You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Prostate Cancer Heritability and Genetic Markers: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Camila Xu and Version 1 by Ahmad S Abdelrazek.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a highly variable illness; in fact, many individuals exhibit an aggressive disease with progression and metastasis, but others exhibit a slow disease with a low tendency to advance.

  • metastasis
  • prostate cancer
  • prostate cancer genes

1. Introduction

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most diagnosed cancer in men, with an estimated 268,490 and 34,500 newly diagnosed and died of prostate cancer in the United States in 2022, respectively [1]. Although PCa may be asymptomatic at the early stage and often has an indolent course of progression, it is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men behind lung cancer [2].
PCa is a highly variable illness; in fact, many individuals exhibit an aggressive disease with progression and metastasis, but others exhibit a slow disease with a low tendency to advance [3].
PCa can manifest clinically as a locally indolent illness or as a fast-developing, fatal metastatic disease [4]. Even though most men are diagnosed with an organ-confined illness, the long-term oncological prognosis might vary considerably [5].
In addition, histomorphology and molecular tumor features exhibit considerable variation between patients and within a similar tumor [6].
Patients with early-onset PCa who have family members with PCa, or other heritable malignancies are appropriate candidates for genetic testing [6]
Histologically, these tumors are quantified using the Gleason score, which analyses the degree to which the biotic prostate specimen resembles the normal prostate gland [7].
It has been well-established that prostate cancer has a reliable genetic association in recent years. As a result, genetic testing has arisen as essential to prostate screening, understanding the role of genetic mutations in PCa diagnosis, and developing new treatment approaches [8].

2. Prostate Cancer Heritability

Recently, the heritability of prostate cancer (PCa) has been highlighted; about 20% of patients with PCa have a positive family history, which may develop not only because of genetic factors but also due to environmental factors such as shared lifestyle and exposure to the same carcinogenic elements [9]. In addition, several studies reported that about 5% of PCa risk is due to genetic heritability [10,11,12][10][11][12]. Family history of cancer remains the cornerstone of genetic risk assessment, and asking about prostate and non-prostate malignancies is essential for a thorough evaluation of potential inherited cancer risk [13]. In 2016 two important studies reported the relation between PCa and family history; the PCBaSE study demonstrated that the risk of developing cancer in men who had brothers with PCa is highly notable; at the age of 65, the risk of developing cancer for those with brothers who had PCa was three-fold more compared to those who did not have brothers with PCa. At age 75, men with brothers having PCa had more than a two-fold risk compared to those without brothers with PCa [14]. In Norway, a twin prostate cancer study was conducted on more than 200,000 twins, both monozygotic and dizygotic, and this study reported that more than 57% of PCa is attributed to genetic risk factors [15]. Additionally, in recent research of 3607 men diagnosed with PCa who underwent genetic testing between 2013 and 2018, 17.2% were found to have germline mutations, whereas 37.2% did not meet the NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment criteria for testing [16]. The argument that all men with PCa should be tested is thought-provoking, but the cost-effectiveness and actionability of widespread genetic testing in early, low-risk PCa settings without other risk factors remain unclear, which may lead to short-term unintended consequences including clinical confusion and depletion of limited genetic counselling resources with low yield [17]. On the other hand, clinical predictors of germline status, such as metastatic stage iv or intraductal histology, emerging data about ductal histology, and/or history of second or multiple primary cancers at a younger age, may assist in prioritizing candidates for testing, as each has been independently associated with the presence of germline DNA repair mutations [18].

3. Genetic Markers

Several genetic mutations have been linked to the development of PCa. DNA repair (e.g., BRCA1, BRCA2, and ATM), DNA mismatch repair (e.g., MLH1, PMS2, MSH6, and MSH2), and cell cycle regulation genes (e.g., TP53) are among the mutations that have been targeted by researchers over the past years. Furthermore, other genes such as HBOX13 gene, important for prostate development, and CHEK2 gene, a tumor suppressor gene, have been linked to increased risk of PCa in men. In this section, we are discussing in detail the relationship between these genes and PCa. Table 1 represents a summary of the data discussed in this entreviewy.
Table 1.
Summary of the available data demonstrating the link between gene mutations and prostate cancer.
Table
GeneAssociation
BRCA1 and BRCA2
  • BRCA2 has more impact on the development as well as the prognosis of PCa than BRCA1.
  • Presence of these mutations is associated with a three to nine-fold increase in the risk of development of PCa.
  • Higher risk of high-grade illness and progression to metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.
ATM
  • Relative risk of metastatic prostate cancer is 6.3%
PALB2
  • Potential association between PALB2 mutation and aggressive forms of PCa.
MLH1, PMS2, MSH6, and MSH2
  • Carriers of pathogenic variants have a higher incidence of PCa compared with non-carrier. (5–24%)
HOXB13
  • Increased risk of early-onset PCa.
  • Increased de novo lipogenesis, cell motility, and PCa metastasis.
TP53
  • Higher relative risk of PCa in individuals with TP53 mutation.
  • TP53 variants are associated with advanced PCa.
CHEK2
  • CHECK2 1100delC mutation is associated with moderate increase in the risk of development of PCa.
FGF
  • Play a role in progression and metastasis.
  • Associated with worse prognosis.
CCNE1
  • Higher expression level is associated with a higher tumor grade.

3.1. DNA Repair Genes

Mutations in DNA repair genes occur in up to 10% and 17% of localized and metastatic PCa, respectively [16,19,20,21,22][16][19][20][21][22]. Sixty-four percent of BRCA2 mutations in prostate cancer are frameshift, 31% are missense, and 5% are splice. The BRCA1 gene contains 63% missense mutations, 31% frameshift mutations, and 6%splice mutations [6]. Moreover, an aggressive phenotype was identified in a study of PCa patients with BRCA1/2 mutations [23,24][23][24]. As regards the ATM gene, 50% of mutations found in PCa are missense, 37% frameshift and 13% splice. ATM variants were associated with the aggressive and lethal phenotype of Hereditary Prostate Cancer (HPCa) disease. In 2015, an international study explored 150 biopsies from patients with metastatic PCa, and the study reported many genetic mutations; 23% of men had DNA repair genes mutation, including BRCA1, BRCA2, and ATM [22]. DNA repair gene mutations have also been associated with metastasis of hormone-sensitive PCa [25].

3.1.1. BRCA1 and BRCA2

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are associated with ovarian and breast cancers and play an essential role in PCa predisposition. BRCA2 mutation has been associated with an increased risk of PCa, higher mortality, and a younger diagnosis of PCa than BRCA 1 mutation [19]. The relative risk of developing PCa in BRCA2 mutation carriers compared to non-carriers is between three- to nine-fold by the age of 65 [26,27][26][27]. BRCA2 mutation has been demonstrated in more aggressive subtypes of PCa [28]. Gallagher et al. showed that the risk of developing PCa in BRCA 2 mutation is three times higher than non-carriers, and the risk of recurrence and PCa-related death is also higher than non-carriers [29]. In another study, the risk of developing PCa in BRCA2 mutation carriers was estimated to be four-fold higher than the carriers of BRCA 1 [30]. All these studies demonstrated that carriers of BRCA 2 have an increased risk of developing PCa than BRCA 1 carriers [31]. Remarkably, germline changes were independent of an earlier age at diagnosis and an aggressive phenotype. As well as BRCA2 mutation carriers had a lower survival rate (61.8%) than males who did not carry the mutation (94.3%). Additionally, BRCA2 pathogenic mutations were linked with an increased risk of high-grade illness and progression to metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In addition, BRCA2 germline mutations contributed more to the increased PCa risk than BRCA1 mutations [32,33,34][32][33][34].

3.1.2. ATM

ATM is located on chromosome 11 and is a crucial component of the DNA damage response system. Ataxia telangiectasia syndrome is caused by homozygous loss-of-function mutations in ATM. Notably, it is also one of the known HBOC susceptibility genes; in fact, carriers of the ATM mutation have an elevated chance of developing breast, colorectal, gastric, and pancreatic cancers. Recently, the use of sequencing panels incorporating DNA-repair genes has also made it possible to identify germline ATM mutations in males with prostate cancer [35]. The relative risk of metastatic prostate cancer was 6.3% among ATM carriers [36]. Although ATM is the second most common alteration in PCa after BRCA 2, most studies demonstrate that ATM mutation is not associated with the same developments as BRCA 2 [22]. In 2015, Helgason et al. identified that the loss of function of the two variants of ATM was associated with PCa and gastric cancer [37]. However, more research is required to demonstrate the role of ATM gene mutation and PCa.

3.1.3. PALB2

PALB2 is located on chromosome 16; first discovered as a BRCA2-interacting protein, it is a crucial component in the creation of the BRCA complex. Indeed, PALB2 serves as a link between BRCA1 and BRCA2 to induce homologous recombination. It is one of the DNA repair genes; PALB2 mutations are connected with HBOC risk, especially breast and pancreatic malignancies, but few studies have revealed PALB2 variations in PCa patients [38]. However, the precise role of PALB2 in developing PCa is indistinct. Earlier studies did not demonstrate a clear association between PALB2 mutation and inherited PCa [39,40,41][39][40][41]. However, most recent studies highlighted the potential association between PALB2 mutation and the inheritance of aggressive forms of PCa [42,43][42][43]. As the PALB2 mutation is rare, more research and studies should be conducted to profoundly investigate the relationship between this gene and PCa development, the biological significance, and the potential treatment strategies of PCa [44].

3.2. DNA Mismatch Repair Genes

Lynch syndrome has been associated with endometrial cancer and colorectal carcinoma due to the mutation of mismatch repair genes. However, recently PCa has demonstrated a strong linkage to the mutation of the mismatch repair genes, including MLH1, PMS2, MSH6, and particularly MSH2. Bancroft et al. conducted a prospective international study that assessed PSA screening in patients with carriers of MSH2, MSH6, and MLH1 mutation genes; carriers of MSH2 and MSH6 pathogenic variants had a higher incidence of PCa compared with non-carrier controls which have been matched in age. However, PCa was not reported in carriers of MLH1 [45]. The Database of Lynch syndrome reported a prospective development of PCa in 28% (1808/6350) of men with Lynch syndrome. At the age of 75, the carriers of MSH2 and MSH1 mutations had an incidence of PCa up to 24% and 9%, compared to MLH1, and PMS2, who demonstrated an incidence of PCa up to 14%, and 5%, respectively [46].

3.3. HOXB13 Gene

The HOXB13 is a homeobox transcription factor, localized on chromosome 17. The HOXB13 gene produces a protein called a transcription factor, which plays a role in prostate development; however, the mechanism and pathways that lead to PCa development are unclear. HOXB13 was one of the first inherited genes related to PCa given its effect on the androgen receptors. Furthermore, it was shown to be associated with an increased risk of early-onset and the overall incidence of PCa in white men [19,47][19][47]. In a study by Pomerantz et al., HOXB13 together with FOXA1 was shown to cause an extensive reprograming to androgen receptor cistrome (i.e., transcription factor binding sites) which in turn plays a role in the development of PCa [48]. In 0.7% to 1.4% of prostate cancer cases and 6% of PCa patients with early onset, mutations have been reported [49]. A previous study indicated for the first time that individuals with the recurrent germline mutation G84E in HOXB13 had considerably increased risks of developing PCa compared to those without the mutation [47]. In 2015, Robson et al. reported the frequency rate of the HBOX13 G48E variant of 1.1 on 3607 patients with PCa [50]. In 2021, Loeb et al. also demonstrated that the frequency of the HBOX13 G48E variant at 1.4% in patients with PCa compared to 0.1% in patients without PCa [51]. Interestingly, in a recent study that was published in 2022, loss of HBOX13 was shown to increase cell motility in vitro and PCa metastasis in mice [52]. The authors have shown that the MEIS domain of HOXB13 interacts with HDAC3 (i.e., Histone deacetylases-3) suppressing the de novo lipogenesis through expression of lipogenic regulators such as fatty acid synthase. These regulators play an important role in producing elements necessary for sterol biosynthesis [53,54][53][54]. Loss of this interaction results in increased de novo lipogenesis and, consequently, tumorigenesis and metastasis. This was later confirmed in the same experiment in which inoculating mice with HOXB13 knockdown PCa cells was associated with higher rate of metastasis compared to controls [52]. This data could be of great value in selecting patient who would benefit from newer agents such as fatty acid synthase (FASN) inhibitor (e.g., TVB-2640) which currently being tested in a clinical trial. Such agents may have the potential to decrease lipogenesis and, eventually, tumor growth.

3.4. TP53 Gene

TP53 is a gene responsible for the production of proteins that regulate cell division and cell death [55]. Because of its function, it plays a role as a tumor suppressor gene in which its deletion or mutation has been associated with the development of several tumors [56]. An example of this association is Li Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) which is an inherited condition characterized by an increased risk for certain types of cancer early in life, most commonly breast and adrenal cancers besides sarcomas, leukemias, and lymphoma. A multi-center study was conducted to assess the relationship between TP53 gene mutation and PCa, and the study identified about 31 patients (19%) with PCa among 163 LFS males and 117 LFS patients without PCa, six of them developed PCa over a median of three years of follow-up [57]. The same study reported 38 patients out of 6850 who have TP53 which reflects a higher relative risk by 9.1-fold than the control population. Additionally, the presence of the TP53 mutation was associated with more advanced disease. The gTP53 predisposes to aggressive prostate cancer; therefore, PCa should be considered as a part of LFS screening protocols, and TP53 should be considered in germline screening of PCa [57].

3.5. CHEK2 Gene

The CHEK2 gene, localized on chromosome 22, encodes for a tumor suppressor that participates in the DNA damage signaling pathway [58]. The CHEK2 gene and its role in developing inherited PCa are still unclear because of the rarity of the studies. However, the mutation of the CHECK 2 variants, particularly 1100delC, has demonstrated a moderate increase in the risk of development of PCa [59]. Moreover, a meta-analysis of 12 studies of the CHECK2 c.1100delC variant was conducted to clarify the relationship between this variant and PCa inheritance. About half of these studies demonstrated that CHECK2 c.1100delC is associated with an increased risk of PCa [60]. However, more retrospective and prospective studies are required to emphasize this relation and the role of genetic screening of PCa patients for CHECK2 gene variants.

3.6. Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF) Genes

FGF genes encode fibroblast growth factor receptors, a group of receptors that regulate cell proliferation and differentiation during development and tissue repair [61]. Alteration to the FGF gene was shown to be associated with several cancers. For example, elevation in FGF expression was reported in patients with breast cancers [62]. Furthermore, point mutations in R78H, S249C, F384L, A391E, and G388R of the FGF genes have been observed in patients with PCa [63,64,65][63][64][65]. Moreover, in a recent meta-analysis, G388R polymorphism was associated with worse prognosis in cancer patients including those with PCa [66]. Interestingly, FGF has been also reported to play a role in cancer progression and metastasis in mice models [67]. Consequently, this gene has become the target for researchers to utilize as a potential therapeutic option [68,69][68][69].

3.7. Cyclin E1 Gene

Cyclin E1 (CCNE1) is one of the genes that regulate the transition from the G1 to the S phase of the cell cycle [70]. This gene has been implicated in different types of cancer such as breast and liver cancer [70,71,72,73][70][71][72][73]. Furthermore, several studies have suggested a potential role for CCNE1 as a prognostic and therapeutic tool [71,74,75][71][74][75]. In a recent study that was published in 2022 which investigated the role of CCNE1 in PCa, polymorphism CCNE1 rs997669 was not associated with a significant impact on prostate cancer risk [76]. However, a higher expression level of CCNE1 was significantly associated with a higher tumor grade [76]. In in vitro and in vivo studies, CCNE1 was shown to be regulated through speckle-type POZ protein (SPOP) in a way that over-expression of SPOP suppresses the tumor cell’s progression [77]. Interestingly, this observation was limited to certain cell lines including prostate and bladder cancer. Furthermore, the wild-type SPOP was shown to have the opposite effect on these cell lines [77]. Although the exact underlying mechanism that would explain this mode of selectivity and variability in the effect is still unknown, this area of research should receive more attention as it could unveil a potential novel therapeutic option for PCa patients [78].

References

  1. Bahmad, H.F.; Demus, T.; Moubarak, M.M.; Daher, D.; Alvarez Moreno, J.C.; Polit, F.; Lopez, O.; Merhe, A.; Abou-Kheir, W.; Nieder, A.M.; et al. Overcoming Drug Resistance in Advanced Prostate Cancer by Drug Repurposing. Med. Sci. 2022, 10, 15.
  2. Rawla, P. Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer. World J. Oncol. 2019, 10, 63–89.
  3. Testa, U.; Castelli, G.; Pelosi, E. Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Prostate Cancer Development: Therapeutic Implications. Medicines 2019, 6, 82.
  4. Klusa, D.; Lohaus, F.; Furesi, G.; Rauner, M.; Benešová, M.; Krause, M.; Kurth, I.; Peitzsch, C. Metastatic Spread in Prostate Cancer Patients Influencing Radiotherapy Response. Front. Oncol. 2020, 10, 627379.
  5. Yahaya, J.J.; Okecha, T.; Odida, M.; Wabinga, H. Prognostic Factors for Overall Survival of Patients with Prostate Cancer in Kyadondo County, Uganda. Prostate Cancer 2020, 2020, 8517130.
  6. Vietri, M.T.; D’Elia, G.; Caliendo, G.; Resse, M.; Casamassimi, A.; Passariello, L.; Albanese, L.; Cioffi, M.; Molinari, A.M. Hereditary Prostate Cancer: Genes Related, Target Therapy and Prevention. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 3753.
  7. Humphrey, P.A. Histopathology of Prostate Cancer. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2017, 7, a030411.
  8. Kafka, M.; Surcel, C.; Heidegger, I. Recent Insights on Genetic Testing in Primary Prostate Cancer. Mol. Diagn. Ther. 2021, 25, 425–438.
  9. Gallagher, R.P.; Fleshner, N. Prostate cancer: 3. Individual risk factors. Cmaj 1998, 159, 807–813.
  10. Ferrís-i-Tortajada, J.; García-i-Castell, J.; Berbel-Tornero, O.; Ortega-García, J.A. Factores de riesgo constitucionales en el cáncer de próstata . Actas Urológicas Españolas 2011, 35, 282–288.
  11. Hemminki, K. Familial risk and familial survival in prostate cancer. World J. Urol. 2012, 30, 143–148.
  12. Wilson, K.M.; Giovannucci, E.L.; Mucci, L.A. Lifestyle and dietary factors in the prevention of lethal prostate cancer. Asian J. Androl. 2012, 14, 365–374.
  13. Cheng, H.H.; Sokolova, A.O.; Schaeffer, E.M.; Small, E.J.; Higano, C.S. Germline and Somatic Mutations in Prostate Cancer for the Clinician. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2019, 17, 515–521.
  14. Bratt, O.; Drevin, L.; Akre, O.; Garmo, H.; Stattin, P. Family History and Probability of Prostate Cancer, Differentiated by Risk Category: A Nationwide Population-Based Study. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2016, 108, djw110.
  15. Mucci, L.A.; Hjelmborg, J.B.; Harris, J.R.; Czene, K.; Havelick, D.J.; Scheike, T.; Graff, R.E.; Holst, K.; Möller, S.; Unger, R.H.; et al. Familial Risk and Heritability of Cancer Among Twins in Nordic Countries. JAMA 2016, 315, 68–76.
  16. Nicolosi, P.; Ledet, E.; Yang, S.; Michalski, S.; Freschi, B.; O’Leary, E.; Esplin, E.D.; Nussbaum, R.L.; Sartor, O. Prevalence of Germline Variants in Prostate Cancer and Implications for Current Genetic Testing Guidelines. JAMA Oncol. 2019, 5, 523–528.
  17. Hendrix, N.; Gulati, R.; Jiao, B.; Kader, A.K.; Ryan, S.T.; Etzioni, R. Clarifying the Trade-Offs of Risk-Stratified Screening for Prostatez Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2021, 190, 2064–2074.
  18. Whitworth, J.; Hoffman, J.; Chapman, C.; Ong, K.R.; Lalloo, F.; Evans, D.G.; Maher, E.R. A clinical and genetic analysis of multiple primary cancer referrals to genetics services. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2015, 23, 581–587.
  19. Giri, V.N.; Knudsen, K.E.; Kelly, W.K.; Cheng, H.H.; Cooney, K.A.; Cookson, M.S.; Dahut, W.; Weissman, S.; Soule, H.R.; Petrylak, D.P.; et al. Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 2798–2811.
  20. Berchuck, J.E.; Zhang, Z.; Silver, R.; Kwak, L.; Xie, W.; Lee, G.-S.M.; Freedman, M.L.; Kibel, A.S.; Van Allen, E.M.; McKay, R.R.; et al. Impact of pathogenic germline DNA damage repair alterations on response to intense neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in high-risk localized prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 2021, 80, 295–303.
  21. Carlo, M.I.; Giri, V.N.; Paller, C.J.; Abida, W.; Alumkal, J.J.; Beer, T.M.; Beltran, H.; George, D.J.; Heath, E.I.; Higano, C.S.; et al. Evolving intersection between inherited cancer genetics and therapeutic clinical trials in prostate cancer: A white paper from the Germline Genetics Working Group of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium. JCO Precis. Oncol. 2018, 2, 1–14.
  22. Pritchard, C.C.; Mateo, J.; Walsh, M.F.; De Sarkar, N.; Abida, W.; Beltran, H.; Garofalo, A.; Gulati, R.; Carreira, S.; Eeles, R.; et al. Inherited DNA-repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 443–453.
  23. Castro, E.; Goh, C.L.; Eeles, R.A. Prostate cancer screening in BRCA and Lynch syndrome mutation carriers. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Educ. Book 2013, 33, 50–55.
  24. Agalliu, I.; Gern, R.; Leanza, S.; Burk, R.D. Associations of high-grade prostate cancer with BRCA1 and BRCA2 founder mutations. Clin. Cancer Res. 2009, 15, 1112–1120.
  25. Yadav, S.; Hart, S.N.; Hu, C.; Hillman, D.; Lee, K.Y.; Gnanaolivu, R.; Na, J.; Polley, E.C.; Couch, F.J.; Kohli, M. Contribution of inherited DNA-repair gene mutations to hormone-sensitive and castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer and implications for clinical outcome. JCO Precis. Oncol. 2019, 3, 1–12.
  26. Hankey, B.F.; Feuer, E.J.; Clegg, L.X.; Hayes, R.B.; Legler, J.M.; Prorok, P.C.; Ries, L.A.; Merrill, R.M.; Kaplan, R.S. Cancer surveillance series: Interpreting trends in prostate cancer--part I: Evidence of the effects of screening in recent prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1999, 91, 1017–1024.
  27. Delongchamps, N.B.; Singh, A.; Haas, G.P. The role of prevalence in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Cancer Control 2006, 13, 158–168.
  28. Taylor, R.A.; Fraser, M.; Livingstone, J.; Espiritu, S.M.G.; Thorne, H.; Huang, V.; Lo, W.; Shiah, Y.-J.; Yamaguchi, T.N.; Sliwinski, A.; et al. Germline BRCA2 mutations drive prostate cancers with distinct evolutionary trajectories. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 1–10.
  29. Gallagher, D.J.; Gaudet, M.M.; Pal, P.; Kirchhoff, T.; Balistreri, L.; Vora, K.; Bhatia, J.; Stadler, Z.; Fine, S.W.; Reuter, V.; et al. Germline BRCA mutations denote a clinicopathologic subset of prostate cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2010, 16, 2115–2121.
  30. Leongamornlert, D.; Mahmud, N.; Tymrakiewicz, M.; Saunders, E.; Dadaev, T.; Castro, E.; Goh, C.; Govindasami, K.; Guy, M.; O’Brien, L.; et al. Germline BRCA1 mutations increase prostate cancer risk. Br. J. Cancer 2012, 106, 1697–1701.
  31. Silvestri, V.; Leslie, G.; Barnes, D.R.; Agnarsson, B.A.; Aittomäki, K.; Alducci, E.; Andrulis, I.L.; Barkardottir, R.B.; Barroso, A.; Barrowdale, D. Characterization of the cancer spectrum in men with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants: Results from the consortium of investigators of modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). JAMA Oncol. 2020, 6, 1218–1230.
  32. Giri, V.N.; Beebe-Dimmer, J.L. Familial prostate cancer. Semin. Oncol. 2016, 43, 560–565.
  33. Ren, Z.-J.; Cao, D.-H.; Zhang, Q.; Ren, P.-W.; Liu, L.-R.; Wei, Q.; Wei, W.-R.; Dong, Q. First-degree family history of breast cancer is associated with prostate cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2019, 19, 1–13.
  34. Rebbeck, T.R. Prostate cancer genetics: Variation by race, ethnicity, and geography. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 2017, 27, 3–10.
  35. Zhen, J.T.; Syed, J.; Nguyen, K.A.; Leapman, M.S.; Agarwal, N.; Brierley, K.; Llor, X.; Hofstatter, E.; Shuch, B. Genetic testing for hereditary prostate cancer: Current status and limitations. Cancer 2018, 124, 3105–3117.
  36. Heidegger, I.; Tsaur, I.; Borgmann, H.; Surcel, C.; Kretschmer, A.; Mathieu, R.; De Visschere, P.; Valerio, M.; van den Bergh, R.C.; Ost, P. Hereditary prostate cancer–Primetime for genetic testing? Cancer Treat. Rev. 2019, 81, 101927.
  37. Helgason, H.; Rafnar, T.; Olafsdottir, H.S.; Jonasson, J.G.; Sigurdsson, A.; Stacey, S.N.; Jonasdottir, A.; Tryggvadottir, L.; Alexiusdottir, K.; Haraldsson, A.; et al. Loss-of-function variants in ATM confer risk of gastric cancer. Nat. Genet. 2015, 47, 906–910.
  38. Vietri, M.T.; Caliendo, G.; Schiano, C.; Casamassimi, A.; Molinari, A.M.; Napoli, C.; Cioffi, M. Analysis of PALB2 in a cohort of Italian breast cancer patients: Identification of a novel PALB2 truncating mutation. Fam. Cancer 2015, 14, 341–348.
  39. Yang, X.; Leslie, G.; Doroszuk, A.; Schneider, S.; Allen, J.; Decker, B.; Dunning, A.M.; Redman, J.; Scarth, J.; Plaskocinska, I.; et al. Cancer Risks Associated With Germline PALB2 Pathogenic Variants: An International Study of 524 Families. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 674–685.
  40. Pakkanen, S.; Wahlfors, T.; Siltanen, S.; Patrikainen, M.; Matikainen, M.P.; Tammela, T.L.; Schleutker, J. PALB2 variants in hereditary and unselected Finnish prostate cancer cases. J. Negat. Results BioMed. 2009, 8, 12.
  41. Tischkowitz, M.; Sabbaghian, N.; Ray, A.M.; Lange, E.M.; Foulkes, W.D.; Cooney, K.A. Analysis of the gene coding for the BRCA2-interacting protein PALB2 in hereditary prostate cancer. Prostate 2008, 68, 675–678.
  42. Goodall, J.; Mateo, J.; Yuan, W.; Mossop, H.; Porta, N.; Miranda, S.; Perez-Lopez, R.; Dolling, D.; Robinson, D.R.; Sandhu, S.; et al. Circulating Cell-Free DNA to Guide Prostate Cancer Treatment with PARP Inhibition. Cancer Discov. 2017, 7, 1006–1017.
  43. Horak, P.; Weischenfeldt, J.; von Amsberg, G.; Beyer, B.; Schütte, A.; Uhrig, S.; Gieldon, L.; Klink, B.; Feuerbach, L.; Hübschmann, D.; et al. Response to olaparib in a PALB2 germline mutated prostate cancer and genetic events associated with resistance. Cold Spring Harb. Mol. Case Stud. 2019, 5, 003657.
  44. Doan, D.K.; Schmidt, K.T.; Chau, C.H.; Figg, W.D. Germline Genetics of Prostate Cancer: Prevalence of Risk Variants and Clinical Implications for Disease Management. Cancers 2021, 13, 2154.
  45. Bancroft, E.K.; Page, E.C.; Brook, M.N.; Thomas, S.; Taylor, N.; Pope, J.; McHugh, J.; Jones, A.-B.; Karlsson, Q.; Merson, S.; et al. A prospective prostate cancer screening programme for men with pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes (IMPACT): Initial results from an international prospective study. Lancet Oncol. 2021, 22, 1618–1631.
  46. Dominguez-Valentin, M.; Sampson, J.R.; Seppälä, T.T.; Ten Broeke, S.W.; Plazzer, J.-P.; Nakken, S.; Engel, C.; Aretz, S.; Jenkins, M.A.; Sunde, L. Cancer risks by gene, age, and gender in 6350 carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair variants: Findings from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database. Genet. Med. 2020, 22, 15–25.
  47. Ewing, C.M.; Ray, A.M.; Lange, E.M.; Zuhlke, K.A.; Robbins, C.M.; Tembe, W.D.; Wiley, K.E.; Isaacs, S.D.; Johng, D.; Wang, Y.; et al. Germline mutations in HOXB13 and prostate-cancer risk. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 366, 141–149.
  48. Pomerantz, M.M.; Li, F.; Takeda, D.Y.; Lenci, R.; Chonkar, A.; Chabot, M.; Cejas, P.; Vazquez, F.; Cook, J.; Shivdasani, R.A.; et al. The androgen receptor cistrome is extensively reprogrammed in human prostate tumorigenesis. Nat. Genet. 2015, 47, 1346–1351.
  49. Pilarski, R. The Role of BRCA Testing in Hereditary Pancreatic and Prostate Cancer Families. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Educ. Book 2019, 39, 79–86.
  50. Robson, M.E.; Bradbury, A.R.; Arun, B.; Domchek, S.M.; Ford, J.M.; Hampel, H.L.; Lipkin, S.M.; Syngal, S.; Wollins, D.S.; Lindor, N.M. American Society of Clinical Oncology Policy Statement Update: Genetic and Genomic Testing for Cancer Susceptibility. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015, 33, 3660–3667.
  51. Loeb, S.; Giri, V.N. Clinical Implications of Germline Testing in Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer. Eur. Urol. Oncol. 2021, 4, 1–9.
  52. Lu, X.; Fong, K.W.; Gritsina, G.; Wang, F.; Baca, S.C.; Brea, L.T.; Berchuck, J.E.; Spisak, S.; Ross, J.; Morrissey, C.; et al. HOXB13 suppresses de novo lipogenesis through HDAC3-mediated epigenetic reprogramming in prostate cancer. Nat. Genet. 2022, 54, 670–683.
  53. Poulose, N.; Amoroso, F.; Steele, R.E.; Singh, R.; Ong, C.W.; Mills, I.G. Genetics of lipid metabolism in prostate cancer. Nat. Genet. 2018, 50, 169–171.
  54. Zadra, G.; Ribeiro, C.F.; Chetta, P.; Ho, Y.; Cacciatore, S.; Gao, X.; Syamala, S.; Bango, C.; Photopoulos, C.; Huang, Y.; et al. Inhibition of de novo lipogenesis targets androgen receptor signaling in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 631–640.
  55. TP53 Gene. Available online: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/tp53-gene (accessed on 5 March 2023).
  56. Aubrey, B.J.; Strasser, A.; Kelly, G.L. Tumor-Suppressor Functions of the TP53 Pathway. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2016, 6, a026062.
  57. Maxwell, K.N.; Cheng, H.H.; Powers, J.; Gulati, R.; Ledet, E.M.; Morrison, C.; Le, A.; Hausler, R.; Stopfer, J.; Hyman, S.; et al. Inherited TP53 Variants and Risk of Prostate Cancer. Eur. Urol. 2022, 81, 243–250.
  58. Stolarova, L.; Kleiblova, P.; Janatova, M.; Soukupova, J.; Zemankova, P.; Macurek, L.; Kleibl, Z. CHEK2 Germline Variants in Cancer Predisposition: Stalemate Rather than Checkmate. Cells 2020, 9, 2675.
  59. Cybulski, C.; Huzarski, T.; Górski, B.; Masojć, B.; Mierzejewski, M.; Debniak, T.; Gliniewicz, B.; Matyjasik, J.; Złowocka, E.; Kurzawski, G.; et al. A novel founder CHEK2 mutation is associated with increased prostate cancer risk. Cancer Res. 2004, 64, 2677–2679.
  60. Hale, V.; Weischer, M.; Park, J.Y. CHEK2* 1100delC Mutation and Risk of Prostate Cancer. Prostate Cancer 2014, 2014, 294575.
  61. Tiong, K.H.; Mah, L.Y.; Leong, C.-O. Functional roles of fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs) signaling in human cancers. Apoptosis 2013, 18, 1447–1468.
  62. Courjal, F.; Cuny, M.; Simony-Lafontaine, J.; Louason, G.; Speiser, P.; Zeillinger, R.; Rodriguez, C.; Theillet, C. Mapping of DNA amplifications at 15 chromosomal localizations in 1875 breast tumors: Definition of phenotypic groups. Cancer Res. 1997, 57, 4360–4367.
  63. Ruhe, J.E.; Streit, S.; Hart, S.; Wong, C.-H.; Specht, K.; Knyazev, P.; Knyazeva, T.; Tay, L.S.; Loo, H.L.; Foo, P.; et al. Genetic alterations in the tyrosine kinase transcriptome of human cancer cell lines. Cancer Res. 2007, 67, 11368–11376.
  64. Greenman, C.; Stephens, P.; Smith, R.; Dalgliesh, G.L.; Hunter, C.; Bignell, G.; Davies, H.; Teague, J.; Butler, A.; Stevens, C.; et al. Patterns of somatic mutation in human cancer genomes. Nature 2007, 446, 153–158.
  65. Hernandez, S.; de Muga, S.; Agell, L.; Juanpere, N.; Esgueva, R.; Lorente, J.A.; Mojal, S.; Serrano, S.; Lloreta, J. FGFR3 mutations in prostate cancer: Association with low-grade tumors. Mod. Pathol. 2009, 22, 848–856.
  66. Kim, J.H.; Jeong, S.Y.; Jang, H.J.; Park, S.T.; Kim, H.S. FGFR4 Gly388Arg Polymorphism Reveals a Poor Prognosis, Especially in Asian Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 762528.
  67. Yang, F.; Zhang, Y.; Ressler, S.J.; Ittmann, M.M.; Ayala, G.E.; Dang, T.D.; Wang, F.; Rowley, D.R. FGFR1 is essential for prostate cancer progression and metastasis. Cancer Res. 2013, 73, 3716–3724.
  68. Ko, J.; Meyer, A.N.; Haas, M.; Donoghue, D.J. Characterization of FGFR signaling in prostate cancer stem cells and inhibition via TKI treatment. Oncotarget 2021, 12, 22–36.
  69. Chiodelli, P.; Coltrini, D.; Turati, M.; Cerasuolo, M.; Maccarinelli, F.; Rezzola, S.; Grillo, E.; Giacomini, A.; Taranto, S.; Mussi, S.; et al. FGFR blockade by pemigatinib treats naive and castration resistant prostate cancer. Cancer Lett. 2022, 526, 217–224.
  70. Milioli, H.H.; Alexandrou, S.; Lim, E.; Caldon, C.E. Cyclin E1 and cyclin E2 in ER+ breast cancer: Prospects as biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 2020, 27, R93–R112.
  71. Sonntag, R.; Penners, C.; Kohlhepp, M.; Haas, U.; Lambertz, D.; Kroh, A.; Cramer, T.; Ticconi, F.; Costa, I.G.; Tacke, F.; et al. Cyclin E1 in Murine and Human Liver Cancer: A Promising Target for Therapeutic Intervention during Tumour Progression. Cancers 2021, 13, 5680.
  72. Sonntag, R.; Giebeler, N.; Nevzorova, Y.A.; Bangen, J.M.; Fahrenkamp, D.; Lambertz, D.; Haas, U.; Hu, W.; Gassler, N.; Cubero, F.J.; et al. Cyclin E1 and cyclin-dependent kinase 2 are critical for initiation, but not for progression of hepatocellular carcinoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 9282–9287.
  73. Karst, A.M.; Jones, P.M.; Vena, N.; Ligon, A.H.; Liu, J.F.; Hirsch, M.S.; Etemadmoghadam, D.; Bowtell, D.D.; Drapkin, R. Cyclin E1 deregulation occurs early in secretory cell transformation to promote formation of fallopian tube–derived high-grade serous ovarian cancers. Cancer Res. 2014, 74, 1141–1152.
  74. Lundgren, C.; Ahlin, C.; Holmberg, L.; Amini, R.-M.; Fjallskog, M.-L.; Blomqvist, C. Cyclin E1 is a strong prognostic marker for death from lymph node negative breast cancer. A population-based case-control study. Acta Oncol. 2015, 54, 538–544.
  75. Xu, H.; George, E.; Kinose, Y.; Kim, H.; Shah, J.B.; Peake, J.D.; Ferman, B.; Medvedev, S.; Murtha, T.; Barger, C.J.; et al. CCNE1 copy number is a biomarker for response to combination WEE1-ATR inhibition in ovarian and endometrial cancer models. Cell Rep. Med. 2021, 2, 100394.
  76. Hives, M.; Jurecekova, J.; Kliment, J.; Grendar, M.; Kaplan, P.; Dusenka, R.; Evin, D.; Vilckova, M.; Holeckova, K.H.; Sivonova, M.K. Role of Genetic Variations in CDK2, CCNE1 and p27(KIP1) in Prostate Cancer. Cancer Genom. Proteom. 2022, 19, 362–371.
  77. Ju, L.-G.; Zhu, Y.; Long, Q.-Y.; Li, X.-J.; Lin, X.; Tang, S.-B.; Yin, L.; Xiao, Y.; Wang, X.; Li, L.; et al. SPOP suppresses prostate cancer through regulation of CYCLIN E1 stability. Cell Death Differ. 2019, 26, 1156–1168.
  78. Song, Y.; Xu, Y.; Pan, C.; Yan, L.; Wang, Z.-W.; Zhu, X. The emerging role of SPOP protein in tumorigenesis and cancer therapy. Mol. Cancer 2020, 19, 2.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Academic Video Service
Feedback