Addition of pathology and biomarker information significantly improves the performance of the Manchester scoring system for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing

Background: Selection for genetic testing of BRCA1/BRCA2 is an important area of healthcare. Although testing costs for mutational analysis are falling, costs in North America remain in excess of US$3000 (UK price can be £690). Guidelines in most countries use a 10–20% threshold of detecting a mutation in BRCA1/2 combined within a family before mutational analysis is considered. A number of computer-based models have been developed. However, use of these models can be time consuming and difficult. The Manchester scoring system was developed in 2003 to simplify the selection process without losing accuracy. Methods: In order to increase accuracy of prediction, breast pathology of the index case was incorporated into the Manchester scoring system based on 2156 samples from unrelated non-Jewish patients fully tested for BRCA1/2, and the scores were adapted accordingly. Results/Discussion: Data from breast pathology allowed adjustment of BRCA1 and combined BRCA1/2 scores alone. There was a lack of pathological homogeneity for BRCA2, therefore specific pathological correlates could not be identified. Upward adjustments in BRCA1 mutation prediction scores were made for grade 3 ductal cancers, oestrogen receptor (ER) and triple-negative tumours. Downward adjustments in the score were made for grade 1 tumours, lobular cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ and ER/HER2 positivity. Application of the updated scoring system led to four and nine more mutations in BRCA1 being identified at the 10% and 20% threshold, respectively. Furthermore, 65 and 58 fewer cases met the 10% and 20% threshold, respectively, for testing. Moreover, the adjusted score significantly improved the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity for BRCA1/2 prediction.

[1]  J. D. Thompson,et al.  BRCA1 mutations in a population-based sample of young women with breast cancer. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  K Offit,et al.  BRCA1 sequence analysis in women at high risk for susceptibility mutations. Risk factor analysis and implications for genetic testing. , 1997, JAMA.

[3]  F. Couch,et al.  BRCA1 mutations in women attending clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  D. Berry,et al.  Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 1998, American journal of human genetics.

[5]  S. Cummings,et al.  Sequence analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2: correlation of mutations with family history and ovarian cancer risk. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  Å. Borg,et al.  Family history of breast and ovarian cancers and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population-based series of early-onset breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[7]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  G. Lenoir,et al.  Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  Sean V Tavtigian,et al.  Clinical characteristics of individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: analysis of 10,000 individuals. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  D. Evans,et al.  Risk assessment and management of high risk familial breast cancer , 2002, Journal of medical genetics.

[11]  Gordon B Mills,et al.  Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  J. Cigudosa,et al.  Immunohistochemical characteristics defined by tissue microarray of hereditary breast cancer not attributable to BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: differences from breast carcinomas arising in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. , 2003, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[13]  L. Newman,et al.  Breast cancer risk assessment models , 2003, Cancer.

[14]  L. Bégin,et al.  Germline BRCA1 mutations and a basal epithelial phenotype in breast cancer. , 2004, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[15]  William D. Foulkes,et al.  Re: Germline BRCA1 Mutations and a Basal Epithelial Phenotype in Breast Cancer , 2004 .

[16]  N. Rahman,et al.  A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO , 2004, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[17]  N. Rahman,et al.  Update on the Manchester Scoring System for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing , 2005, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[18]  Julian Peto,et al.  Prediction of BRCA1 Status in Patients with Breast Cancer Using Estrogen Receptor and Basal Phenotype , 2005, Clinical Cancer Research.

[19]  Alan Ashworth,et al.  Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy , 2005, Nature.

[20]  Thomas Helleday,et al.  Specific killing of BRCA2-deficient tumours with inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase , 2005, Nature.

[21]  B. Mukesh,et al.  Optimal selection of individuals for BRCA mutation testing: a comparison of available methods. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  J. Kirk,et al.  Evaluation of models to predict BRCA germline mutations , 2006, British Journal of Cancer.

[23]  B. Knoppers,et al.  Evaluation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation prevalence, risk prediction models and a multistep testing approach in French-Canadian families with high risk of breast and ovarian cancer , 2006, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[24]  Z. Miedzybrodzka,et al.  Probability estimation models for prediction of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: COS compares favourably with other models , 2007, Familial Cancer.

[25]  A. Shenton,et al.  Probability of BRCA1/2 mutation varies with ovarian histology: results from screening 442 ovarian cancer families , 2008, Clinical genetics.

[26]  H A Risch,et al.  The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions , 2008, British Journal of Cancer.

[27]  J. Hopper,et al.  The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions , 2008, British Journal of Cancer.

[28]  R. Eeles,et al.  Predicting the likelihood of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: validation of BOADICEA, BRCAPRO, IBIS, Myriad and the Manchester scoring system using data from UK genetics clinics , 2008, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[29]  C. Yip,et al.  Evaluation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and risk-prediction models in a typical Asian country (Malaysia) with a relatively low incidence of breast cancer , 2008, Breast Cancer Research.

[30]  M. Ennis,et al.  Selecting a BRCA risk assessment model for use in a familial cancer clinic , 2008, BMC Medical Genetics.