The Role of Genome Sequencing in Personalized Breast Cancer Prevention

Background: There is uncertainty about the benefits of using genome-wide sequencing to implement personalized preventive strategies at the population level, with some projections suggesting little benefit. We used data for all currently known breast cancer susceptibility variants to assess the benefits and harms of targeting preventive efforts to a population subgroup at highest genomic risk of breast cancer. Methods: We used the allele frequencies and effect sizes of 86 known breast cancer variants to estimate the population distribution of breast cancer risks and evaluate the strategy of targeting preventive efforts to those at highest risk. We compared the efficacy of this strategy with that of a “best-case” strategy based on a risk distribution estimated from breast cancer concordance in monozygous twins, and with strategies based on previously estimated risk distributions. Results: Targeting those in the top 25% of the risk distribution would include approximately half of all future breast cancer cases, compared with 70% captured by the best-case strategy and 35% based on previously known variants. In addition, current evidence suggests that reducing exposure to modifiable nongenetic risk factors will have greatest benefit for those at highest genetic risk. Conclusions: These estimates suggest that personalized breast cancer preventive strategies based on genome sequencing will bring greater gains in disease prevention than previously projected. Moreover, these gains will increase with increased understanding of the genetic etiology of breast cancer. Impact: These results support the feasibility of using genome-wide sequencing to target the women who would benefit from mammography screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(11); 2322–7. ©2014 AACR.

[1]  P. Pharoah,et al.  Public health genomics and personalized prevention: lessons from the COGS project , 2013, Journal of internal medicine.

[2]  Paul D P Pharoah,et al.  Inherited genetic susceptibility to breast cancer: the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning? , 2013, The American journal of pathology.

[3]  Jaana M. Hartikainen,et al.  Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[4]  Patrick Neven,et al.  Genome-wide association studies identify four ER negative–specific breast cancer risk loci , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[5]  Wei Lu,et al.  Gene-environment interactions for breast cancer risk among Chinese women: a report from the Shanghai Breast Cancer Genetics Study. , 2013, American journal of epidemiology.

[6]  Aung Ko Win,et al.  Risks of primary extracolonic cancers following colorectal cancer in lynch syndrome. , 2012, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[7]  S. Rosset,et al.  Comment on “The Predictive Capacity of Personal Genome Sequencing” , 2012, Science Translational Medicine.

[8]  Giovanni Parmigiani,et al.  The Predictive Capacity of Personal Genome Sequencing , 2012, Science Translational Medicine.

[9]  G. Rennert,et al.  MutYH mutation carriers have increased breast cancer risk , 2012, Cancer.

[10]  Samantha E. Boyle,et al.  Analysis of RAD51C germline mutations in high-risk breast and ovarian cancer families and ovarian cancer patients , 2012, Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice.

[11]  W. Ruan,et al.  Genetic polymorphisms and breast cancer risk: evidence from meta-analyses, pooled analyses, and genome-wide association studies , 2011, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[12]  Montserrat Garcia-Closas,et al.  Genetic susceptibility to breast cancer , 2010, Molecular oncology.

[13]  Dieter Niederacher,et al.  Germline mutations in breast and ovarian cancer pedigrees establish RAD51C as a human cancer susceptibility gene , 2010, Nature Genetics.

[14]  P. Visscher,et al.  Common polygenic variation contributes to risk of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder , 2009, Nature.

[15]  R. Wilkins Polygenes, risk prediction, and targeted prevention of breast cancer. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  T. Dörk,et al.  Nijmegen Breakage Syndrome mutations and risk of breast cancer , 2008, International journal of cancer.

[17]  Douglas F. Easton,et al.  Polygenic susceptibility to breast cancer and implications for prevention , 2002, Nature Genetics.

[18]  E. Feuer,et al.  SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2003 , 2006 .