metricas
covid
Buscar en
Cirugía Española (English Edition)
Toda la web
Inicio Cirugía Española (English Edition) Surgical implications of multigenic testing during neoadjuvant chemotherapy trea...
Información de la revista
Vol. 101. Núm. 3.
Páginas 224-226 (marzo 2023)
Vol. 101. Núm. 3.
Páginas 224-226 (marzo 2023)
Scientific letter
Acceso a texto completo
Surgical implications of multigenic testing during neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment in high-risk women with breast cancer
Implicaciones quirúrgicas de paneles multigénicos durante el tratamiento quimioterápico neoadyuvante en mujeres de alto riesgo con cáncer de mama
Visitas
128
Laura Sánchez Escudero
Autor para correspondencia
lsanchezes1992@hotmail.com

Corresponding author.
, María Yeray Rodríguez Garcés, Francisco Javier Jiménez Ruiz
Servicio Oncología Médica, Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Texto completo

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women, and the leading cause of death in women.1 Ovarian cancer (OC) is the gynaecological cancer with the highest mortality rate.2 Hereditary cancer accounts for 8%–10% of all tumours diagnosed. Approximately 5%–10% of BCs and 10%–15% of OCs are hereditary, and 25% have been linked to germline mutations in BRCA1/2.1

The aim of our study was to analyse the usefulness of multigene panels (MP) in patients with BC undergoing treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) with clinical criteria for genetic study of hereditary cancer (Table 1).

Table 1.

Clinical selection criteria of genetic study.

A single case. Irrespective of the family: 
Woman affected by BC and OC (goal/synchronic) 
BC ≤ 40 years 
Bilateral BC (the first tumour ≤40) or triple negative BC ≤60 years 
Non mucinous high grade epithelial OC or primary tubal or peritoneal tumour 
BC in a male 
Two or more cases First degree relative (parents, children and siblings) and second grade (grandparents, grandchildren, uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces): 
Bilateral BC at any age  +BC< 50 years 
BC and OC 
2 BC < 50 years 
Three or more cases. Direct relatives with BC and/or OC: 
≥ 3 BC ± OC 

BC, breast cancer; OC, Ovarian cancer.

Llort Pursals and Ramón y Cajal3.

We conducted a prospective, observational study at the Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, during the years 2019−2020. Of a total of 98 women with locally advanced BC who were candidates for treatment with NCT, 19 patients (19.4%) were included (Table 2).

Table 2.

Patient characteristics.

Individual  Age  Immunohistochemical  Criteria  Type of mutation  RRM  RRSO 
38  Her 2  >1 case  BRCA1  Yes  Yes 
42  Triple negative  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
41  Triple negative  Single case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
48  Triple negative  >1 case  BRCA1  Yes  Yes 
53  Luminal B1  >1 case  BRCA1  Yes  Yes 
46  Luminal B1  >1 case  BRCA1  Yes  No 
50  Triple negative  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
48  Luminal B2  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
28  Triple negative  Single case  MUTHY  No  No 
10  45  Luminal B2  Single case  CHEK2  No  No 
11  42  Triple negative  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
12  45  Luminal B2  Single case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
13  51  Luminal A  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
14  37  Luminal B1  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
15  50  Triple negative  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
16  32  Triple negative  Single case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
17  40  Luminal A  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
18  48  Triple negative  Single case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 
19  50  Luminal A  >1 case  BRCA non-informative  No  No 

RRM, reduced risk mastectomy; RRSO, bilateral risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.

Multigene panels by DNA extraction from peripheral blood were performed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). Pathogenic variants (PV) or probably pathogenic variants (PPV) found were confirmed by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification or multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA). BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PTEN, STK11, TP53, ATM, BRIP1, CHEK2, PALB2, MSH6, RAD51C, RAD51D, MSH2, MLH1, MUTYH and PMS2 genes were analysed. Participants signed an informed consent form, the centres' protocols on the publication of patient data were followed, and the privacy of the subjects was respected. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS® version 22 statistical software.

The median age was 45 years (IQR: 40–50). In 31.6% of the cases a PV was identified: four in BRCA1 (21.05%), one in MUTYH (5.26%) and one in CHEK2 (5.26%). Thirteen patients had non-informative (negative) BRCA. All patients with BRCA1 PV opted for surgery for their breast cancer and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) of the contralateral breast, and 75% also had risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in the same surgical procedure. Risk-reducing surgery (RRS) was not performed in patients with PV in the CHEK2 and MUTYH genes because it was not indicated after reviewing the family history.

The development of NGS has improved the ability to study numerous genes at the same time while reducing costs. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBC and OCS) is linked to PV/PPV in genes with high (BRCA1/2, TP53, PALB2, PTEN) and moderate penetrance (CHEK2, CDH1, among others).4,5

In our case, the result was obtained prior to surgery, so the genetic study was useful in those carriers of PV in high-risk genes for HBC and OCS. Tumour intervention and RRS of the contralateral breast and RRSO was planned for those who wanted it. All interventions were performed in patients carrying BRCA1, as no PV were found in other high-risk genes (BRCA2, PALB2, TP53, among others). This is due to the low prevalence of these genes in the population, which is around 6% of families with hereditary cancer syndrome.5 In cases with negative (non-informative) results, RRM was not indicated. The benefit of RRS in moderate risk genes (ATM, CHEK2, etc.) is controversial and will be agreed on the basis of family history and patient preferences after a detailed explanation of the risks and benefits. It has not been demonstrated that in these cases the overall survival of the intervened patients is increased. In patients carrying PV in the CHEK2 gene, it could be offered in those cases with high familial burden or assessed in carriers of a deletion variant (del1100C) despite low familial burden. The del1100C appears to contribute to an increased risk of BC compared to other PV in this gene. A case-control study reported an OR of 2.55 (95% CI 2.10–3.10, p < .001).6 On the other hand, MUTYH is a gene associated with attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis when PV are detected in homozygosis, characterised by a high risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). 7 The increased risk of BC and CRC in the heterozygous form has not been demonstrated in several studies. In these cases, colonoscopy follow-up is recommended based on a family history of first/second-degree CRC.8

BRCA1/2 genes with VP/VPP account for approximately 20%–25% of all HBC and OCS,9 which is consistent with our findings. For this reason, in places where it is difficult to access a genetic study by NGS where the study time is expected to be prolonged, we could initially request the study of only the BRCA1/2 genes by MLPA and, in the event of obtaining a non-informative study, consider extending the rest of the genes depending on the family history. This would shorten the time of the result, reduce costs and improve the performance of the study.

To conclude, the use of Mp by NGS is a useful tool in the diagnosis of HBC and OCS, given that we found a high prevalence of PV that justifies the need to study these patients, benefiting from the intervention of the tumour and RRS in the same surgical act.

References
[1]
S. Winters, C. Martin, D. Murphy, N.K. Sholkar.
Breast cancer epidemiology, prevencion, and screening.
Prog Mol Biol Transl., 151 (2017), pp. 1-32
[2]
L. Kuroki, S.R. Guntupalli.
Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer.
BMJ., 371 (2020), pp. 1-20
[3]
G. Llort Pursals, T. Ramón y Cajal.
Aspectos clínicos de predisposición hereditaria al cáncer de mama y al cáncer de ovario.
Cáncer hereditario. Sociedad Española Oncología Médica, 3.a ed, pp. 155-188
[4]
L.N. Hoang, B.C. Gilks.
Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome: moving beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2.
Adv Anat Pathol., 25 (2018), pp. 85-95
[5]
Cornelia Kraus, J. Hoyer, G. Vasileiou, M. Wunderle, M.P. Lux, P.A. Fasching, et al.
Gene panel sequencing in familial breast/ovarian cancer patients identifies multiple novel mutations also in genes others than BRCA1/2.
Int J Cancer., 140 (2017), pp. 95-102
[6]
M.K. Schmidt, F. Hogervorst, R.V. Hien, S. Cornelissen, A. Broeks, M.A. Adank.
Age- and tumor subtype-specific breast cancer risk estimates for CHEK2*1100delC carriers.
J Clin Oncol., 34 (2016), pp. 2750-2760
[7]
A.K. Win, J.C. Reece, J.G. Dowty, D.D. Buchanan, M. Clendenning, C. Rosty, et al.
Risk of extracolonic cancers for people with biallelic and monoallelic mutations in MUTYH.
Int J Cancer, 139 (2016), pp. 1557-1563
[8]
Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal. Versión 1. 2021. Disponible en: https://www.nccn.org. Acceso Enero 2022.
[9]
K.N. Maxwell, B. Wubbenhorst, K. D’Andrea, B. Garman, J.M. Long, J. Powers, et al.
Prevalence of mutations in a panel of breast cancer susceptibility genes in BRCA1/2- negative patients with early-onset breast cancer.
Genet Med., 17 (2015), pp. 630-638
Copyright © 2022. AEC
Descargar PDF
Opciones de artículo
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos