BioMed Research International

BioMed Research International / 2016 / Article
Special Issue

Cancer Diagnostic and Predictive Biomarkers 2016

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2016 |Article ID 1869304 |

Javier Martinez-Useros, Jesus Garcia-Foncillas, "The Role of BRCA2 Mutation Status as Diagnostic, Predictive, and Prognosis Biomarker for Pancreatic Cancer", BioMed Research International, vol. 2016, Article ID 1869304, 8 pages, 2016.

The Role of BRCA2 Mutation Status as Diagnostic, Predictive, and Prognosis Biomarker for Pancreatic Cancer

Academic Editor: Renato Franco
Received08 Aug 2016
Revised21 Nov 2016
Accepted28 Nov 2016
Published18 Dec 2016


Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers worldwide, and life expectancy after diagnosis is often short. Most pancreatic tumours appear sporadically and have been highly related to habits such as cigarette smoking, high alcohol intake, high carbohydrate, and sugar consumption. Other observational studies have suggested the association between pancreatic cancer and exposure to arsenic, lead, or cadmium. Aside from these factors, chronic pancreatitis and diabetes have also come to be considered as risk factors for these kinds of tumours. Studies have found that 10% of pancreatic cancer cases arise from an inherited syndrome related to some genetic alterations. One of these alterations includes mutation in BRCA2 gene. BRCA2 mutations impair DNA damage response and homologous recombination by direct regulation of RAD51. In light of these findings that link genetic factors to tumour development, DNA damage agents have been proposed as target therapies for pancreatic cancer patients carrying BRCA2 mutations. Some of these drugs include platinum-based agents and PARP inhibitors. However, the acquired resistance to PARP inhibitors has created a need for new chemotherapeutic strategies to target BRCA2. The present systematic review collects and analyses the role of BRCA2 alterations to be used in early diagnosis of an inherited syndrome associated with familiar cancer and as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for the management of pancreatic cancer patients.

1. Introduction

In 1994, BRCA2 (breast cancer gene 2) was located in chromosome 13ql2-13 by the group led by Wooster et al. [1]. Transmission of this gene follows an autosomal dominant pattern with incomplete penetrance [2]. Soon thereafter, BRCA2 was reported as a tumour suppressor gene based on evidence of loss of heterozygosity in 7 out of 8 familial breast cancers [3]. Subsequently, BRCA2 was associated with high-risk breast and ovarian cancer with a large component of heritability [47], although the risk for ovarian cancer due to BRCA2 is much lower than the risk associated with BRCA1 [8].

Only one year after this gene was discovered, the association between BRCA2 and pancreatic cancer was assessed by Schutte et al. [9]. It was found that pancreatic cancer appeared in some individuals with a history of familial breast cancer associated with BRCA2 alterations [10]; thus, it was estimated that 10% of cases of pancreatic cancer have an underlying inherited component [11, 12].

Worldwide pancreatic cancer incidence has increased from 185,000 in the 1980s [13] to 227,000 cases per year in 2014 [14]. In 2007, the highest incidence of pancreatic cancer was in the Baltic countries and central and eastern Europe. In northern European countries and the UK, this cancer has risen over most recent years and is rising in countries of southern, central, and eastern Europe [15]. It is hypothesised that this increase could be associated with increased consumption of high-sugar or carbohydrate-rich foods [16] or simply reflects the ageing of the population in recent decades.

Nowadays, the primary acquired risk factors for pancreatic cancer are cigarette smoking (HR = 1.74), high alcohol consumption (HR = 1.1–1.5), obesity (body mass index > 30; HR = 1.2–1.5), and some infectious diseases that include Helicobacter pylori (HR = 1.5), Hepatitis B virus, or Human Immunodeficiency virus [1719]. Interestingly, other studies suggested that heavy consumption of cooking and table salt appeared to be significantly associated with pancreatic cancer ( and , resp.), and a similar correlation was found with smoked food () [20].

Interestingly, observational studies link pancreatic cancer incidence to cadmium, arsenic, and lead exposure [21]. The countries with the highest levels of arsenic (more than 10 μg/L, values recommended by the World Health Organization [22]) are those with highest incidence of pancreatic cancer. These countries include Baltic countries (especially Finland) and central and eastern European countries such as Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary [23].

Pancreatic cancer has long been related to family history of pancreatic cancer (HR = 2.20, 95%; CI = 1.16–4.19) and melanoma (HR = 1.74, 95%; CI = 1.03–2.95), upon breast, ovarian, lung, gastrointestinal, or prostate cancer [24]. In addition, diabetes has also been associated with pancreatic cancer (HR = 1.4–2.2) [25].

Surgical resection is currently the best option so far to improve survival [26]. Mean life expectancy for pancreatic cancer is 1.4 years reaching 3.5 years for surgically resected patients versus 0.8 years for nonoperated patients () [27]. However, cancers of the pancreas are usually asymptomatic, and the disease only becomes apparent after the tumour invades surrounding tissues or metastasises to distant organs [28]. As a result, there is a pressing need to find new approaches and strategies; of these, targeted therapies hold particular promise, and BRCA2 is one such therapy that has great potential. BRCA2 regulates sister chromatid cohesion and/or alignment [29] and plays a key role in response to DNA damage by direct regulation of RAD51 recombination (Figure 1).

2. BRCA2 in DNA Damage Response

The first attempt to associate BRCA2 with DNA damage response was as a cofactor associated with human RAD51-dependent DNA repair of double-strand breaks through 8 evolutionarily conserved BRC motifs encoded in exon 11 of BRCA2 (Figure 1) [30]. The milestone of DNA strand exchange is RAD51 protein which is closely related to other tumour suppressor genes such as TP53, ATM, BRCA1, BLM, and FANCD2. Preclinical studies showed that BRCA2 disruptions sensitize mice embryos to ionising radiation [30], which was previously observed in RAD51 knockout mice embryos [31]. Furthermore, mice carrying truncations on BRCA2 loci were one-third smaller than their wild-type littermates and had improper tissue differentiation, sterility, and a shorter overall survival [32, 33].

On the other hand, BRCA2 is essential for repair of double-strand breaks by homologous recombination [34]. BRCA2 alterations led to elevated P53 and P21 expression, spontaneous accumulation of chromosomal abnormalities, and aberrant chromatid exchanges, which suggests its role in pancreatic tumorigenesis (Figure 2). The aforementioned properties make BRCA2 a crucial factor to maintain cell homeostasis.

3. BRCA2 as a Prognostic Biomarker of Pancreatic Cancer

BRCA2 inactivation is due mainly to genomic mutations. The most common mutations of BRCA2 found in pancreatic cancer patients are 6174delT frameshift mutation, 6158insT mutation, splice site mutation 16-2A > G, and the splice site mutation 15-1G > A [35, 36]. Another variant located in the 3′-untranslated region is significantly associated with lower expression of brca2 RNA and, consequently, with sporadic pancreatic cancer (HR = 1.3; ) [37]. BRCA2 inactivation has been reported to be a late event in sporadic pancreatic tumorigenesis [38] preceded by KRAS mutation (G12D) or loss of TP53 [39, 40]. Overall, BRCA2 could be used to determine patient prognosis.

Ashkenazi Jews have been one of the most closely studied ethnic groups concerning the significance of BRCA2 mutations and family involved pancreatic cancer. Struewing et al. found that >90% of Ashkenazi patients that carried BRCA2 mutations detected in blood sample showed an association with increased risk of pancreatic cancer [41]. The 6174delT mutation of BRCA2 was determined to be present in 1% (CI = 0.6–1.5) of 1.255 Jewish individuals [42]. Another study performed with 26 European families reported that 19% (CI = 7% to 39%) of the families with first-degree relatives with pancreatic cancer had either a mutation or a splice variant of BRCA2 [43]. Murphy et al. reported 17% of BRCA2 mutations in 31 samples from pancreatic cancer patients with at least two first-degree relatives affected by pancreatic cancer [35]. One study found 6% (10 of 180 families) with BRCA2 mutation and moderate or high-risk pancreatic cancer predisposition and 6% (8 of 146) of families that presented two or more first-degree relatives affected with pancreatic cancer [44].

This kind of studies performed with high-risk pancreatic cancer families provides a true enlightenment of BRCA2-associated pancreatic cancer; however, BRCA2 has not been directly related to patient outcome.

Pancreatic cancers with a high familial component are associated with mutations not only in BRCA2 but also in ATM, CDKN2, PALB2, PRSS1, STK11, or mismatch repair (MMR) family genes [45]. MMR genes allow continuous point mutations in repeats regions of DNA known as microsatellites that become unstable. Alterations in microsatellites are found in oncogenes associated with initiation and progression of cancer [46]. Several MMR genes are involved in the acquisition of aggressive phenotype of cancer [47]. For example, alterations on EXO1, MLH1, MSH2, MSH3, MSH6, PMS2, PMS2L3, RECQL, TP73, and TREX1 were statistically significantly associated with overall survival of pancreatic cancer patients [48]. Nevertheless, the predisposition to pancreatic cancer by MMR family genes is due mainly to mutations in MLH1 and MSH2 and it is estimated to be <5% [49].

