Cargando…

A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer

Several ongoing international prostate cancer (PC) clinical trials are exploring therapies that target the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway. This systematic review summarizes the prevalence of DDR mutation carriers in the unselected (general) PC and familial PC populations. A total of 11 electronic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lang, Shona H., Swift, Stephanie L., White, Heath, Misso, Kate, Kleijnen, Jos, Quek, Ruben G.W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31322208
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4842
_version_ 1783442423442046976
author Lang, Shona H.
Swift, Stephanie L.
White, Heath
Misso, Kate
Kleijnen, Jos
Quek, Ruben G.W.
author_facet Lang, Shona H.
Swift, Stephanie L.
White, Heath
Misso, Kate
Kleijnen, Jos
Quek, Ruben G.W.
author_sort Lang, Shona H.
collection PubMed
description Several ongoing international prostate cancer (PC) clinical trials are exploring therapies that target the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway. This systematic review summarizes the prevalence of DDR mutation carriers in the unselected (general) PC and familial PC populations. A total of 11 electronic databases, 10 conference proceedings, and grey literature sources were searched from their inception to December 2017. Studies reporting the prevalence of somatic and/or germline DDR mutations were summarized. Metastatic PC (mPC), castration-resistant PC (CRPC) and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) subgroups were included. A total of 11,648 records were retrieved, and 80 studies (103 records) across all PC populations were included; 59 records were of unselected PC and 13 records of familial PC. Most data were available for DDR panels (n=12 studies), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM; n=13), breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA)1 (n=14) and BRCA2 (n=20). ATM, BRCA2 and partner and localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2) had the highest mutation rates (≥4%). Median prevalence rates for DDR germline mutations were 18.6% in PC (range, 17.2-19%; three studies, n=1,712), 11.6% in mPC (range, 11.4-11.8%; two studies, n=1,261) and 8.3% in mCRPC (range, 7.5-9.1%; two studies, n=738). Median prevalence rates for DDR somatic mutations were 10.7% in PC (range, 4.9-22%; three studies, n=680), 13.2% in mPC (range, 10-16.4%; two studies, n=105) and not reported (NR) in mCRPC. The prevalence of DDR germline and/or somatic mutations was 27% in PC (one study, n=221), 22.67% in mCRPC (one study, n=150) and NR in mPC. In familial PC, median mutation prevalence was 12.1% (range, 7.3-16.9%) for germline DDR (two studies, n=315) and 3.7% (range, 1.3-7.9%) for BRCA2 (six studies, n=945). In total, 88% of studies were at a high risk of bias. The prevalence of DDR gene mutations in PC varied widely within somatic subgroups depending on study size, genetic screening techniques, DDR mutation definition and PC diagnosis; somatic and/or germline DDR mutation prevalence was in the range of 23-27% in PC. These findings support DDR mutation testing for all patients with PC (including those with mCRPC). With the advent of the latest clinical practice PC guidelines highlighting the importance of DDR mutation screening, and ongoing mCRPC clinical trials evaluating DDR mutation-targeted drugs, future larger epidemiological studies are warranted to further quantify the international burden of DDR mutations in PC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6685596
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66855962019-08-15 A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer Lang, Shona H. Swift, Stephanie L. White, Heath Misso, Kate Kleijnen, Jos Quek, Ruben G.W. Int J Oncol Articles Several ongoing international prostate cancer (PC) clinical trials are exploring therapies that target the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway. This systematic review summarizes the prevalence of DDR mutation carriers in the unselected (general) PC and familial PC populations. A total of 11 electronic databases, 10 conference proceedings, and grey literature sources were searched from their inception to December 2017. Studies reporting the prevalence of somatic and/or germline DDR mutations were summarized. Metastatic PC (mPC), castration-resistant PC (CRPC) and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) subgroups were included. A total of 11,648 records were retrieved, and 80 studies (103 records) across all PC populations were included; 59 records were of unselected PC and 13 records of familial PC. Most data were available for DDR panels (n=12 studies), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM; n=13), breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA)1 (n=14) and BRCA2 (n=20). ATM, BRCA2 and partner and localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2) had the highest mutation rates (≥4%). Median prevalence rates for DDR germline mutations were 18.6% in PC (range, 17.2-19%; three studies, n=1,712), 11.6% in mPC (range, 11.4-11.8%; two studies, n=1,261) and 8.3% in mCRPC (range, 7.5-9.1%; two studies, n=738). Median prevalence rates for DDR somatic mutations were 10.7% in PC (range, 4.9-22%; three studies, n=680), 13.2% in mPC (range, 10-16.4%; two studies, n=105) and not reported (NR) in mCRPC. The prevalence of DDR germline and/or somatic mutations was 27% in PC (one study, n=221), 22.67% in mCRPC (one study, n=150) and NR in mPC. In familial PC, median mutation prevalence was 12.1% (range, 7.3-16.9%) for germline DDR (two studies, n=315) and 3.7% (range, 1.3-7.9%) for BRCA2 (six studies, n=945). In total, 88% of studies were at a high risk of bias. The prevalence of DDR gene mutations in PC varied widely within somatic subgroups depending on study size, genetic screening techniques, DDR mutation definition and PC diagnosis; somatic and/or germline DDR mutation prevalence was in the range of 23-27% in PC. These findings support DDR mutation testing for all patients with PC (including those with mCRPC). With the advent of the latest clinical practice PC guidelines highlighting the importance of DDR mutation screening, and ongoing mCRPC clinical trials evaluating DDR mutation-targeted drugs, future larger epidemiological studies are warranted to further quantify the international burden of DDR mutations in PC. D.A. Spandidos 2019-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6685596/ /pubmed/31322208 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4842 Text en Copyright: © Lang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Lang, Shona H.
Swift, Stephanie L.
White, Heath
Misso, Kate
Kleijnen, Jos
Quek, Ruben G.W.
A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title_full A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title_fullStr A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title_short A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
title_sort systematic review of the prevalence of dna damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31322208
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4842
work_keys_str_mv AT langshonah asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT swiftstephaniel asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT whiteheath asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT missokate asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT kleijnenjos asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT quekrubengw asystematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT langshonah systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT swiftstephaniel systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT whiteheath systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT missokate systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT kleijnenjos systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer
AT quekrubengw systematicreviewoftheprevalenceofdnadamageresponsegenemutationsinprostatecancer