Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Breast Cancer Research
Published in: Breast Cancer Research 4/2005

Open Access 01-08-2005 | Research article

Mutation analysis of the ATRgene in breast and ovarian cancer families

Authors: Katri Heikkinen, Virpi Mansikka, Sanna-Maria Karppinen, Katrin Rapakko, Robert Winqvist

Published in: Breast Cancer Research | Issue 4/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, TP53, CHK2 and PTEN account for only 20–30% of the familial aggregation of breast cancer, which suggests the involvement of additional susceptibility genes. The ATR (ataxia-telangiectasia- and Rad3-related) kinase is essential for the maintenance of genomic integrity. It functions both in parallel and cooperatively with ATM, but whereas ATM is primarily activated by DNA double-strand breaks induced by ionizing radiation, ATR has been shown to respond to a much broader range of DNA damage. Upon activation, ATR phosphorylates several important tumor suppressors, including p53, BRCA1 and CHK1. Based on its central function in the DNA damage response, ATR is a plausible candidate gene for susceptibility to cancer.

Methods

We screened the entire coding region of the ATR gene for mutations in affected index cases from 126 Finnish families with breast and/or ovarian cancer, 75 of which were classified as high-risk and 51 as moderate-risk families, by using conformation sensitive gel electrophoresis and direct sequencing.

Results

A large number of novel sequence variants were identified, four of which – Glu254Gly, Ser1142Gly, IVS24-48G>A and IVS26+15C>T – were absent from the tested control individuals (n = 300). However, the segregation of these mutations with the cancer phenotype could not be confirmed, partly because of the lack of suitable DNA samples.

Conclusion

The present study does not support a major role for ATR mutations in hereditary susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD: Genetic analysis of breast cancer in the cancer and steroid hormone study. Am J Hum Genet. 1991, 48: 232-242.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Houlston R, Peto J: The future of association studies of common cancers. Hum Genet. 2003, 112: 434-435.PubMed
3.
Pharoah PDP, Antoniou A, Bobrow M, Zimmern RL, Easton DF, Ponder BAJ: Polygenic susceptibility to breast cancer and implications for prevention. Nat Genet. 2002, 31: 33-36. 10.1038/ng853.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Nathanson KL, Weber BL: 'Other' breast cancer susceptibility genes: searching for more holy grail. Hum Mol Genet. 2001, 10: 715-720. 10.1093/hmg/10.7.715.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Abraham RT: Cell cycle checkpoint signaling through the ATM and ATR kinases. Genes Dev. 2001, 15: 2177-2196. 10.1101/gad.914401.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Swift M, Reitnauer PJ, Morrell D, Chase CL: Breast and other cancers in families with ataxia telangiectasia. N Engl J Med. 1987, 316: 1289-1294.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Teraoka SN, Malone KE, Doody DR, Suter NM, Ostrander EA, Daling JR, Concannon P: Increased frequency of ATM mutations in breast carcinoma patients with early onset disease and positive family history. Cancer. 2001, 92: 479-487. 10.1002/1097-0142(20010801)92:3<479::AID-CNCR1346>3.0.CO;2-G.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Chenevix-Trench G, Spurdle AB, Gatei M, Kelly H, Marsh A, Chen X, Donn K, Cummings M, Nyholt D, Jenkins MA, et al: Dominant negative ATM mutations in breast cancer families. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002, 94: 205-215.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Thorstenson YR, Roxas A, Kroiss R, Jenkins MA, Yu KM, Bachrich T, Muhr D, Wayne TL, Chu G, Davis RW, et al: Contributions of ATM mutations to familial breast and ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 2003, 63: 3325-3333.PubMed
10.
Shiloh Y: ATM and related protein kinases: safeguarding genome integrity. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003, 3: 155-168. 10.1038/nrc1011.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zou L, Elledge SJ: Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP recognition of RPA-ssDNA complexes. Science. 2003, 300: 1542-1548. 10.1126/science.1083430.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Brown EJ, Baltimore D: ATR disruption leads to chromosomal fragmentation and early embryonic lethality. Genes Dev. 2000, 14: 397-402.PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Menoyo A, Alazzouzi H, Espin E, Armengol M, Yamamoto H, Schwartz S: Somatic mutations in the DNA damage-response genes ATR and CHK1 in sporadic stomach tumors with microsatellite instability. Cancer Res. 2001, 61: 7727-7730.PubMed
14.
Vassileva V, Millar A, Briollais L, Chapman W, Bapat B: Genes involved in DNA repair are mutational targets in endometrial cancers with microsatellite instability. Cancer Res. 2002, 62: 4095-4099.PubMed
15.
Fang Y, Tsao CC, Goodman BK, Furumai R, Tirado CA, Abraham RT, Wang XF: ATR functions as a gene dosage-dependent tumor suppressor on a mismatch repair-deficient background. EMBO J. 2004, 23: 3164-3174. 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600315.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
O'Driscoll M, Ruiz-Perez VL, Woods CG, Jeggo PA, Goodship JA: A splicing mutation affecting expression of ataxia-telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein (ATR) results in Seckel syndrome. Nat Genet. 2003, 33: 497-501. 10.1038/ng1129.CrossRefPubMed
17.
O'Driscoll M, Jeggo PA: Clinical impact of ATR checkpoint signalling failure in humans. Cell Cycle. 2003, 2: 194-195.PubMed
18.
Wooster R, Bignell G, Lancaster J, Swift S, Seal S, Mangion J, Collins N, Gregory S, Gumbs C, Micklem G: Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. Nature. 1995, 378: 789-792. 10.1038/378789a0.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Howlett NG, Taniguchi T, Olson S, Cox B, Waisfisz Q, De Die-Smulders C, Persky N, Grompe M, Joenje H, Pals G, et al: Biallelic inactivation of BRCA2 in Fanconi anemia. Science. 2002, 297: 606-609. 10.1126/science.1073834.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Górski B, Debniak T, Masojc B, Mierzejewski M, Medrek K, Cybulski C, Jakubowska A, Kurzawski G, Chosia M, Scott R, et al: Germline 657del5 mutation in the NBS1 gene in breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer. 2003, 106: 379-381. 10.1002/ijc.11231.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Huusko P, Pääkkönen K, Launonen V, Pöyhönen M, Blanco G, Kauppila A, Puistola U, Kiviniemi H, Kujala M, Leisti J, et al: Evidence of founder mutations in Finnish BRCA1 and BRCA2 families. Am J Hum Genet. 1998, 62: 1544-1548. 10.1086/301880.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Allinen M, Huusko P, Mäntyniemi S, Launonen V, Winqvist R: Mutation analysis of the CHK2 gene in families with hereditary breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2001, 85: 209-212. 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1858.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Rapakko K, Allinen M, Syrjäkoski K, Vahteristo P, Huusko P, Vähäkangas K, Eerola H, Kainu T, Kallioniemi OP, Nevanlinna H, et al: Germline TP53 alterations in Finnish breast cancer families are rare and occur at conserved mutation-prone sites. Br J Cancer. 2001, 84: 116-119. 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1530.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Körkkö J, Annunen S, Pihlajamaa T, Prockop DJ, Ala-Kokko L: Conformation sensitive gel electrophoresis for simple and accurate detection of mutations: comparison with denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and nucleotide sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998, 95: 1681-1685. 10.1073/pnas.95.4.1681.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Ganguly A: An update on conformation sensitive gel electrophoresis. Hum Mutat. 2002, 19: 334-342. 10.1002/humu.10059.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Perry J, Kleckner N: The ATRs, ATMs, and TORs are giant HEAT repeat proteins. Cell. 2003, 112: 151-155. 10.1016/S0092-8674(03)00033-3.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Mutation analysis of the ATRgene in breast and ovarian cancer families
Authors
Katri Heikkinen
Virpi Mansikka
Sanna-Maria Karppinen
Katrin Rapakko
Robert Winqvist
Publication date
01-08-2005
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Breast Cancer Research / Issue 4/2005
Electronic ISSN: 1465-542X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr1037

Other articles of this Issue 4/2005

Breast Cancer Research 4/2005 Go to the issue

Research article

Alternative initiation and splicing in dicer gene expression in human breast cells

Commentary

Laminin isoform expression in breast tumors

Research article

Relationship of patients' age to histopathological features of breast tumours in BRCA1 and BRCA2and mutation-negative breast cancer families

Research article

Effect of reproductive factors on stage, grade and hormone receptor status in early-onset breast cancer

Research article

CYP17genetic polymorphism, breast cancer, and breast cancer risk factors: Australian Breast Cancer Family Study

Research article

Connexin 43 mediated gap junctional communication enhances breast tumor cell diapedesis in culture
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits