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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |