Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Large family with both parents affected by distinct BRCA1 mutations: implications for genetic testing

  • Anna P Sokolenko1,
  • Dmitry A Voskresenskiy1,
  • Aglaya G Iyevleva1,
  • Elena M Bit-Sava1,
  • Nadezhda I Gutkina2,
  • Maxim S Anisimenko2,
  • Nathalia Yu Sherina1,
  • Nathalia V Mitiushkina1,
  • Yulia M Ulibina1,
  • Olga S Yatsuk1,
  • Olga A Zaitseva1,
  • Evgeny N Suspitsin1,
  • Alexandr V Togo1,
  • Valery A Pospelov3,
  • Sergey P Kovalenko2,
  • Vladimir F Semiglazov1 and
  • Evgeny N Imyanitov1Email author
Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice20097:2

DOI: 10.1186/1897-4287-7-2

Received: 09 September 2008

Accepted: 26 January 2009

Published: 26 January 2009

Abstract

Although the probability of both parents being affected by BRCA1 mutations is not negligible, such families have not been systematically described in the literature. Here we present a large breast-ovarian cancer family, where 3 sisters and 1 half-sister inherited maternal BRCA1 5382insC mutation while the remaining 2 sisters carried paternal BRCA1 1629delC allele. No BRCA1 homozygous mutations has been detected, that is consistent with the data on lethality of BRCA1 knockout mice. This report exemplifies that the identification of a single cancer-predisposing mutation within the index patient may not be sufficient in some circumstances. Ideally, all family members affected by breast or ovarian tumor disease have to be subjected to the DNA testing, and failure to detect the mutation in any of them calls for the search of the second cancer-associated allele.

Case presentation

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations occur in approximately 0.2–1% healthy subjects, 5% non-selected breast cancer (BC) patients, 15% consecutive ovarian cancer (OC) cases, and 25% females with clinical features of hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome [18]. Given low populational frequency and high penetrance of deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, only one of the parent of the affected proband is usually suspected to contain this genetic lesion. Nevertheless, the probability of both parents being a carrier of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is not negligible. If we consider random healthy couples, this estimate would be equal to 0.2–1% × 0.2–1% = 0.0004–0.01% (i.e., 1:250000 - 1:10000). This probability is significantly increased if we deal with already affected females. Indeed, the most conservative calculation would imply that the chance to detect a mutation in one of the parents of the patient is the same as in the patient herself, whereas the probability for the remaining parent to be affected by BRCA1 or BRCA2 defect is similar to the populational frequency of the latter. Therefore, approximately 0.01–0.05% (i.e., 1:10000 - 1:2000) of BC patients, 0.03 – 0.15% (i.e., 1:3333-1:667) of OC patients, and 0.05–0.25% (i.e., 1:2000 - 1:400) of women with HOBC have both parents carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Coincident occurrence of BRCA1 heterozygosity in mother and father is particularly likely if both parents of the patient report a strong family history of the breast-ovarian cancer disease, however these situations are exceptionally rare due to gender-specific penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 alterations and lack of explicit information in the most of pedigrees.

Here we report an unique family with multiple affected members and 2 distinct BRCA1 mutations identified. Breast cancer patient III.9 was forwarded to a genetic counselor in the year 2002 because of pronounced family history (Fig. 1). She underwent DNA testing for Russian founder mutations [8], however no genetic lesion has been identified. DNA sequencing was not accessible to us at that time, however, given an unusually strong family history of breast-ovarian cancer and large number of yet healthy female relatives, we desperately attempted to find a facility who would agree to perform a full-length BRCA1 and BRCA2 analysis for this particular patient. Unfortunately, this effort failed to succeed. The patient and her only sister who accepted the invitation for genetic counseling (III.5, healthy by then) were informed that their family is likely to suffer from hereditary cancer syndrome, and the failure to identify a causative mutation may be related to current technical limitations. Therefore, we recommended tight diagnostic monitoring for BC and OC, as well as consideration of comprehensive analysis of breast cancer genes as soon as it becomes available. In the year 2007, healthy female III.2 was forwarded to DNA testing by her mammologist because of cancer family history concerns. "Founder" test-panel [8] revealed the presence of BRCA1 5382insC mutation, therefore she was advised to consult with a cancer geneticist. Conversation with this women revealed that she belonged to the same family as the patient III.9, however she was unaware about genetic counseling applied to her sisters III.9 and III.5. Then, BRCA1 5382insC mutation testing was performed for her affected mother (II.6, BC at age 66), her sisters (III.4, healthy; III.5, affected by BC at age 52, i.e. after the initial counseling in the year 2002; III.6, BC at age 35), and her healthy 31-years-old nephew whose mother (III.11) survived BC at age 35 but died from OC at 50. All these relatives were found to carry BRCA1 5382insC mutation, with the exception of BC patient III.6. Since III.6 was already a second family member, who acquired cancer disease but was negative for founder mutation test, sequencing analysis was applied to DNA samples III.6 and III.9; it identified second BRCA1 mutation, 1629delC.
Figure 1

