BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group

Kathryn Alsop, Sian Fereday, Cliff Meldrum, Anna deFazio, Catherine Emmanuel, Joshy George, Alexander Dobrovic, Michael J Birrer, Penelope M Webb, Colin Stewart, Michael Friedlander, Stephen Fox, David Bowtell, Gillian Mitchell, Kathryn Alsop, Sian Fereday, Cliff Meldrum, Anna deFazio, Catherine Emmanuel, Joshy George, Alexander Dobrovic, Michael J Birrer, Penelope M Webb, Colin Stewart, Michael Friedlander, Stephen Fox, David Bowtell, Gillian Mitchell

Abstract

Purpose: The frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germ-line mutations in women with ovarian cancer is unclear; reports vary from 3% to 27%. The impact of germ-line mutation on response requires further investigation to understand its impact on treatment planning and clinical trial design.

Patients and methods: Women with nonmucinous ovarian carcinoma (n = 1,001) enrolled onto a population-based, case-control study were screened for point mutations and large deletions in both genes. Survival outcomes and responses to multiple lines of chemotherapy were assessed.

Results: Germ-line mutations were found in 14.1% of patients overall, including 16.6% of serous cancer patients (high-gradeserous, 17.1%); [corrected] 44% had no reported family history of breast orovarian cancer.Patients carrying germ-line mutations had improved rates of progression-free and overall survival. In the relapse setting, patients carrying mutations more frequently responded to both platin- and nonplatin-based regimens than mutation-negative patients, even in patients with early relapse after primary treatment. Mutation-negative patients who responded to multiple cycles of platin-based treatment were more likely to carry somatic BRCA1/2 mutations.

Conclusion: BRCA mutation status has a major influence on survival in ovarian cancer patients and should be an additional stratification factor in clinical trials. Treatment outcomes in BRCA1/2 carriers challenge conventional definitions of platin resistance, and mutation status may be able to contribute to decision making and systemic therapy selection in the relapse setting. Our data, together with the advent of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor trials, supports the recommendation that germ-line BRCA1/2 testing should be offered to all women diagnosed with nonmucinous, ovarian carcinoma, regardless of family history.

Conflict of interest statement

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis; P values calculated using a log-rank analysis. Estimated (A) progression-free survival (P = .01) and (B) overall survival (P = .01) of women with serous tumors by mutation status: BRCA1 mutation–positive (blue); BRCA2 mutation–positive (gray); BRCA1/2 mutation–positive (combined; gold); wild type (black). Death as a result of disease (n = 371); patients who died as a result of nondisease-related causes were censored (n = 40). Estimated (C) progression-free survival (P < .001) and (D) overall survival (P < .001) of women with serous BRCA1/2 mutation–positive tumors by amount of residual disease after primary surgery: nil macroscopic disease (red); ≤ 1 cm (gold); > 1 cm (blue). Death as a result of disease (n = 57); patients who died as a result of nondisease-related causes were censored (n = 4). Estimated (E) progression-free survival (P < .001) and (F) overall survival (P < .001) of women with serous tumors by both mutation status and amount of residual disease: BRCA1/2 mutation–positive with nil macroscopic disease (red); BRCA1/2 mutation–positive with ≤ 1 cm residual disease (gold); BRCA1/2 mutation–positive with > 1 cm macroscopic disease (dark blue); BRCA1/2 wild-type with nil residual disease (light blue); BRCA1/2 wild-type with ≤ 1 cm residual disease (gray); BRCA1/2 wild-type with > 1 cm macroscopic disease (dark gold). Death as a result of disease, n = 348; patients who had died as a result of nondisease-related causes were censored (n = 35).
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Response to treatment at first progression. Treatment response was based on a 50% decrease in CA-125, maintained for 28 days, as described in the Patients and Methods section. Patients with a sequence variant of unclassified significance were excluded from this analysis. (A) Mutation-positive and (B) mutation-negative patients are divided into those whose disease progressed within 6 months of the end of treatment (dark gray segment) and those whose disease progressed more than 6 months after primary treatment (light gray segment). Response to second line for (C and D) platin-based and (E and F) nonplatin-based treatments in patients with more than 6 months to first progression after primary platinum treatment (n = 333). Response to second line for (G and H) platin-based and (I and J) nonplatin-based treatments in patients whose disease progressed within 6 months of the end of primary platinum treatment (n = 168).
Fig 3.
Fig 3.
Time to first progression or death was plotted by mutation position along either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene, or by mutation type. Progression is only plotted for patients whose disease progressed by the censoring date; time to death was only plotted for those patients who died as a result of disease-related causes before the censoring date. The line represents the median. Thirty-five of the mutation-positive patients (24.8%) had remained progression free at the time of data censoring for this study. (A) Time to first progression in patients with a BRCA1 mutation who were optimally debulked (nil or ≤ 1 cm residual disease; gold plus symbols) or suboptimally debulked (blue) at time of primary surgery. (B) Time to death in BRCA1 mutation–positive cases who were optimally (gold) or suboptimally (blue) debulked at time of primary surgery. Deaths as a result of disease-related causes (n = 45; plotted); deaths as a result of nondisease-related causes (n = 3; not plotted). (C) Time to first progression in patients with a BRCA2 mutation who were optimally (gold) or suboptimally (blue) debulked at time of primary surgery. (D) Time to death in BRCA2 mutation–positive women who were optimally (gold) or suboptimally (blue) debulked at time of primary surgery. Deaths as a result of disease-related causes (n = 26; plotted); deaths as a result of nondisease-related causes (n = 2; not plotted). (E) Time to first progression by mutation type. A deletion or insertion was considered multiple base if at least two base pairs were involved. (F) Time to death by mutation type. Deaths as a result of disease-related causes (n = 71; plotted); deaths as a result of nondisease-related causes (n = 5; not plotted). A deletion or insertion was considered multiple base if at least two base pairs were involved. HGVS, Human Genome Variation Society.

References

    1. Rubin SC, Benjamin I, Behbakht K, et al. Clinical and pathological features of ovarian cancer in women with germ-line mutations of BRCA1. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1413–1416.
    1. Sarantaus L, Vahteristo P, Bloom E, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among 233 unselected Finnish ovarian carcinoma patients. Eur J Hum Genet. 2001;9:424–430.
    1. Malander S, Ridderheim M, Måsbäck A, et al. One in 10 ovarian cancer patients carry germ line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: Results of a prospective study in Southern Sweden. Eur J Cancer. 2004;40:422–428.
    1. Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE, et al. Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: A kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1694–1706.
    1. Jacobi CE, van Ierland Y, van Asperen CJ, et al. Prediction of BRCA1/2 mutation status in patients with ovarian cancer from a hospital-based cohort. Genet Med. 2007;9:173–179.
    1. Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Betts JA, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations account for a large proportion of ovarian carcinoma cases. Cancer. 2005;104:2807–2816.
    1. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474:609–615.
    1. Robson ME, Storm CD, Weitzel J, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: Genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:893–901.
    1. Cass I, Baldwin RL, Varkey T, et al. Improved survival in women with BRCA-associated ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2003;97:2187–2195.
    1. Majdak EJ, Debniak J, Milczek T, et al. Prognostic impact of BRCA1 pathogenic and BRCA1/BRCA2 unclassified variant mutations in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;104:1004–1012.
    1. Boyd J, Sonoda Y, Federici M, et al. Clinicopathologic features of BRCA-linked and sporadic ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2000;283:2260–2265.
    1. Ben David Y, Chetrit A, Hirsh-Yechezkel G, et al. Effect of BRCA mutations on the length of survival in epithelial ovarian tumours. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:463–466.
    1. Chetrit A, Hirsh-Yechezkel G, Ben-David Y, et al. Effect of BRCA1/2 mutations on long-term survival of patients with invasive ovarian cancer: The national Israeli study of ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:20–25.
    1. Tan DSP, Rothermundt C, Thomas K, et al. “BRCAness” syndrome in ovarian cancer: A case-control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5530–5536.
    1. Vencken PM, Kriege M, Hoogwerf D, et al. Chemosensitivity and outcome of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated ovarian cancer patients after first-line chemotherapy compared with sporadic ovarian cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1346–1352.
    1. Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Kapoor R, et al. Improved survival in BRCA2 carriers with ovarian cancer. Fam Cancer. 2007;6:113–119.
    1. Farmer H, McCabe N, Lord CJ, et al. Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy. Nature. 2005;434:917–921.
    1. Helleday T, Bryant HE, Schultz N. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP-1) in homologous recombination and as a target for cancer therapy. Cell Cycle. 2005;4:1176–1178.
    1. McCabe N, Turner NC, Lord CJ, et al. Deficiency in the repair of DNA damage by homologous recombination and sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition. Cancer Res. 2006;66:8109–8115.
    1. Fong PC, Boss DS, Yap TA, et al. Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in tumors from BRCA mutation carriers. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:123–134.
    1. Merritt MA, Green AC, Nagle CM, et al. Talcum powder, chronic pelvic inflammation and NSAIDs in relation to risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:170–176.
    1. Takano EA, Mitchell G, Fox SB, et al. Rapid detection of carriers with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations using high resolution melting analysis. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:59–65.
    1. Hondow HL, Fox SB, Mitchell G, et al. A high-throughput protocol for mutation scanning of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:265.
    1. Tothill RW, Tinker AV, George J, et al. Novel molecular subtypes of serous and endometrioid ovarian cancer linked to clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:5198–5208.
    1. Rustin GJ. Can we now agree to use the same definition to measure response according to CA-125? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4035–4036.
    1. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–216.
