4.6 Article

Assessment of SLX4 Mutations in Hereditary Breast Cancers

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066961

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Starr Cancer Consortium
  2. Rita Allen Foundation Scholars Program Grant
  3. Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career Award for Medical Scientists
  4. Breast Cancer Research Foundation
  5. Sabin Family Research Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: SLX4 encodes a DNA repair protein that regulates three structure-specific endonucleases and is necessary for resistance to DNA crosslinking agents, topoisomerase I and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Recent studies have reported mutations in SLX4 in a new subtype of Fanconi anemia (FA), FA-P. Monoallelic defects in several FA genes are known to confer susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers. Methods and Results: To determine if SLX4 is involved in breast cancer susceptibility, we sequenced the entire SLX4 coding region in 738 (270 Jewish and 468 non-Jewish) breast cancer patients with 2 or more family members affected by breast cancer and no known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We found a novel nonsense (c.2469G>A, p.W823*) mutation in one patient. In addition, we also found 51 missense variants [13 novel, 23 rare (MAF<0.1%), and 15 common (MAF>1%)], of which 22 (5 novel and 17 rare) were predicted to be damaging by Polyphen2 (score = 0.65-1). We performed functional complementation studies using p.W823* and 5 SLX4 variants (4 novel and 1 rare) cDNAs in a human SLX4-null fibroblast cell line, RA3331. While wild type SLX4 and all the other variants fully rescued the sensitivity to mitomycin C (MMC), campthothecin (CPT), and PARP inhibitor (Olaparib) the p.W823* SLX4 mutant failed to do so. Conclusion: Loss-of-function mutations in SLX4 may contribute to the development of breast cancer in very rare cases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available