Pedigree of the breast-ovarian cancer family with 2 BRCA1 mutations. Circles and squares indicate females and males, respectively. Crossed symbols are used for deceased subjects; age at death is given after the letter "d", otherwise current age is provided. Black circles correspond to females affected by breast or ovarian cancer; half-filled circles are used for yet healthy BRCA1 mutation carriers; gray symbols depict subjects with unknown or non-breast-ovarian tumors. BC – breast cancer; OC – ovarian cancer; age at cancer diagnosis is given in brackets. All tested subjects carried either BRCA1 5382insC or BRCA1 1629delC allele, i.e. missing information on the BRCA1 status indicates that DNA from this family member has not been analyzed. Index cases are designated by arrows (see the text).

Since 2 sisters from this family carry BRCA1 1629delC, it is highly unlikely that these mutations appeared de novo; instead, it is nearly certain that the father of these sisters (II.5) was a carrier of this allele. We could not validate this assumption, because this man died a long time ago. Similarly, patient III.11 was likely to carry BRCA1 5382insC mutation, but this could not be confirmed.

Homozygosity for BRCA1 inactivation was reported previously in a single human [9], although this observation was later suggested to be a technical artifact [10]. We conducted testing for both BRCA1 5382insC and 1629delC alleles in all available DNA samples, and failed to detect any biallelic defect. Taken together with the only available publication on BRCA1 mutation occurring in both parents [11] and a large body of evidence for early embryonic lethality of BRCA1 knockout mice [1214], our data provide additional support to the common statement on the lack of viability of BRCA1-null homozygotes. This contrasts to the situation with another breast-ovarian cancer gene, BRCA2, whose homozygous inactivation leads to Fanconi anemia but is not absolutely lethal [15].

Conclusion

While families harboring both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have been repeatedly presented in the literature [16], there is no systematic analysis of the pedigrees with both parents carrying distinct alterations in the BRCA1 gene [11]. Our observation calls for the same caution as was formulated in a series of articles describing double mutations for BRCA1 and BRCA2 [16]. First, in the communities with strong founder effect, relaxed criteria for subjects selection should be used when considering the administration of appropriate non-expensive PCR tests; it is highly recommended that all BC and OC patients, and perhaps even healthy middle-aged females, have to be offered the opportunity of the DNA analysis [3, 6, 8, 16]. Secondly, the possibility of existence of disease phenocopies within the same family has to be always remembered; therefore, failure to identify breast-ovarian cancer gene mutation in the index case does not exclude the possibility of identification of BRCA defect in other affected members of a given pedigree. Ideally, all affected members of the family have to undergo DNA testing at least for the presence of founder mutations [16].

Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from the alive memebrs of the described family for the publication of this case report. Copies of the written consent are available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal.

Abbreviations

BC: 

breast cancer

OC: 

ovarian cancer

HBOC: 

hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by INTAS (grant 05-1000008-7870), Russian Agency for Science and Innovations (grant 02.512.11.2101), Grant for Helmholtz-Russia Joint Research Groups (grant HRJRG-006/07-04-92282-à), Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 07-04-00122-à, 07-04-00172-à, 08-04-00369-à), and the Russian Academy of Sciences (grant "Molecular and Cell Biology"). We cordially thank Prof. Peter Devilee (Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands) for the fruitful discussion.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
NN Petrov Institute of Oncology
(2)
Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics
(3)
Institute of Cytology

References

  1. Nathanson KL, Wooster R, Weber BL: Breast cancer genetics: what we know and what we need. Nat Med 2001, 7: 552–556. 10.1038/87876View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Satagopan JM, Offit K, Foulkes W, Robson ME, Wacholder S, Eng CM, Karp SE, Begg CB: The lifetime risks of breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001, 10: 467–473.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Menkiszak J, Gronwald J, Górski B, Jakubowska A, Huzarski T, Byrski T, Foszczyńska-Kłoda M, Haus O, Janiszewska H, Perkowska M, Brozek I, Grzybowska E, Zientek H, Góźdź S, Kozak-Klonowska B, Urbański K, Miturski R, Kowalczyk J, Pluzańska A, Niepsuj S, Koc J, Szwiec M, Drosik K, Mackiewicz A, Lamperska K, Strózyk E, Godlewski D, Stawicka M, Waśko B, Bebenek M, Rozmiarek A, Rzepka-Górska I, Narod SA, Lubiński J: Hereditary ovarian cancer in Poland. Int J Cancer 2003, 106: 942–945. 10.1002/ijc.11338View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Whittemore AS, Gong G, John EM, McGuire V, Li FP, Ostrow KL, Dicioccio R, Felberg A, West DW: Prevalence of BRCA1 mutation carriers among U.S. non-Hispanic Whites. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004, 13: 2078–2083.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Narod SA, Foulkes WD: BRCA1 and BRCA2: 1994 and beyond. Nat Rev Cancer 2004, 4: 665–676. 10.1038/nrc1431View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Górski B, Cybulski C, Huzarski T, Byrski T, Gronwald J, Jakubowska A, Stawicka M, Gozdecka-Grodecka S, Szwiec M, Urbański K, Mituś J, Marczyk E, Dziuba J, Wandzel P, Surdyka D, Haus O, Janiszewska H, Debniak T, Tołoczko-Grabarek A, Medrek K, Masojæ B, Mierzejewski M, Kowalska E, Narod SA, Lubiński J: Breast cancer predisposing alleles in Poland. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005, 92: 19–24. 10.1007/s10549-005-1409-1View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Robson M, Offit K: Clinical practice. Management of an inherited predisposition to breast cancer. New Engl J Med 2007, 357: 154–162. 10.1056/NEJMcp071286View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Sokolenko AP, Rozanov ME, Mitiushkina NV, Sherina NY, Iyevleva AG, Chekmariova EV, Buslov KG, Shilov ES, Togo AV, Bit-Sava EM, Voskresenskiy DA, Chagunava OL, Devilee P, Cornelisse C, Semiglazov VF, Imyanitov EN: Founder mutations in early-onset, familial and bilateral breast cancer patients from Russia. Fam Cancer 2007, 6: 281–286. 10.1007/s10689-007-9120-5View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyd M, Harris F, McFarlane R, Davidson HR, Black DM: A human BRCA1 gene knockout. Nature 1995, 375: 541–542. 10.1038/375541b0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kuschel B, Gayther SA, Easton DF, Ponder BA, Pharoah PD: Apparent human BRCA1 knockout caused by mispriming during polymerase chain reaction: implications for genetic testing. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2001, 31: 96–98. 10.1002/gcc.1122View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Fricker JP, Essioux L, Pages S, Limacher JM, Sobol H, Laurent-Puig P, Thomas G: Segregation of two BRCA1 mutations in a single family. Am J Hum Genet 1996, 59: 479–481.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Gowen LC, Johnson BL, Latour AM, Sulik KK, Koller BH: Brca1 deficiency results in early embryonic lethality characterized by neuroepithelial abnormalities. Nat Genet 1996, 12: 191–194. 10.1038/ng0296-191View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hakem R, de la Pompa JL, Sirard C, Mo R, Woo M, Hakem A, Wakeham A, Potter J, Reitmair A, Billia F, Firpo E, Hui CC, Roberts J, Rossant J, Mak TW: The tumor suppressor gene Brca1 is required for embryonic cellular proliferation in the mouse. Cell 1996, 85: 1009–1023. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81302-1View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chandler J, Hohenstein P, Swing DA, Tessarollo L, Sharan SK: Human BRCA1 gene rescues the embryonic lethality of Brca1 mutant mice. Genesis 2001, 29: 72–77. 10.1002/1526-968X(200102)29:2<72::AID-GENE1007>3.0.CO;2-BView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Howlett NG, Taniguchi T, Olson S, Cox B, Waisfisz Q, De Die-Smulders C, Persky N, Grompe M, Joenje H, Pals G, Ikeda H, Fox EA, D'Andrea AD: Biallelic inactivation of BRCA2 in Fanconi anemia. Science 2002, 297: 606–609. 10.1126/science.1073834View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Leegte B, Hout AH, Deffenbaugh AM, Bakker MK, Mulder IM, ten Berge A, Leenders EP, Wesseling J, de Hullu J, Hoogerbrugge N, Ligtenberg MJ, Ardern-Jones A, Bancroft E, Salmon A, Barwell J, Eeles R, Oosterwijk JC: Phenotypic expression of double heterozygosity for BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations. J Med Genet 2005, 42: e20. 10.1136/jmg.2004.027243View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Sokolenko et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement