases in any individual BARD1-specific study, including 38 p.Q564X mutations. The p.Q564X was associated with a moderately increased risk of BC (OR = 2.30, p = 0.04). The estimated risk was even higher for triple-negative BC and bilateral BC. As expected, the two tested variants of unknown significance did not show significant associations with BC risk. Our study provides substantial evidence for the association of a deleterious BARD1 mutation with BC as a low/moderate risk allele. The p.Q564X was shown to be a Central European recurrent mutation with potential relevance for future genetic testing.
Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes predispose afflicted individuals to breast, ovarian, and other cancers. The BRCA-encoded products form complexes with other tumor suppressor proteins and with the recombinase enzyme RAD51 to mediate chromosome damage repair by homologous recombination and also to protect stressed DNA replication forks against spurious nucleolytic attrition. Understanding how the BRCA tumor suppressor network executes its biological functions would provide the foundation for developing targeted cancer therapeutics, but progress in this area has been greatly hampered by the challenge of obtaining purified BRCA complexes for mechanistic studies. In this article, we review how recent effort begins to overcome this technical challenge, leading to functional and structural insights into the biochemical attributes of these complexes and the multifaceted roles that they fulfill in genome maintenance. We also highlight the major mechanistic questions that remain. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Biochemistry Volume 88 is June 20, 2019. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
The last 10 years witnessed an acceleration of our understanding of what genetic factors underpin the risk of breast cancer. Rare high- and moderate-penetrance variants such as those in the BRCA genes account for a small proportion of the familial risk of breast cancer. Low-penetrance alleles are expected to underlie the remaining heritability. By now, there are about 180 genetic polymorphisms that are associated with risk, most of them of modest effect. In combination, they can be used to identify women at the lowest or highest ends of the risk spectrum, which might lead to more efficient cancer prevention strategies. Most of these variants were discovered in populations of European descent. As a result, we might be failing to discover additional polymorphisms that could explain risk in other groups. This review highlights breast cancer genetic epidemiology studies conducted in Latin America, and summarizes the information that they provide, with special attention to similarities and differences with studies in other populations. It includes studies of common variants, as well as moderate- and high-penetrance variants. In addition, it addresses the gaps that need to be bridged in order to better understand breast cancer genetic risk in Latin America.
The BRCT domain of BARD1 (BARD1 BRCT) is involved in many cellular processes such as DNA damage repair (DDR) and cell-cycle checkpoint regulation. BARD1 BRCT performs tumor suppressor function by recruiting BRCA1 at DNA damage site via interactions with other DNA damage repair (DDR) proteins. Considering the importance of the BRCT domain in genomic integrity, we decided to evaluate reported mutations of BARD1 BRCT Cys645Arg, Val695Leu, and Ser761Asn for their pathogenicity. To explore the effect of the mutation on the structure and function, BARD1 BRCT wild-type proteins and the mutant proteins were studied using different biochemical, biophysical and in silico techniques. Comparative fluorescence, circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy and limited proteolysis studies demonstrate the well-folded structural conformation of wild-type and mutant proteins. However, thermal and chemical denaturation studies revealed similarity in the folding pattern of BARD1 BRCT wild-type and Cys645Arg mutant proteins, whereas there was a significant loss in the thermodynamic stability of Val695Leu and Ser761Asn mutants. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation studies on wild-type and mutant protein structures indicate the loss in structural integrity of mutants compared with the wild-type protein.
BRCA1 functions as a tumor suppressor in DNA repair and centrosome regulation. Previously, Obg-like ATPase 1 (OLA1) was shown to interacts with BARD1, a heterodimer partner of BRCA1. OLA1 binds to BRCA1, BARD1, and γ-tubulin and functions in centrosome regulation. This study determined that overexpression of wild-type OLA1 (OLA1-WT) caused centrosome amplification due to centriole overduplication in mammary tissue-derived cells. Centrosome amplification induced by overexpression of the cancer-derived OLA1 mutant, which is deficient at regulating centrosome number, occurred in significantly fewer cells than in that induced by overexpression of OLA1-WT. Thus, it was hypothesized that overexpression of OLA1 with normal function efficiently induces centrosome amplification, but not that of OLA1 mutants, which are deficient at regulating centrosome number. We analyzed whether overexpression of OLA1 missense mutants of nine candidate phosphorylation residues, three residues modified with acetylation, and two ATP-binding residues caused centrosome amplification, and identified five missense mutants that are deficient in the regulation of centrosome number. Three of them did not bind to BARD1. Two phosphomimetic mutations restored the binding to BARD1 and the efficient centrosome amplification by their overexpression. Knockdown and overexpression of BARD1 also caused centrosome amplification. BARD1 mutant reported in cancer failed to bind to OLA1 and rescue the BARD1 knockdown-induced centrosome amplification and reduced its centrosomal localization. Combined, these data reveal that the OLA1-BARD1 interaction is important for the regulation of centrosome number.
Implications:
Regulation of centrosome number by BRCA1/BARD1 together with OLA1 is important for the genome integrity to prevent tumor development.
Significance
Loss-of-function mutations in BRCA1 and its protein partner BARD1 lead to high risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Both BRCA1 and BARD1 proteins harbor RING domains, and missense mutations in the critical residues of the BRCA1 RING domain are among those known to predispose to cancer. The BRCA1 RING domain is a ubiquitin ligase, but the function of the BARD1 RING domain and the consequences of mutations in it are unknown. Evaluation of missense mutations at evolutionarily conserved zinc-binding residues of BARD1, each identified in a family severely affected with breast cancer, revealed that BARD1 is necessary for two core functions of the BRCA1/BARD1 complex: ubiquitylation of histone 2A on nucleosomes and transcriptional regulation of genes of estrogen metabolism.
The tumour suppressor complex BRCA1-BARD1 functions in the repair of DNA double-stranded breaks by homologous recombination. During this process, BRCA1-BARD1 facilitates the nucleolytic resection of DNA ends to generate a single-stranded template for the recruitment of another tumour suppressor complex, BRCA2-PALB2, and the recombinase RAD51. Here, by examining purified wild-type and mutant BRCA1-BARD1, we show that both BRCA1 and BARD1 bind DNA and interact with RAD51, and that BRCA1-BARD1 enhances the recombinase activity of RAD51. Mechanistically, BRCA1-BARD1 promotes the assembly of the synaptic complex, an essential intermediate in RAD51-mediated DNA joint formation. We provide evidence that BRCA1 and BARD1 are indispensable for RAD51 stimulation. Notably, BRCA1-BARD1 mutants with weakened RAD51 interactions show compromised DNA joint formation and impaired mediation of homologous recombination and DNA repair in cells. Our results identify a late role of BRCA1-BARD1 in homologous recombination, an attribute of the tumour suppressor complex that could be targeted in cancer therapy.
BRCA1 associated ring domain protein 1(BARD1) is a tumor suppressor protein having a wide role in cellular processes like cell-cycle checkpoint, DNA damage repair and maintenance of genomic integrity. Germ-line mutation Gln 564 His discovered in linker region of BARD1 leads to loss of binding to Cleavage stimulating factor (CstF50), which in turn instigates the premature mRNA transcript formation and apoptosis. We have studied the dynamics of ARD domain present in the BARD1 wild-type and mutant protein in association with CstF50 using biophysical, biochemical and molecular dynamics simulations. It has been observed that the ARD domain is relatively more flexible than the BRCT domain of BARD1. Further relative orientations of both the ARD and BRCT domains varies due to the highly flexible nature of the connecting linker region present between the domains. It has been observed that mutant ARD domain is more dynamic in nature compared to wild-type protein. Molecular docking studies between BARD1 Gln 564 His mutant and CstF50 shows the loss of interactions. Furthermore, domain motion of ARD present in BARD1 was stabilized when complexed with CstF50.
Next-generation sequencing promotes identification of mutations in non-BRCA1/2 genes in hereditary cancer families. The contribution of mutations in moderate penetrance genes to hereditary cancer risk is not well established. Here, we report a family with early onset breast and fallopian tube cancer that was identified as carrying germline mutations in BARD1 and ATM genes. Loss of heterozygosity studies suggest a causative role of the BARD1 mutation in the development of primary peritoneal cancer, but fail to confirm an association between germline ATM mutations and breast cancer development in this family. Complexities in interpreting implications of mutations in moderate-risk cancer susceptibility genes are discussed.
Key Clinical Message
One of the strongest risk factors predisposing patients to breast cancer is a positive family history. In our study, we describe a patient diagnosed with multiple breast cancer tumors. Genetic analysis revealed a pathogenic variant in BARD1, which is associated with an increased risk of developing certain types of cancer.
The breast cancer can be sporadic or familial. Studies in the early 1990s lead to the recognition of the role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in hereditary breast cancer. Next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have permitted expansion of the number of genes that can be simultaneously analyzed for assessment of breast cancer risk. NGS has opened a large window into the complex biology of carcinogenesis and management of breast cancer. Mutation panels are now being commonly used in the making therapeutic decisions. In this chapter, we review the data on the gene panels being used for risk assessment and clinical management of patients and discuss the pros and cons of the approaches.
Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent carcinoma in women. The cumulative risk for the disease is 10 % up to the age of 80. A familial history of BC and ovarian cancer (OC) is a significant risk factor. 5–10 % of all cases of BC and 25–40 % of cases in patients under the age of 35 have a hereditary origin. BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations are responsible for 3–8 % of all cases of BC and 30–40 % of familial cases. Ten percent of patients with OC have a genetic predisposition. About 80 % of families with a history of OC have BRCA1 mutations, while 15 % have BRCA2 mutations. Women at risk can receive counseling from interdisciplinary cancer genetics clinics and genetic testing. Risk calculation programs can define the risk and assist in decision-making for genetic testing and clinical options.
Since the initial discovery that pathogenic germline alterations in BRCA 1/2 increase susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer, many additional genes have now been discovered that also increase breast cancer risk. Given that several more genes have now been implicated in hereditary breast cancer syndromes, there is increased clinical use of multigene panel testing to evaluate patients with a suspected genetic predisposition to breast cancer. While this is most certainly a cost-effective approach, broader testing strategies have resulted in a higher likelihood of identifying moderate-penetrance genes, for which management guidelines regarding breast cancer risk reduction have not been firmly established. In addition, the testing of more genes has led to increased detection of variants of uncertain significance. We review the current knowledge regarding both high- and moderate-risk hereditary breast cancer syndromes, as well as additional genes implicated in hereditary breast cancer for which there is limited data. Furthermore, strategies for cancer risk reduction in mutation carriers as well as therapeutic implications for those patients who harbor pathogenic germline alterations are discussed.
The BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes fit the traditional description of tumor-suppressor genes, according to Knudson’s classic two-hit model (1,2). In familial cancers, an individual inherits a germline mutation, and thus this first hit is present in all cells of the body. A somatic mutation represents the second hit on a given cell, resulting in the loss of the wild-type (WT) allele, thus rendering both copies of the gene inactive (3,4). In sporadic cancers, loss of function of a tumor-suppressor gene is accomplished by two somatic mutations that alter the alleles on both chromosomes (chrs). Knudson’ s model accurately accounts for the early onset of familial cancers caused by a pre-existing germline mutation; the accumulation of two somatic mutations in a single cell, a much less likely event, may occur once in several decades, giving rise to a sporadic cancer.
Genetic evaluation for cancer susceptibility is becoming an integral part of medical care. This chapter provides an update on the genetic basis of breast cancer including genes recently identified which are associated with low to moderate risk for developing breast cancer. Approaches to genetic testing for breast cancer risk are explained. Implications of genetic testing on individuals as well as their family members are reviewed and updated.
For nearly two decades most research on BARD1 was closely linked to research on BRCA1, the breast cancer predisposition gene. The co-expression of BARD1 and BRCA1 genes in most tissues, the nearly identical phenotype of Bard1 and Brca1 knock-out mice, and the fact that BRCA1 and BARD1 proteins form a stable complex, led to the general assumption that BARD1 acts as an accessory to BRCA1. More recent research on both proteins showed that BRCA1 and BARD1 might have common as well as separate functions. This review is an overview of how BARD1 functions and controls BRCA1. It highlights also experimental evidence for dominant negative, tumor promoting, functions of aberrant isoforms of BARD1 that are associated with and drivers of various types of cancer.
Genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are often sequenced in search of mutations that are predictive of susceptibility to these cancer types, but the sequence results are frequently ambiguous due to detection of missense substitutions for which the clinical impact is unknown. The BARD1 protein is the heterodimeric partner of BRCA1 and is included on clinical gene panels for testing for susceptibility to HBOC. Like BRCA1, it is required for homology-directed DNA repair (HDR). We measured the HDR function of 29 BARD1 missense variants, 27 culled from clinical test results and two synthetic variants. 23 of the assayed variants were functional for HDR; of these, four are known neutral variants. Three variants showed intermediate function, and three others were defective in HDR. When mapped to BARD1 domains, residues crucial for HDR were located in the N- and C- termini of BARD1. In the BARD1 RING domain, critical residues mapped to the zinc-coordinating amino acids and to the BRCA1-BARD1 binding interface, highlighting the importance of interaction between BRCA1 and BARD1 for HDR activity. Based on these results, we propose that the HDR assay is a useful complement to genetic analyses to classify BARD1 variants of unknown clinical significance. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
BARD1 - BRCA1 complex plays an important role in DNA damage repair, apoptosis, chromatin remodeling and other important processes required for cell survival. BRCA1 and BARD1 heterodimer possess E3 ligase activity and is involved in genome maintenance, by functioning in surveillance for DNA damage, thereby regulating multiple pathways including tumor suppression. BRCTs domains are evolutionary conserved domains present in different proteins such as BRCA1, BARD1, XRCC and MDC1 regulating damage response and cell- cycle control through protein-protein interactions. Nonetheless, the role of BARD1BRCT in recruitment of DNA repair mechanism and structural integrity with BRCA1-complex is still implicit. To explicate the role of BARD1BRCT in the DNA repair mechanism, in-silico, in-vitro and biophysical approach were applied to characterize BARD1BRCT wild -type and Arg658Cys and Ile738Val mutants. However, no drastic secondary and tertiary structural changes in the mutant proteins were observed. Thermal and chemical denaturation studies revealed that mutant Arg658Cys and Ile738Val has a decrease Tm and ∆G than the wild- type. In-silico studies of BARD1BRCT (568-777) and mutant protein indicates loss in structural compactness on the Ile738Val mutant. Comparative studies of wild- type and mutants will thus be helpful in understanding the basic role of BARD1BRCT in DNA damage repair.
Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for 10-20% of all breast cancers and conventional chemotherapy is the only effective systemic treatment. Germline BRCA1/2 mutations are found in approximately 15% of TNBC patients. In the past we have documented pathogenic mutations in BARD1, a BRCA1 interacting protein, in families at high risk for breast cancer. In the current study we have analyzed germline DNA from 61 estrogen receptor negative patients (of which 42 were TNBC) for the presence of mutations in the BRCA1, BRCA2 and BARD1 gene. BRCA1/2 mutations were found in 8/42 (19%) TNBC patients, but not in the ER-/HER2+ cohort. We also found four good candidate pathogenic BARD1 mutations in the TNBC cohort, including two protein truncating mutations (p.Gln564Ter and p.Arg641Ter). Our data suggest that TNBC patients are enriched for pathogenic BARD1 germline mutations as compared to control samples and high breast cancer risk families. Ten out of the 42 investigated TNBC patients carry a BRCA pathway mutation (in BRCA1, BRCA2 or BARD1) rendering them susceptible to homologous recombination deficiency. These patients should become eligible for exploring the efficacy of PARP inhibitors.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Only approximately 50% of all familial breast cancers can be explained by known genetic factors, including mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. One of the most extensively studied candidates for breast and/or ovarian cancer susceptibility is BARD1. Although it was suggested that large mutations may contribute substantially to the deleterious variants of BARD1, no systematic study of the large mutations in BARD1 has been performed. To further elucidate the role of large mutations in BARD1, we designed a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) assay and performed an analysis of 504 women with a familial breast and/or ovarian cancer and 313 patients with ovarian cancer. The investigation did not reveal any large mutations in the BARD1 gene. Although the analysis was not focused on identification of small mutations, we detected seven deleterious or potentially deleterious point mutations, which contribute substantially to the total number of BARD1 mutations detected so far. In conclusion, although we cannot exclude the presence of large mutations in BARD1, our study indicates that such mutations do not contribute substantially to the risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer. However, it has to be noted that our results may be specific to the Polish population. Five to ten percent of all breast cancer (MIM#114480) cases are inherited and consequently aggregate in families. Hereditary breast cancer, on average, is diagnosed in a young age and/or co-occurs with ovarian cancer (MIM#167000). It is estimated that germline mutations affecting the highly susceptible BRCA1 (MIM*113705) and BRCA2 (MIM*600185) genes explain 16–40% of all familial breast cancer cases
Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women around the world. About one in 12 women in the West develop breast cancer at some point in life. It is estimated that 5%-10% of all breast cancer cases in women are linked to hereditary susceptibility due to mutations in autosomal dominant genes. The two key players associated with high breast cancer risk are mutations in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2. Another highly important mutation can occur in TP53 resulting in a triple negative breast cancer. However, the great majority of breast cancer cases are not related to a mutated gene of high penetrance, but to genes of low penetrance such as CHEK2, CDH1, NBS1, RAD50, BRIP1 and PALB2, which are frequently mutated in the general population. In this review, we discuss the entire spectrum of mutations which are associated with breast cancer.
BARD1 has been shown to play tumor suppressive roles in human cancer. We performed this meta-analysis and firstly evaluated the association between three common BARD1 polymorphisms (Arg378Ser, Val507Met and Pro24Ser) and cancer susceptibility. We performed this meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, OVID and Web of Science databases was done from database inception to August 2014. Odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined to measure the association between BARD1 polymorphisms and cancer risk. On the basis of 10 studies about BARD1 polymorphisms and cancer, we found that BARD1 Val507Met (G/A) polymorphism was associated with decreased cancer susceptibility (allelic model: OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66-0.87, P < 0.00001; dominant model: OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.65-0.91, P < 0.00001; recessive model: OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55-0.74, P < 0.00001; homozygote comparison: OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.49-0.70, P < 0.00001; heterozygote comparison: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.99 , P = 0.0008). BARD1 Pro24Ser (C/T) polymorphism was also associated decreased cancer risk in allelic model (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.60-0.88, P = 0.0009), dominant model (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56-0.87, P = 0.004), recessive model (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56-0.87 , P = 0.004), homozygote comparison (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.39-0.78, P = 0.0007) and heterozygote comparison (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62-0.91, P = 0.004). And in our sensitivity analysis, when deleting the study performed by Capasso in 2009, we found that BARD1 Arg378Ser polymorphism was associated with decreased cancer risk in allelic model (OR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67-0.97, P = 0.02), dominant model (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.56-0.91, P = 0.007) and heterozygote comparison (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91, 0 = 0.006). In conclusion, BARD1 Arg378Ser, Val507Met and Pro24Ser may be associated with decreased cancer risk. More studies with larger samples and gene-environment interactions are needed to confirm our findings.