    1. Rustin GJ, Vergote I, Eisenhauer E, et al. Definitions for response and progression in ovarian cancer clinical trials incorporating RECIST 1.1 and CA125 agreed by the Gynaecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21:419–423.
    1. Madore J, Ren F, Filali-Mouhim A, et al. Characterization of the molecular differences between ovarian endometrioid carcinoma and ovarian serous carcinoma. J Pathol. 2010;220:392–400.
    1. Han G, Gilks CB, Leung S, et al. Mixed ovarian epithelial carcinomas with clear cell and serous components are variants of high-grade serous carcinoma: An interobserver correlative and immunohistochemical study of 32 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32:955–964.
    1. DeLair D, Oliva E, Köbel M, et al. Morphologic spectrum of immunohistochemically characterized clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: A study of 155 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35:36–44.
    1. Kosary CL. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2007. Cancer of the Ovary, in SEER Survival Monograph—Cancer Survival Amongst Adults: US SEER Program 1998-2001, Patient and Tumor Characterstics. NIH Publication No. 07-6215.
    1. Winter WE, III, Maxwell GL, Tian C, et al. Prognostic factors for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3621–3627.
    1. Eisenhauer EA, Vermorken JB, van Glabbeke M. Predictors of response to subsequent chemotherapy in platinum pretreated ovarian cancer: A multivariate analysis of 704 patients. Ann Oncol. 1997;8:963–968.
    1. Swisher EM, Sakai W, Karlan BY, et al. Secondary BRCA1 mutations in BRCA1-mutated ovarian carcinomas with platinum resistance. Cancer Res. 2008;68:2581–2586.
    1. Edwards SL, Brough R, Lord CJ, et al. Resistance to therapy caused by intragenic deletion in BRCA2. Nature. 2008;451:1111–1115.
    1. Sakai W, Swisher EM, Karlan BY, et al. Secondary mutations as a mechanism of cisplatin resistance in BRCA2-mutated cancers. Nature. 2008;451:1116–1120.
    1. Metcalfe KA, Fan I, McLaughlin J, et al. Uptake of clinical genetic testing for ovarian cancer in Ontario: A population-based study. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112:68–72.
    1. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, et al. Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA. 2010;304:967–975.
    1. Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: Results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:327–340.
    1. Wentzensen N, Black A, Jacobs K, et al. Genetic variation on 9p22 is associated with abnormal ovarian ultrasound results in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. PLoS One. 2011;6:e21731.
    1. Vaughan S, Coward JI, Bast RC, Jr, et al. Rethinking ovarian cancer: Recommendations for improving outcomes. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;11:719–725.
    1. Zhang S, Royer R, Li S, et al. Frequencies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among 1,342 unselected patients with invasive ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:353–357.
    1. Hodgson SV, Heap E, Cameron J, et al. Risk factors for detecting germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 founder mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast or ovarian cancer. J Med Genet. 1999;36:369–373.
    1. Kobel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, et al. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: Implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e232.
    1. Cannistra SA. Cancer of the ovary. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2519–2529.
    1. Mukhopadhyay A, Elattar A, Cerbinskaite A, et al. Development of a functional assay for homologous recombination status in primary cultures of epithelial ovarian tumor and correlation with sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:2344–2351.
    1. Norquist B, Wurz KA, Pennil CC, et al. Secondary somatic mutations restoring BRCA1/2 predict chemotherapy resistance in hereditary ovarian carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3008–3015.
    1. Etemadmoghadam D, George J, Cowin PA, et al. Amplicon-dependent CCNE1 expression is critical for clonogenic survival after cisplatin treatment and is correlated with 20q11 gain in ovarian cancer. PLoS One. 2010;5:e15498.
    1. Etemadmoghadam D, deFazio A, Beroukhim R, et al. Integrated genome-wide DNA copy number and expression analysis identifies distinct mechanisms of primary chemoresistance in ovarian carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:1417–1427.
    1. Trainer AH, Meiser B, Watts K, et al. Moving toward personalized medicine: Treatment-focused genetic testing of women newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:704–716.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner