Francesca Fava

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome accounts for 5–10% of all breast and ovarian cancers, with BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants being the most common genetic alterations. However, additional genes such as BARD1, whose protein product interacts with BRCA1 via its N-terminal RING domain, have been implicated as low-penetrance contributors to cancer risk. This study aimed to investigate the frequency and distribution of the BARD1 variant c.1518_1519delinsCA (p.Val507Met) in a cohort of 920 patients undergoing genetic testing for hereditary cancer predisposition. Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) was performed using a 28-gene panel, and allelic frequencies of BARD1 were analyzed. Among 920 patients, 159 (17.28%) were pure heterozygous for the c.1518_1519delinsCA variant. Notably, c.1519G>A was never observed without c.1518T>C, suggesting a strong linkage between the two variants. The allele frequencies observed (34.51% for A at c.1519 and 77.88% for C at c.1518) challenge current reference genome expectations. Data from the ALFA database confirmed that these frequencies are consistent with population-level variation, not sample bias. Our findings raise the hypothesis that the reference allele at position c.1518 may not reflect the true wild-type sequence. While both c.1518T>C and c.1519G>A are individually classified as benign, their combined occurrence as a dinucleotide substitution (c.1518_1519delinsCA) warrants further investigation. These results underscore the importance of accurate variant annotation and population-specific frequency data for clinical interpretation of NGS findings. Although BARD1 remains a low-frequency contributor to HBOC compared to BRCA1/2, its inclusion in multigene panels is supported by the potential relevance of such complex variants.

Background and Aim: DNA methylation may contribute to a worsening in breast cancer (BC). Methods: We conducted a matched case–control study to investigate the contribution of DNA methylation (DNAm) in breast cancer recurrence risk. Genome-wide DNAm profiles were generated from peripheral white blood cells (WBC) collected post-surgery from women with primary breast cancer BRCA wild-type, using Illumina Infinium HumanMethylationEPIC array. Cases had to experience recurrence of breast cancer or death and were matched to controls (subjects without recurrence, ratio 1:2) by age at diagnosis (+/− 5 years) and follow-up duration. Results: We identified three differentially methylated regions between the groups. Cases showed two hypomethylated regions, one upstream of the vtRNA2–1 gene (estimate −0.30, p-value < 0.005), and one in the 5′ UTR region of the FGFR2 gene (estimate −0.34, p-value < 0.028), whereas one, upstream of the RUFY1 gene (estimate 0.32, p-value < 0.015), was hypermethylated. Additionally, we identified two methylation signals, recognised as predictors of biochemical traits. The chemokine ligand 21 (unadjusted p-value < 0.03) and insulin receptor expression (unadjusted p-value < 0.04) were higher in cases than in controls. Conclusions: Our exploratory study suggests that specific DNA methylation patterns in WBCs, particularly in genes related to cellular proliferation, invasion, and glucose homeostasis, may be associated with the risk of breast cancer recurrence in BRCA wild-type women. If validated in larger cohorts, these circulating signatures may serve as blood-based biomarkers to improve risk stratification and guide tailored treatment strategies.

Background/Objectives: Compared to single gene testing (SGT), multigene panel testing (MGPT) improves pathogenic variants (PVs) detection. However, MGPT yields complex results, including secondary findings, heterozygous PVs in recessive genes, low-penetrance PVs, and variants of uncertain significance. We reported our mono-institutional experience of germline testing in breast cancer (BC), comparing SGT and MGPT. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical and molecular data from 1084 BC patients: 308 underwent SGT (BRCA1/BRCA2) and 776 MGPT (for 28 cancer-related genes). We compared these approaches regarding the genetic classification of the findings (positive, uncertain, uninformative) and their impact on clinical management (primary findings (PFs); complex and inconclusive results). Additionally, we described clinical features supporting one approach over the other and focused on copy number variation (CNV) frequency in non-BRCA genes. Results: We found ≥1 PV in 165 patients (165/1084 = 15.2%), including 91 in BRCA1/BRCA2 (91/1084 = 8.4%), with 42 identified by SGT (42/308 = 13.6%) and 49 by MGPT (49/776 = 6.3%). MGPT detected PVs in non-BRCA genes in 74 patients (74/776 = 9.5%), including 40 PFs. Overall, MGPT identified 89 PFs (89/776 = 11.5%). We observed complex results in 21 patients (21/308 = 6.8%) with SGT and in 300 (300/776 = 38.7%) with MGPT. Compared to MGPT, SGT detected a similar percentage of PFs (13.6% vs. 11.5%) but a significantly reduced percentage of complex results (6.8% vs. 38.7%) (p < 0.001). Triple-negative BCs prevailed in BRCA1 carriers, while ER-positive BCs were more prevalent in ATM/CHEK2 carriers. Concerning non-BRCA genes, MGPT detected CNVs in PALB2, representing 20% of PVs in this gene. Conclusions: Although MGPT increases hereditary BC detection, its complexity requires clear guidelines for optimal clinical management and strategies for merging the benefits of SGT and MGPT.

Lynch syndrome is a genetic condition predisposing to cancer, particularly colorectal cancer and endometrial cancer, due to germline mutations in MisMatch Repair genes. More rarely, Lynch syndrome is the result of a constitutional MLH1 promoter methylation. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the role of this epigenetic mechanism in the Lynch syndrome. Universal Tumor Screening, performed on tumoral specimens to identify features suggestive of Lynch syndrome, shows the same features both in the case of sporadic cancers and Lynch syndrome-cancers due to a constitutional MLH1 methylation: microsatellite instability, deficiency of MisMatch Repair proteins, and methylation of MLH1 gene. Over the last few years, identifying methylation of MLH1 promoter on tumors was used to discern sporadic tumors from Lynch syndrome tumors: the methylation of the MLH1 promoter was usually explained as a somatic event and this could lead to a missed diagnosis of some Lynch syndrome cases. Therefore, establishing criteria to decide when to test patients for constitutional MLH1 methylation is urgent. In the case of microsatellite instability/deficiency of MisMatch Repair tumors with MLH1 methylation, a germline genetic test could be requested for all colorectal cancer patients aged 55 years or younger and all endometrial cancer patients younger than 50 years old, independently from family history. The prevalence of germline MLH1 epimutations is not precisely known and possibly underestimated. The associated cancer risk could be similar to that due to a MLH1 sequence variant. MLH1 epimutations could be secondary to other genetic defects and follow an autosomal dominant inheritance. On the contrary, primary epimutations are often “ de novo” events, and their transmission does not follow Mendelian rules.

Women carrying pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in moderate- or high-penetrance genes have an increased risk of developing breast cancer. However, most P/LP variants associated with breast cancer risk show incomplete penetrance. Age, gender, family history, polygenic risk, lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, and environmental factors can affect the expressivity and penetrance of the disease. However, there are gaps in translating how individual genomic variation affects phenotypic presentation. The expansion of criteria for genetic testing and the increasing utilization of comprehensive genetic panels may enhance the identification of individuals carrying P/LP variants linked to hereditary breast cancer. Individualized risk assessment could facilitate the implementation of personalized risk-reduction strategies for these individuals. Preventive interventions encompass lifestyle modifications, chemoprevention, enhanced surveillance through breast imaging, and risk-reducing surgeries. This review addresses the current literature’s inconsistencies and limitations, particularly regarding risk factors and the intensity of preventive strategies for women with P/LP variants in moderate- and high-penetrance genes. In addition, it synthesizes the latest evidence on risk assessment and primary and secondary prevention in women at high risk of breast cancer.

Women carrying pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in moderate- or high-penetrance genes have an increased risk of developing breast cancer. However, most P/LP variants associated with breast cancer risk show incomplete penetrance. Age, gender, family history, polygenic risk, lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, and environmental factors can affect the expressivity and penetrance of the disease. However, there are gaps in translating how individual genomic variation affects phenotypic presentation. The expansion of criteria for genetic testing and the increasing utilization of comprehensive genetic panels may enhance the identification of individuals carrying P/LP variants linked to hereditary breast cancer. Individualized risk assessment could facilitate the implementation of personalized risk-reduction strategies for these individuals. Preventive interventions encompass lifestyle modifications, chemoprevention, enhanced surveillance through breast imaging, and risk-reducing surgeries. This review addresses the current literature's inconsistencies and limitations, particularly regarding risk factors and the intensity of preventive strategies for women with P/LP variants in moderate- and high-penetrance genes. In addition, it synthesizes the latest evidence on risk assessment and primary and secondary prevention in women at high risk of breast cancer.