DNA damage is a deleterious threat, but occurs daily in all types of cells. In response to DNA damage, poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation, a unique post-translational modification, is immediately catalyzed by poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs) at DNA lesions, which facilitates DNA damage repair. Recent studies suggest that poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation is one of the first steps of cellular DNA damage response and governs early DNA damage response pathways. Suppression of DNA damage-induced poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation by PARP inhibitors impairs early DNA damage response events. Moreover, PARP inhibitors are emerging as anti-cancer drugs in phase III clinical trials for BRCA-deficient tumors. In this review, we discuss recent findings on poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation in DNA damage response as well as the molecular mechanism by which PARP inhibitors selectively kill tumor cells with BRCA mutations.Oncogene advance online publication, 15 September 2014; doi:10.1038/onc.2014.295.
To determine novel genetic alterations in the BRCA1 associated RING domain (BARD1) gene in breast cancer and ovarian cancer and to identify the deleterious or ‘benign’ nature of these genetic variants.
Alternative splicing has critical roles in normal development and can promote growth and survival in cancer. Aberrant splicing, the production of noncanonical and cancer-specific mRNA transcripts, can lead to loss-of-function in tumor suppressors or activation of oncogenes and cancer pathways. Emerging data suggest that aberrant splicing products and loss of canonically spliced variants correlate with stage and progression in malignancy. Here, we review the splicing landscape of TP53, BARD1 and AR to illuminate roles for alternative splicing in cancer. We also examine the intersection between alternative splicing pathways and novel therapeutic approaches.Oncogene advance online publication, 20 January 2014; doi:10.1038/onc.2013.570.
Germ-line mutations of the BRCA1 gene predispose women to early-onset breast and ovarian cancer by compromising the gene’s presumptive function as a tumor
suppressor. Although the biochemical properties of BRCA1 polypeptides are not understood, their expression pattern and subcellular
localization suggest a role in cell-cycle regulation. When resting cells are induced to proliferate, the steady-state levels
of BRCA1 increase in late G1 and reach a maximum during S phase. Moreover, in S phase cells, BRCA1 polypeptides are hyperphosphorylated and accumulate
into discrete subnuclear foci termed “BRCA1 nuclear dots.” BRCA1 associates in vivo with a structurally related protein termed BARD1. Here we show that the steady-state levels of BARD1, unlike those of BRCA1,
remain relatively constant during cell cycle progression. However, immunostaining revealed that BARD1 resides within BRCA1
nuclear dots during S phase of the cell cycle, but not during the G1 phase. Nevertheless, BARD1 polypeptides are found exclusively in the nuclear fractions of both G1- and S-phase cells. Therefore, progression to S phase is accompanied by the aggregation of nuclear BARD1 polypeptides into
BRCA1 nuclear dots. This cell cycle-dependent colocalization of BARD1 and BRCA1 indicates a role for BARD1 in BRCA1-mediated
tumor suppression.
A predisposing gene for breast and ovarian cancer has recently been mapped to chromosome 17q12-21. If this gene is a tumour suppressor gene, allele losses would be expected in the tumours of affected family members and the losses should affect the wild-type chromosome, reflecting the need for inactivation of the wild-type allele at the predisposing locus. In four multiple case breast-ovarian cancer families, we have found that in each of nine tumours which showed allele losses, the losses were from the wild-type chromosome. This suggests that the putative 'breast-ovarian' cancer gene is indeed a tumour suppressor gene.
Human breast cancer is usually caused by genetic alterations of somatic cells of the breast, but occasionally, susceptibility to the disease is inherited. Mapping the genes responsible for inherited breast cancer may also allow the identification of early lesions that are critical for the development of breast cancer in the general population. Chromosome 17q21 appears to be the locale of a gene for inherited susceptibility to breast cancer in families with early-onset disease. Genetic analysis yields a lod score (logarithm of the likelihood ratio for linkage) of 5.98 for linkage of breast cancer susceptibility to D17S74 in early-onset families and negative lod scores in families with late-onset disease. Likelihood ratios in favor of linkage heterogeneity among families ranged between 2000:1 and greater than 10(6):1 on the basis of multipoint analysis of four loci in the region.
We developed mobility shift analysis of single-stranded DNAs on neutral polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis to detect DNA polymorphisms. This method follows digestion of genomic DNA with restriction endonucleases, denaturation in alkaline solution, and electrophoresis on a neutral polyacrylamide gel. After transfer to a nylon membrane, the mobility shift due to a nucleotide substitution of a single-stranded DNA fragment could be detected by hybridization with a nick-translated DNA fragment or more clearly with RNA copies synthesized on each strand of the DNA fragment as probes. As the mobility shift caused by nucleotide substitutions might be due to a conformational change of single-stranded DNAs, we designate the features of single-stranded DNAs as single-strand conformation polymorphisms (SSCPs). Like restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs), SSCPs were found to be allelic variants of true Mendelian traits, and therefore they should be useful genetic markers. Moreover, SSCP analysis has the advantage over RFLP analysis that it can detect DNA polymorphisms and point mutations at a variety of positions in DNA fragments. Since DNA polymorphisms have been estimated to occur every few hundred nucleotides in the human genome, SSCPs may provide many genetic markers.
Four series of cell lines have been derived from patients with ovarian adenocarcinoma. Nine cell lines have been established at one from a solid metastasis. Six lines were derived from the ascites or pleural effusion of patients with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma: PEO1, PEO4, and PEO6 from one patient, PEA1 and PEA2 from a second, and PEO16 from a third. Three lines (PEO14 and PEO23 from ascites and TO14 from a solid metastasis) were derived from a patient with a well-differentiated serous adenocarcinoma. Each set of cell lines was morphologically distinct. The five cell lines PEO1, PEO4, PEO6, PEA1, and PEA2 had cloning efficiencies on plastic of 1-2% and only a few cells in these lines expressed alkaline phosphatase or vimentin. Only a low percentage of these cells reacted with the monoclonal antibodies 123C3 and 123A8 but most reacted with OC125. Conversely the cell lines PEO14, TO14, PEO23, and PEO16 were characterized by low cloning efficiency values (less than 0.05%), marked expression of alkaline phosphatase and vimentin, and good reaction with 123C3 and 123A8 but not OC125. These four cell lines also exhibited dome formation. Four of the cell lines, PEO1, PEO4, PEO6, and PEO16, have been xenografted into immune-deprived mice and found to be tumorigenic.
A strong candidate for the 17q-linked BRCA1 gene, which influences susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer, has been identified
by positional cloning methods. Probable predisposing mutations have been detected in five of eight kindreds presumed to segregate
BRCA1 susceptibility alleles. The mutations include an 11-base pair deletion, a 1-base pair insertion, a stop codon, a missense
substitution, and an inferred regulatory mutation. The BRCA1 gene is expressed in numerous tissues, including breast and ovary,
and encodes a predicted protein of 1863 amino acids. This protein contains a zinc finger domain in its amino-terminal region,
but is otherwise unrelated to previously described proteins. Identification of BRCA1 should facilitate early diagnosis of
breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility in some individuals as well as a better understanding of breast cancer biology.
The BRCA1 gene on chromosome 17q21 is responsible for an autosomal dominant syndrome of increased susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer but no somatic mutations in tumours have yet been described. To study the potential role of BRCA1 in sporadic carcinogenesis, we analysed the genomic DNA of tumour and normal fractions of 47 ovarian cancers for mutations in BRCA1 using the single-strand conformation polymorphism technique. We now describe somatic mutations in the DNA of four tumours which also had loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at a BRCA1 intragenic marker. Our data support a tumour suppressor mechanism for BRCA1; somatic mutations and LOH may result in inactivation of BRCA1 in at least a small number of ovarian cancers.
Inherited mutant alleles of familial tumour suppressor genes predispose individuals to particular types of cancer. In addition to an involvement in inherited susceptibility to cancer, these tumour suppressor genes are targets for somatic mutations in sporadic cancers of the same type found in the familial forms. An exception is BRCA1, which contributes to a significant fraction of familial breast and ovarian cancer, but undergoes mutation at very low rates in sporadic breast and ovarian cancers. This finding suggests that other genes may be the principal targets for somatic mutation in breast carcinoma. A second, recently identified familial breast cancer gene, BRCA2 (refs 5-8), accounts for a proportion of breast cancer roughly equal to BRCA1. Like BRCA1, BRCA2 behaves as a dominantly inherited tumour suppressor gene. Individuals who inherit one mutant allele are at increased risk for breast cancer, and the tumours they develop lose the wild-type allele by heterozygous deletion. The BRCA2 coding sequence is huge, composed of 26 exons that span 10,443 bp. Here we investigate the rate of BRCA2 mutation in sporadic breast cancers and in a set of cell lines that represent twelve other tumour types. Surprisingly, mutations in BRCA2 are infrequent in cancers including breast carcinoma. However, a probable germline mutation in a pancreatic tumour cell line suggests a role for BRCA2 in susceptibility to pancreatic cancer.
Inherited mutations in the recently discovered BRCA2 gene are believed to be responsible for a significant fraction of early-onset hereditary breast cancers. Unlike BRCA1, however, which confers a high risk to both breast and ovarian cancer, the incidence of ovarian cancer appears to be much lower In BRCA2-linked families, causing uncertainty as to the relevance of BRCA2 to hereditary ovarian cancer. Numerous allelotype studies indicate that allelic deletions Including the BRCA2 locus on chromosome 13q are common in ovarian cancers in general, suggesting that somatic mutations of this gene may be involved in sporadic ovarian tumorigenesis. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that germline or somatic mutations of BRCA2 are associated with hereditary and/or sporadic ovarian cancers, respectively. The entire 10.2-kb coding region of BRCA2 was screened for mutations in 130 consecutive ovarian tumors, the only selection criterion being a pathological diagnosis of epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Loss of heterozygosity at markers flanking BRCA2 was observed in 56% of the tumors. Four germline mutations and two somatic mutations were identified; two of the germline mutations are recurrent, having been previously described. Remarkably, the patients with germline mutations were late-onset cases with no medical or family histories suggestive of hereditary cancer. These data suggest that mutations of BRCA2 are rare in sporadic ovarian cancers, and that the proportion of ovarian cancers resulting from hereditary predisposition may be higher than previously suspected based on estimates derived from studies of highly penetrant genetic loci.
The hereditary breast cancer gene BRCA2 was recently cloned and is believed to account for almost half of site-specific breast cancer families and the majority of male breast cancer families. We screened 49 site-specific breast cancer families for mutations in the BRCA2 gene using single strand conformation analysis (SSCA) followed by direct sequencing. We found mutations in eight families, including all four families with male breast cancer. The eight mutations were small deletions with the exception of a single nonsense mutation, an all were predicted to interrupt the BRCA2 coding sequence and to lead to a truncated protein product. Other factors which predicted the presence of a BRCA2 mutation included a case of breast cancer diagnosed at age 35 or below (P = 0.01) and a family history of pancreatic cancer (P = 0.03). Two mutations were seen twice, including a 8535delAG, which was detected in two French Canadian families. Our results suggest the possibility that the proportion of site-specific breast cancer families attributable to BRCA2 may be overestimated.
Mutations in BRCA1 account for 45% of families with high incidence of breast cancer and for 80-90% of families with both breast and ovarian cancer. BRCA1 protein includes an amino-terminal zinc finger motif as well as an excess of negatively charged amino acids near the C terminus. In addition, BRCA1 contains two nuclear localization signals and localizes to the nucleus of normal cells. While these features suggest a role in transcriptional regulation, no function has been assigned to BRCA1. Here, we show that the C-terminal region, comprising exons 16-24 (aa 1560-1863) of BRCA1 fused to GAL4 DNA binding domain can activate transcription both in yeast and mammalian cells. Furthermore, we define the region comprising exons 21-24 (aa 1760-1863) as the minimal transactivation domain. Any one of four germ-line mutations in the C-terminal region found in patients with breast or ovarian cancer (Ala-1708-->Glu, Gln-1756 C+, Met-1775-->Arg, Tyr-1853 ->Stop), had markedly impaired transcription activity. Together these data underscore the notion that one of the functions of BRCA1 may be the regulation of transcription.
The hereditary breast and ovarian cancer gene, BRCA1, encodes a large polypeptide that contains the cysteine-rich RING motif, a zinc-binding domain found in a variety of regulatory proteins. Here we describe a novel protein that interacts in vivo with the N-terminal region of BRCA1. This BRCA1-associated RING domain (BARD1) protein contains an N-terminal RING motif, three tandem ankyrin repeats, and a C-terminal sequence with significant homology to the phylogenetically conserved BRCT domains that lie near the C terminus of BRCA1. The BARD1/BRCA1 interaction is disrupted by BRCA1 missense mutations that segregate with breast cancer susceptibility, indicating that BARD1 may be involved in mediating tumour suppression by BRCA1.
BRCA1 immunostaining reveals discrete, nuclear foci during S phase of the cell cycle. Human Rad51, a homolog of bacterial RecA, behaves similarly. The two proteins were found to colocalize in vivo and to coimmunoprecipitate. BRCA1 residues 758-1064 alone formed Rad51-containing complexes in vitro. Rad51 is also specifically associated with developing synaptonemal complexes in meiotic cells, and BRCA1 and Rad51 were both detected on asynapsed (axial) elements of human synaptonemal complexes. These findings suggest a functional interaction between BRCA1 and Rad51 in the meiotic and mitotic cell cycles, which, in turn, suggests a role for BRCA1 in the control of recombination and of genome integrity.
Computer analysis of a conserved domain, BRCT, first described at the carboxyl terminus of the breast cancer protein BRCA1, a p53 binding protein (53BP1), and the yeast cell cycle checkpoint protein RAD9 revealed a large superfamily of domains that occur predominantly in proteins involved in cell cycle checkpoint functions responsive to DNA damage. The BRCT domain consists of approximately 95 amino acid residues and occurs as a tandem repeat at the carboxyl terminus of numerous proteins, but has been observed also as a tandem repeat at the amino terminus or as a single copy. The BRCT superfamily presently includes approximately 40 nonorthologous proteins, namely, BRCA1, 53BP1, and RAD9; a protein family that consists of the fission yeast replication checkpoint protein Rad4, the oncoprotein ECT2, the DNA repair protein XRCC1, and yeast DNA polymerase subunit DPB11; DNA binding enzymes such as terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferases, deoxycytidyl transferase involved in DNA repair, and DNA-ligases III and IV; yeast multifunctional transcription factor RAP1; and several uncharacterized gene products. Another previously described domain that is shared by bacterial NAD-dependent DNA-ligases, the large subunits of eukaryotic replication factor C, and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases appears to be a distinct version of the BRCT domain. The retinoblastoma protein (a universal tumor suppressor) and related proteins may contain a distant relative of the BRCT domain. Despite the functional diversity of all these proteins, participation in DNA damage-responsive checkpoints appears to be a unifying theme. Thus, the BRCT domain is likely to perform critical, yet uncharacterized, functions in the cell cycle control of organisms from bacteria to humans. The carboxyterminal BRCT domain of BRCA1 corresponds precisely to the recently identified minimal transcription activation domain of this protein, indicating one such function.
Hereditary multiple exostoses (EXT) is an autosomal dominant disorder characterized by multiple bony outgrowths from the juxtaepiphyseal region of long bones. In a small proportion of cases, these exostoses progress to malignant chondrosarcomas. Genetic linkage of this disorder has been described to three independent loci on chromosomes 8q24.1 (EXT1), 11p11-13 (EXT2), and 19p (EXT-3). The EXT1 and EXT2 genes were isolated recently and show extensive sequence homology to each other. These genes are deleted in exostoses-derived tumors, supporting the hypothesis that they encode tumor suppressors. We have identified a third gene that shows striking sequence similarity to both EXT1 and EXT2 at the nucleotide and amino acid sequence levels, and have derived its entire coding sequence. Although the mRNA transcribed from this gene is similar in size to that from EXT1 and EXT2, its pattern of expression is quite different. We have localized this gene by fluorescence in situ hybridization to metaphase chromosomes and by whole genome radiation hybrid mapping to chromosome 1p36.1 between DIS458 and DIS511, region that frequently shows loss of heterozygosity in a variety of tumor types. This gene, EXTL (for EXT-like), is therefore a new member of the EXT gene family and is a potential candidate for several disease phenotypes.
A growing interest in cell-mediated immune response to human malignant tumors is reflected in the recent reports of several investigators. Some of these are briefly reviewed. In addition, evidence is presented that patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix and adenocarcinoma (serous) of the ovary circulate presensitized peripheral blood lymphocytes which in vitro produce a prompt cytotoxic effect on allogenic tumor cells in tissue culture. Lymphocytes from normal donors were cytocidal only after a “learning” period of 48 to 96 hours. The presence of tumor-specific antigens in these two malignancies is suggested. Observations on the interaction of tumor cells and lymphoid cells are described. A “blocking” or enhancing antibody could not be demonstrated in 22 patients studied with progressive disease.
This paper reports the results of a collaborative linkage study involving 214 breast cancer families, including 57 breast-ovarian cancer families; this represents almost all the known families with 17q linkage data. Six markers on 17q, spanning approximately 30 cM, were typed in the families. The aims of the study were to define more precisely the localization of the disease gene, the extent of genetic heterogeneity and the characteristics of linked families and to estimate the penetrance of the 17q gene. Under the assumption of no genetic heterogeneity, the strongest linkage evidence was obtained with D17S588. Multipoint linkage analysis allowing for genetic heterogeneity provided evidence that the predisposing gene lies between the markers D17S588 and D17S250, an interval whose genetic length is estimated to be 8.3 cM in males and 18.0 cM in females. This position was supported over other intervals by odds of 66:1. The location of the gene with respect to D17S579 could not be determined unequivocally. Under the genetic model used in the analysis, the best estimate of the proportion of linked breast-ovarian cancer families was 1.0 (lower LOD -- 1 limit 0.79). In contrast, there was significant evidence of genetic heterogeneity among the families without ovarian cancer, with an estimated 45% being linked. These results suggest that a gene(s) on chromosome 17q accounts for the majority of families in which both early-onset breast cancer and ovarian cancer occur but that other genes predisposing to breast cancer exist. By examining the fit of the linkage data to different penetrance functions, the cumulative risk associated with the 17q gene was estimated to be 59% by age 50 years and 82% by age 70 years. The corresponding estimates for the breast-ovary families were 67% and 76%, and those for the families without ovarian cancer were 49% and 90%; these penetrance functions did not differ significantly from one another. 42 refs., 5 figs., 2 tabs.
A long-term ovarian carcinoma cell line is described in terms of its morphology, original histopathology, electron microscopic features and chromosome features before and after transplantation into an athymic nude mouse. The microscopic features of the tumor nodule grown in the nude mouse are compared with the original pathology. Epithelial characteristics of the cells were maintained in culture and after retrieval from the nude mouse. Three markers were identified in all karyotypes and trisomy was noted in chromosomes 1, 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, 16, and X and monosomy of 17 and 21.
Various types of DNA probes, such as total genomic DNA, repetitive sequences, unique sequences, and composites of chromosome-specific DNA probes, can be used with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) techniques to address research questions having to do with localization, mapping, and distribution of DNA in situ. FISH involves the formation of a heteroduplex between such DNA probes and chromatin targets on a microscope slide, which can be visualized with fluorescent reporter molecules. Three chromatin targets--metaphase chromosomes, somatic interphases, and zygote interphases--offer increasingly extended states of chromatin which can be strategically selected, individually or in combination, to address specific research questions of interest.
