Click here to close
Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly.
We suggest using a current version of Chrome,
FireFox, or Safari.
Comprehensive statistical study of 452 BRCA1 missense substitutions with classification of eight recurrent substitutions as neutral.
Tavtigian SV
,
Deffenbaugh AM
,
Yin L
,
Judkins T
,
Scholl T
,
Samollow PB
,
de Silva D
,
Zharkikh A
,
Thomas A
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes contributes to the medical management of patients who may be at increased risk of one or more cancers. BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer is one such widely used test. However, clinical testing methods with high sensitivity for deleterious mutations in these genes also detect many unclassified variants, primarily missense substitutions. We developed an extension of the Grantham difference, called A-GVGD, to score missense substitutions against the range of variation present at their position in a multiple sequence alignment. Combining two methods, co-occurrence of unclassified variants with clearly deleterious mutations and A-GVGD, we analysed most of the missense substitutions observed in BRCA1. A-GVGD was able to resolve known neutral and deleterious missense substitutions into distinct sets. Additionally, eight previously unclassified BRCA1 missense substitutions observed in trans with one or more deleterious mutations, and within the cross-species range of variation observed at their position in the protein, are now classified as neutral. The methods combined here can classify as neutral about 50% of missense substitutions that have been observed with two or more clearly deleterious mutations. Furthermore, odds ratios estimated for sets of substitutions grouped by A-GVGD scores are consistent with the hypothesis that most unclassified substitutions that are within the cross-species range of variation at their position in BRCA1 are also neutral. For most of these, clinical reclassification will require integrated application of other methods such as pooled family histories, segregation analysis, or validated functional assay.
Abkevich,
Analysis of missense variation in human BRCA1 in the context of interspecific sequence variation.
2004, Pubmed,
Xenbase
Abkevich,
Analysis of missense variation in human BRCA1 in the context of interspecific sequence variation.
2004,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Altschul,
Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs.
1997,
Pubmed
Antoniou,
Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies.
2003,
Pubmed
Beaudet,
A suggested nomenclature for designating mutations.
1993,
Pubmed
Brzovic,
Structure of a BRCA1-BARD1 heterodimeric RING-RING complex.
2001,
Pubmed
Fitch,
An improved method for determining codon variability in a gene and its application to the rate of fixation of mutations in evolution.
1970,
Pubmed
Frank,
Clinical characteristics of individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: analysis of 10,000 individuals.
2002,
Pubmed
Frank,
Sequence analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2: correlation of mutations with family history and ovarian cancer risk.
1998,
Pubmed
Goldgar,
Integrated evaluation of DNA sequence variants of unknown clinical significance: application to BRCA1 and BRCA2.
2004,
Pubmed
Gowen,
Brca1 deficiency results in early embryonic lethality characterized by neuroepithelial abnormalities.
1996,
Pubmed
Grantham,
Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution.
1974,
Pubmed
Greenblatt,
Detailed computational study of p53 and p16: using evolutionary sequence analysis and disease-associated mutations to predict the functional consequences of allelic variants.
2003,
Pubmed
Hakem,
The tumor suppressor gene Brca1 is required for embryonic cellular proliferation in the mouse.
1996,
Pubmed
Hendrickson,
Application of haplotype pair analysis for the identification of hemizygous loci.
2003,
Pubmed
Hohenstein,
A targeted mouse Brca1 mutation removing the last BRCT repeat results in apoptosis and embryonic lethality at the headfold stage.
2001,
Pubmed
Joukov,
Functional communication between endogenous BRCA1 and its partner, BARD1, during Xenopus laevis development.
2001,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Liu,
Inactivation of the mouse Brca1 gene leads to failure in the morphogenesis of the egg cylinder in early postimplantation development.
1996,
Pubmed
Ludwig,
Targeted mutations of breast cancer susceptibility gene homologs in mice: lethal phenotypes of Brca1, Brca2, Brca1/Brca2, Brca1/p53, and Brca2/p53 nullizygous embryos.
1997,
Pubmed
Miki,
A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1.
1994,
Pubmed
Ng,
SIFT: Predicting amino acid changes that affect protein function.
2003,
Pubmed
Phelan,
Classification of BRCA1 missense variants of unknown clinical significance.
2005,
Pubmed
Poirot,
3DCoffee@igs: a web server for combining sequences and structures into a multiple sequence alignment.
2004,
Pubmed
Ramensky,
Human non-synonymous SNPs: server and survey.
2002,
Pubmed
Shiozaki,
Structure of the BRCT repeats of BRCA1 bound to a BACH1 phosphopeptide: implications for signaling.
2004,
Pubmed
Tavtigian,
The complete BRCA2 gene and mutations in chromosome 13q-linked kindreds.
1996,
Pubmed
Thompson,
The genetic epidemiology of breast cancer genes.
2004,
Pubmed
Venkitaraman,
Cancer susceptibility and the functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2.
2002,
Pubmed
Vitkup,
The amino-acid mutational spectrum of human genetic disease.
2003,
Pubmed
Williams,
Crystal structure of the BRCT repeat region from the breast cancer-associated protein BRCA1.
2001,
Pubmed
Wooster,
Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2.
,
Pubmed
Xu,
Impaired meiotic DNA-damage repair and lack of crossing-over during spermatogenesis in BRCA1 full-length isoform deficient mice.
2003,
Pubmed
