4.6 Article

Loss-of-function variants in CTNNA1 detected on multigene panel testing in individuals with gastric or breast cancer

期刊

GENETICS IN MEDICINE
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 840-846

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0753-1

关键词

CTNNA1; diffuse gastric cancer; breast cancer; multigene panel testing; cancer risk assessment

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) grants [K08DK106489, R03DK120946]
  2. Lustgarten Family Colon Cancer Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose CTNNA1 is a potential diffuse gastric cancer risk gene, however CTNNA1 testing on multigene panel testing (MGPT) remains unstudied. Methods De-identified data from 151,425 individuals who underwent CTNNA1 testing at a commercial laboratory between October 2015 and July 2019 were reviewed. Tissue alpha-E-catenin immunohistochemistry was performed on CTNNA1 c.1351C>T (p.Arg451*) carriers. Results Fifty-two individuals (0.03% tested) had CTNNA1 loss-of-function (LOF) variants and 1057 individuals (0.7% tested) had a total of 302 distinct missense variants of uncertain significance. Detailed history was available on 33 CTNNA1 LOF carriers, with 21 unique CTNNA1 LOF variants. Four (12%) individuals had diffuse gastric cancer and 22 (67%) had breast cancer. Six (21%) and 24 (83%) of the 29 families reported a history of gastric or breast cancer, respectively. The CTNNA1 c.1351C>T nonsense variant was identified in three separate families with early-onset diffuse gastric cancer or breast cancer. Immunohistochemistry showed decreased alpha-E-catenin expression in gastric cancers. Conclusion CTNNA1 LOF variants are detected on MGPT with a majority of these individuals having gastric or breast cancer. The overall risk of gastric cancer for CTNNA1 LOF carriers may be lower than expected. Given the uncertain phenotype and penetrance, management of individuals with CTNNA1 LOF variants remains challenging.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据