The immunoglobulin kappa light chain (IgK) locus may play a significant role in the pathology of both infectious and autoimmune diseases. Most of the work on IgK genetics has been conducted using immunological techniques for allelic typing and sequence analysis. This is restricted by availability of reagents and can be both expensive and time-consuming. PCR primers were designed to amplify the kappa constant gene (Ck), and four allele-specific oligonucleotides (ASOs) were used to distinguish the alleles in the amplified PCR products. Direct sequencing of PCR products was performed to confirm that the primers specifically amplified the Ck region and the ASOs differentiated the Km alleles. Sequencing of an average of 209 nucleotides of DNA from 50 individuals revealed no variation except at codon 191, which is known to be involved in a frequent polymorphism. An analysis of 347 different individual DNAs from 10 human populations was conducted to determine Km allelic frequencies within these populations and to apply this type of data collection to population studies.
An oligonucleotide hybridization procedure has been developed that eliminates the preferential melting of A X T versus G X C base pairs, allowing the stringency of the hybridization to be controlled as a function of probe length only. This technique, which uses tetramethylammonium chloride, is especially helpful whenever a highly complex library is screened with a pool of oligonucleotide probes, which usually vary widely in base composition. The procedure can also be applied advantageously whenever an exact match to an oligonucleotide probe is desired, such as in screening for clones having as little as a single-base alteration generated by in vitro mutagenesis.
A primary culture, 734B, was grown from a pleural effusion of a patient with metastatic mammary carcinoma. This culture continually produced free floating cells used to initiate serial passages that could be transferred at 25 day intervals. A stable cell line, MCF 7, was derived from the free floating cells and has been maintained for over 90 weekly passages. MCF 7 and 734B retained several characteristics of differentiated mammary epithelium, including the cytoplasmic estrogen receptor and the capability of forming domes. Four lines of evidence attest to the human origin of the cells.
In order to pinpoint the locale of the gene for early-onset familial breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA1), polymorphisms were developed within the locus for thyroid hormone receptor alpha (THRA1) and for several anonymous sequences at chromosome 17q12-q21. The THRA1 polymorphism is a dinucleotide repeat with 10 alleles and heterozygosity.79. Gene mapping in extended families with inherited, early-onset breast and ovarian cancer indicates that BRCA1 is distal to THRA1 and proximal to D17S183 (SCG43), an interval of < 4 cM. This locale excludes HER2, THRA1, WNT3, HOX2, NGFR, PHB, COLIA1, NME1, and NME2 as candidates for BRCA1 but does not exclude RARA or EDH17B. Resolving the remaining recombination events in these families by new polymorphisms in the THRA1-D17S183 interval will facilitate positional cloning of the breast-ovarian cancer gene on chromosome 17q12-q21.
The majority of multiple-case families that segregate both breast and ovarian cancer in a dominant fashion are due to mutations in the BRCA1 gene on chromosome 17q. In this paper, we have combined penetrance estimates for BRCA1 with the results of two population-based genetic epidemiological studies to estimate the gene frequency of BRCA1. On the assumption that the excess risk of ovarian cancer in first degree relatives of breast cancer patients and the breast cancer excess in relatives of ovarian cancer patients are both entirely accounted for by BRCA1, we estimate that the BRCA1 gene frequency is 0.0006 (95% confidence interval [O.002-0.002]) and that the proportion of breast cancer cases in the general population due to BRCA1 is 5.3% below age 40 years, 2.2% between ages 40 and 49 years, and 1.1% between ages 50 and 70 years. The corresponding estimates for ovarian cancer are 5.7%, 4.6%, and 2.1%, respectively. Our results suggest that the majority of breast cancer families with less than four cases and no ovarian cancer are not due to rare highly penetrant genes such as BRCA1 but are more likely to be due either to chance or to more common genes of lower penetrance.
Breast cancer, one of the most common and deleterious of all diseases affecting women, occurs in hereditary and sporadic forms. Hereditary breast cancers are genetically heterogeneous; susceptibility is variously attributable to germline mutations in the BRCA1 (ref. 1), BRCA2 (ref. 2), TP53 (ref. 3) or ataxia telangiectasia (ATM) genes, each of which is considered to be a tumour suppressor. Recently a number of germline mutations in the BRCA2 gene have been identified in families prone to breast cancer. We screened 100 primary breast cancers from Japanese patients for BRCA2 mutations, using PCR-SSCP. We found two germline mutations and one somatic mutation in our patient group. One of the germline mutations was an insertion of an Alu element into exon 22, which resulted in alternative splicing that skipped exon 22. The presence of a 64-bp polyadenylate tract and evidence for an 8-bp target-site duplication of the inserted DNA implied that the retrotransposal insertion of a transcriptionally active Alu element caused this event. Our results indicate that somatic BRCA2 mutations, like somatic mutations in the BRCA1 gene, are very rare in primary breast cancers.
The second hereditary breast cancer gene, BRCA2, was recently isolated. Germline mutations of this gene predispose carriers to breast cancer, and, to a lesser extent, ovarian cancer. Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the BRCA2 locus has been observed in 30-40% of sporadic breast and ovarian tumours, implying that BRCA2 may act as a tumour suppressor gene in a proportion of sporadic cases. To define the role of BRCA2 in sporadic breast and ovarian cancer, we screened the entire gene for mutations using a combination of techniques in 70 primary breast carcinomas and in 55 primary epithelial ovarian carcinomas. Our analysis revealed alterations in 2/70 breast tumours and none of the ovarian carcinomas. One alteration found in the breast cancers was a 2-basepair (bp) deletion (4710delAG) which was subsequently shown to be a germline mutation, the other was a somatic missense mutation (Asp3095Glu) of unknown significance. Our results suggest that BRCA2 is a very infrequent target for somatic inactivation in breast and ovarian carcinomas, similar to the results obtained for BRCA1.
Recently, a second susceptibility gene for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA2, was cloned. The subsequent identification of heterozygous germ-line mutations confirmed its role as a predisposing factor in a subset of familial breast and ovarian cancer families. The possible involvement of BRCA2 in the sporadic forms of breast and ovarian tumors was addressed in three recent reports analyzing the gene for somatic mutations in 212 primary breast cancers and SS ovarian cancers. Although several alterations were identified, all except two changes were shown to represent germ-line mutations. Moreover, the two somatic BRCA2 alterations were found to be missense mutations resulting in a Asp309S-Glu change in one case and in a His2415Asn change in the other. Given the questionable effect of missense mutations on protein function, the role of BRCA2 in the carcinogenesis of sporadic breast tumors remains unclear. 10 refs., 1 fig.
Inherited mutations in BRCA1 predispose to breast and ovarian cancer, but the biological function of the BRCA1 protein has remained largely elusive. The recent correspondence of Koonin et al. [Koonin, E.V., Altschul, S.F. and Bork, P. (1996) Nature Genet. 13, 266-267] has emphasized the potential importance of the BRCA1 C-terminal region for BRCA1-mediated breast cancer suppression, as this domain shows similarities with the C-terminal regions of a p53-binding protein (53BP1), the yeast RAD9 protein involved in DNA repair, and two uncharacterized, hypothetical proteins (KIAA0170 and SPAC19G10.7). The highlighted domain has been suggested to be the result of an internal duplication, each of the tandem domains being designated as a 'BRCT domain' (for BRCA1 C-terminus). Sequence analysis using hydrophobic cluster analysis reveals here the presence of 50 copies of the BRCT domain in 23 different proteins, including, in addition to BRCA1, 53BP1 and RAD9, XRCC1, RAD4, Ect2, REV1, Crb2, RAP1, terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferases (TdT) and three eukaryotic DNA ligases. Most of these proteins are known to be involved in DNA repair. The BRCT domain is not limited to the C-termini of protein sequences and can be found in multiple copies or in a single copy as in RAP1 and TdT, suggesting that it could well constitute an autonomous folding unit of approx. 90-100 amino acids.
BRCA1 localizes to discrete nuclear foci (dots) during S phase. Hydroxyurea-mediated DNA synthesis arrest of S phase MCF7 cells led to a loss of BRCA1 from these structures. Ultraviolet light, mitomycin C, or gamma irradiation produced a similar effect but with no concurrent arrest of DNA synthesis. BARD1 and Rad51, two proteins associated with the BRCA1 dots, behaved similarly. Loss of the BRCA1 foci was accompanied by a specific, dose-dependent change(s) in the state of BRCA1 phosphorylation. Three distinct DNA damaging agents preferentially induced this change in S phase. The S phase BRCA1 phosphorylation response to DNA damage occurred in cells lacking, respectively, two DNA damage-sensing protein kinases, DNA-PK and Atm, implying that neither plays a prime role in this process. Finally, after BRCA1 dot dispersal, BRCA1, BARD1, and Rad51 accumulated, focally, on PCNA+ replication structures, implying an interaction of BRCA1/BARD1/Rad51 containing complexes with damaged, replicating DNA. Taken together, the data imply that the BRCA1 S phase foci are dynamic physiological elements, responsive to DNA damage, and that BRCA1-containing multiprotein complexes participate in a replication checkpoint response.
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual Cold Spring Harbor Km typing with PCR: application to population screening
- J Sambrook
- E F Fritsch
- T Maniatis
Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F. and Maniatis, T. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A
Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring
Harbor, NY.
31. Kurth, J.H., Bowcock, A.M., Erlich, H.A., Nevo, S. and Cavalli-Sforza.
(1991) Km typing with PCR: application to population screening. Am. J.
Hum. Genet. 48, 613–620.
- Y Miki
- J Swensen
- D Shattuck Eidens
- P A Futreal
- K Harshman
- S Tavtigian
- Q Liu
- C Cochran
- L M Bennett
- W Ding
- R Bell
- J Rosenthal
- C Hussey
- T Tran
- M Mcclure
- C Frye
- T Hattier
- R Phelps
- A Haugen-Strano
- H Katcher
- K Yakumo
- Z Gholami
- D Shaffer
- S Stone
- S Bayer
- C Wray
- R Bogden
- P Dayananth
- J Ward
- P Tonin
- S Narod
- P K Bristow
- F H Norris
- L Helvering
- P Morrison
- P Rosteck
- M Lai
- J C Barrett
Miki, Y., Swensen, J., Shattuck Eidens, D., Futreal, P.A., Harshman, K.,
Tavtigian, S., Liu, Q., Cochran, C., Bennett, L.M., Ding, W., Bell, R., Rosenthal,
J., Hussey, C., Tran, T., McClure, M., Frye, C., Hattier, T., Phelps, R.,
Haugen-Strano, A., Katcher, H., Yakumo, K., Gholami, Z., Shaffer, D., Stone, S.,
Bayer, S., Wray, C., Bogden, R., Dayananth, P., Ward, J., Tonin, P., Narod, S.,
Bristow, P.K., Norris, F.H., Helvering, L., Morrison, P., Rosteck, P., Lai, M.,
Barrett, J.C., Lewis, C., Neuhausen, S., Cannon-Albright, L., Goldgar, D.,
Wiseman, R., Kamb, A. and Skolnick, M.H. (1994) A strong candidate for the
breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science, 266, 66-71.
Mutation analysis of the BRCA2 gene in 49 site-specific breast cancer families
- C. Phelan
- J.M. Lancaster
- P. Tonin
- C. Gumbs
- C. Cochran
- R. Carter
- P. Ghadirian
- C. Perret
- R. Moslehi
- F. Dion
- M. Faucher
- K. Dole
- S. Karimi
- W. Foulkes
- H. Lounis
- E. Watner
- P. Goss
- D. Anderson
- C. Larsson
- S. Narod
- P.A. Futreal
Phelan, C., Lancaster, J.M., Tonin, P., Gumbs, C., Cochran, C., Carter, R.,
Ghadirian, P., Perret, C., Moslehi, R., Dion, F., Faucher, M., Dole, K., Karimi,
S., Foulkes, W., Lounis, H., Watner, E., Goss, P., Anderson, D., Larsson, C.,
Narod, S. and Futreal, P.A. (1966) Mutation analysis of the BRCA2 gene in 49
site-specific breast cancer families. Nature Genet., 13, 120-122.
A somatic BRCA1 mutation in an ovarian tumour
- L. Hosking
- J. Trowsdale
- H. Nicolai
- E. Solomon
- W. Foulkes
- G. Stemp
- E. Signer
- A. Jeffreys
Hosking, L., Trowsdale, J., Nicolai, H., Solomon, E., Foulkes, W., Stemp, G.,
Signer, E. and Jeffreys, A. (1995) A somatic BRCA1 mutation in an ovarian
tumour. Nature Genet., 9, 343-344.
Fluorescence in situ hybridization
- B.J. Trask
- B. Birren
- E. Green
- P. Hieter
- R. Myers
Detection of polymorphisms of human DNA by gel electrophoresis as single-stranded conformation polymorphisms
- M. Orita
- H. Wahana
- H. Kanazawa
- K. Hayashi
- T. Sekiya
Characterization of an ovarian carcinoma cell line
- R.S. Freedman
- E. Pihl
- C. Kusyk
- H.S. Gallager
- F. Rutledge