Cited by 455BRCA gene mutations in cancerGenomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

A Systematic Genetic Assessment of 1,433 Sequence Variants of Unknown Clinical Significance in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Breast Cancer–Predisposition Genes

Open access
Easton, Douglas F., Deffenbaugh, Amie M., Pruss, Dmitry, Frye, Cynthia, Wenstrup, Richard J., Allen-Brady, Kristina, Tavtigian, Sean V., Monteiro, Alvaro N.A. +3 more·2007·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

Mutation screening of the breast and ovarian cancer-predisposition genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 is becoming an increasingly important part of clinical practice. Classification of rare nontruncating sequence variants in these genes is problematic, because it is not known whether these subtle changes alter function sufficiently to predispose cells to cancer development. Using data from the Myriad Genetic Laboratories database of nearly 70,000 full-sequence tests, we assessed the clinical significance of 1,433 sequence variants of unknown significance (VUSs) in the BRCA genes. Three independent measures were employed in the assessment: co-occurrence in trans of a VUS with known deleterious mutations; detailed analysis, by logistic regression, of personal and family history of cancer in VUS-carrying probands; and, in a subset of probands, an analysis of cosegregation with disease in pedigrees. For each of these factors, a likelihood ratio was computed under the hypothesis that the VUSs were equivalent to an "average" deleterious mutation, compared with neutral, with respect to risk. The likelihood ratios derived from each component were combined to provide an overall assessment for each VUS. A total of 133 VUSs had odds of at least 100 : 1 in favor of neutrality with respect to risk, whereas 43 had odds of at least 20 : 1 in favor of being deleterious. VUSs with evidence in favor of causality were those that were predicted to affect splicing, fell at positions that are highly conserved among BRCA orthologs, and were more likely to be located in specific domains of the proteins. In addition to their utility for improved genetics counseling of patients and their families, the global assessment reported here will be invaluable for validation of functional assays, structural models, and in silico analyses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/521032

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Numerous chronic conditions have familial analogs caused by rare variants, including atherosclerosis through hypercholesterolemia, MODY, and BRCA1/BRCA2 breast cancer susceptibility.

    “well-known examples include rare variants promoting atherosclerosis through hypercholesterolemia39, the lesions responsible for Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY)40, and the BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer susceptibility mutations41.”

    From Rare and common variants: twenty arguments (2012) · cites this paper as [41]

  • The identification of multiple rare variants within the same gene in largely monogenic disorders suggests that rare variants might also influence common complex traits and diseases.

    “Third, the identification of multiple rare variants within the same gene contributing to largely monogenic disorders such as Cystic Fibrosis and BRCA1 and BRCA2-associated breast cancer18, 19 suggests that rare variants might also influence common complex traits and diseases.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Easton, D. F., Deffenbaugh, A. M., Pruss, D., Frye, C., Wenstrup, R. J., Allen-Brady, K., Tavtigian, S. V., Monteiro, A. N. A., Iversen, E. S., Couch, F. J., & Goldgar, D. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Goldgar, David E.
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-11
Volume
81
Issue
5
Pages
873-883
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2027605814
Cited by
455
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 31
FWCI
16.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA092309, CA92309, P50CA116201)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
BRCA1, BRCA2, breast cancer predisposition, ovarian cancer predisposition, likelihood ratios, co-segregation analysis, family history of cancer, splicing, protein conservation, genetic counseling, mutation detection
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mutation, Likelihood Functions, Odds Ratio, Sequence Analysis, DNA, BRCA1 Protein, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, BRCA2 Protein

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review