Extreme polymorphism of HLA and killer‐cell immunoglobulin‐like receptors (KIR) differentiates immune responses across individuals. Additional to T cell receptor interactions, subsets of HLA class I act as ligands for inhibitory and activating KIR, allowing natural killer (NK) cells to detect and kill infected cells. We investigated the impact of HLA and KIR polymorphism on the severity of COVID‐19. High resolution HLA class I and II and KIR genotypes were determined from 403 non‐hospitalized and 1575 hospitalized SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients from Italy collected in 2020. We observed that possession of the activating KIR2DS4*001 allotype is associated with severe disease, requiring hospitalization (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.20–1.85, p_c = 0.017), and this effect is greater in individuals homozygous for KIR2DS4*001 (OR = 3.74, 95% CI 1.75–9.29, p_c = 0.003). We also observed the HLA class II allotype, HLA‐DPB1*13:01 protects SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients from severe disease (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.33–0.74, p_c = 0.019). These association analyses were replicated using logistic regression with sex and age as covariates. Autoantibodies against IFN‐α associated with COVID‐19 severity were detected in 26% of 156 hospitalized patients tested. HLA‐C*08:02 was more frequent in patients with IFN‐α autoantibodies than those without, and KIR3DL1*01502 was only present in patients lacking IFN‐α antibodies. These findings suggest that KIR and HLA polymorphism is integral in determining the clinical outcome following SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, by influencing the course both of innate and adaptive immunity.

Carriers of single pathogenic variants of the CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) gene have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 and 14-day death. The machine learning post-Mendelian model pinpointed CFTR as a bidirectional modulator of COVID-19 outcomes. Here, we demonstrate that the rare complex allele [G576V;R668C] is associated with a milder disease via a gain-of-function mechanism. Conversely, CFTR ultra-rare alleles with reduced function are associated with disease severity either alone (dominant disorder) or with another hypomorphic allele in the second chromosome (recessive disorder) with a global residual CFTR activity between 50 to 91%. Furthermore, we characterized novel CFTR complex alleles, including [A238V;F508del], [R74W;D1270N;V201M], [I1027T;F508del], [I506V;D1168G], and simple alleles, including R347C, F1052V, Y625N, I328V, K68E, A309D, A252T, G542*, V562I, R1066H, I506V, I807M, which lead to a reduced CFTR function and thus, to more severe COVID-19. In conclusion, CFTR genetic analysis is an important tool in identifying patients at risk of severe COVID-19.

Many pathogens exploit host cell-surface glycans. However, precise analyses of glycan ligands binding with heavily modified pathogen proteins can be confounded by overlapping sugar signals and/or compounded with known experimental constraints. Universal saturation transfer analysis (uSTA) builds on existing nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy to provide an automated workflow for quantitating protein-ligand interactions. uSTA reveals that early-pandemic, B-origin-lineage severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike trimer binds sialoside sugars in an “end-on” manner. uSTA-guided modeling and a high-resolution cryo–electron microscopy structure implicate the spike N-terminal domain (NTD) and confirm end-on binding. This finding rationalizes the effect of NTD mutations that abolish sugar binding in SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Together with genetic variance analyses in early pandemic patient cohorts, this binding implicates a sialylated polylactosamine motif found on tetraantennary N-linked glycoproteins deep in the human lung as potentially relevant to virulence and/or zoonosis.

KBG syndrome (KBGS) is characterized by distinctive facial gestalt, short stature and variable clinical findings. With ageing, some features become more recognizable, allowing a differential diagnosis. We aimed to better characterize natural history of KBGS. In the context of a European collaborative study, we collected the largest cohort of KBGS patients (49). A combined array- based Comparative Genomic Hybridization and next generation sequencing (NGS) approach investigated both genomic Copy Number Variants and SNVs. Intellectual disability (ID) (82%) ranged from mild to moderate with severe ID identified in two patients. Epilepsy was present in 26.5%. Short stature was consistent over time, while occipitofrontal circumference (median value: −0.88 SD at birth) normalized over years. Cerebral anomalies, were identified in 56% of patients and thus represented the second most relevant clinical feature reinforcing clinical suspicion in the paediatric age when short stature and vertebral/dental anomalies are vague. Macrodontia, oligodontia and dental agenesis (53%) were almost as frequent as skeletal anomalies, such as brachydactyly, short fifth finger, fifth finger clinodactyly, pectus excavatum/carinatum, delayed bone age. In 28.5% of individuals, prenatal ultrasound anomalies were reported. Except for three splicing variants, leading to a premature termination, variants were almost all frameshift. Our results, broadening the spectrum of KBGS phenotype progression, provide useful tools to facilitate differential diagnosis and improve clinical management. We suggest to consider a wider range of dental anomalies before excluding diagnosis and to perform a careful odontoiatric/ear-nose-throat (ENT) evaluation in order to look for even submucosal palate cleft given the high percentage of palate abnormalities. NGS approaches, following evidence of antenatal ultrasound anomalies, should include ANKRD11.