4. BRCA2 as Predictive Biomarker in Pancreatic Cancer

BRCA2 mutations impair DNA repair; thus, they are considered biomarkers of genomic instability and DNA damage repair deficiency. Therefore, BRCA2 mutations could be used as predictive biomarkers of response to some DNA damage agents. Some of these compounds include platinum-based agents and PARP inhibitors. They are considered targeted therapies indicated for BRCA2-positive tumours according to some good results achieved in clinical trials [50]. Platinum-based drugs are, despite their toxicity, one of the gold-standard chemotherapies administered to pancreatic cancer patients. Cisplatin, carboplatin, and oxaliplatin are some of the mostly used in clinical practice and allow cross-linking and forming DNA adducts which trigger apoptosis cascade [51].

Oliver et al. presented a cohort of pancreatic cancer patients; of them, those with family history of breast, ovarian, or pancreatic cancers showed significantly increased survival after platinum-based chemotherapy compared to other patients without family history (22.9 versus 6.3 months, ) [52]. A case report of a 60-year-old pancreatic adenocarcinoma patient carrying the BRCA2 mutation, 1153insertionT, presented recurrence after gemcitabine treatment but showed a complete response after cisplatin and gemcitabine as second-line therapy [53]. Subsequently, another study with pancreatic cancer patients with positive BRCA1/2 mutations showed improved outcome after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy. Here, patients with locally advanced disease were pathologically downstaged and those with metastatic disease had significant increase in their progression-free survival [54]. Golan et al. reported that stage III/IV patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy carrying BRCA1/2 mutations had improved overall survival compared to those patients treated with other drugs (22 versus 9 months, resp.; ) [55]. One study reported that 5 out of 8 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas that were treated with platinum-based chemotherapy presented BRCA2 mutation. Of these 5 patients, 2 had complete radiological response and 2 had partial responses to platinum treatment [56]. All the above-mentioned studies suggest that BRCA2 mutations predict not only platinum response but also better outcome and longer survival for pancreatic cancer patients with advanced disease.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) prevent the repair of double-strand DNA breaks, homologous recombination, and replication repair performed by the PARP family of proteins [57]. A preclinical study with CAPAN-1 cell line has suggested that 6174delT mutation of BRCA2 is highly sensitive to PARPi [58]. However, another study also performed with pancreatic cancer cell lines reported how a PARPi increases sensitivity to chemoradiotherapy independently of BRCA2 mutation status [59].

A different drug popularly used in pancreatic cancer treatment is gemcitabine and is able to induce DNA damage response and PARP degradation [60]. Gemcitabine in combination with PARPi showed promising antitumor activity compared to PBS, gemcitabine, or PARPi alone, in in vivo models of pancreatic cancer [61].

In clinical studies, BRCA2-positive status has been associated with better response to PARPi alone or in combination with other drugs. In one study, 3 out of 4 patients with a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation showed partial response after receiving PARPi alone or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy [62]. In a phase I/II trial of PARPi in combination with 5FU and oxaliplatin that included 2 patients with BRCA2 mutation, one showed a partial response and the other achieved complete response [63]. Another phase IB trial of PARPi in combination with gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapy reported that BRCA-mutated patients achieved partial response in 56% and stable disease in 44% of cases. However, 62% of BRCA wild-type patients remained with stable disease and 25% with progression [64].

To date, personalised therapies in pancreatic cancer could improve patient survival if assisted by breakthrough techniques used in molecular diagnosis. Deep sequencing currently offers a high-throughput method of dissecting the underlying mechanisms of tumorigenicity, leading to new strategies for personalised medicine. However, pancreatic cancer genotype is highly heterogeneous, and this heterogeneity involves its therapeutic ineffectiveness [65]. The IMPaCT clinical trial was set out to improve patient survival using deep sequencing to guide treatment decisions. In the study, patients carrying BRCA2 mutations were eligible to receive targeted treatment based on 5FU and mitomycin versus gemcitabine alone [66]. Nevertheless, no consistent conclusions arose from this trial due to the low number of patients recruited with BRCA2 mutations [67].

Nevertheless, patients could present acquired resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy by accumulation of secondary genomic alterations, such as BCR-ABL point mutations, in which case the BRCA2 mutation effect is bypassed [68].

Table 1 summarises ongoing or recently completed clinical trials recruiting BRCA2 mutated pancreatic cancer patients.

Clinical trial PhaseStudy typeDrugsSponsor Inclusion criteria

NCT02309632ScreeningNonrandomizedScreening of high-risk individualsUniversity of ArkansasPeutz-Jegher’s Syndrome
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier
Familial atypical malignant melanoma syndrome
Colorectal neoplasms, hereditary nonpolyposis
Hereditary pancreatitis

NCT02000089Prospective observationalCohortHuman synthetic secretinJohns Hopkins UniversityPancreas cancer
Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome
Gene mutation
Germline mutation carrier
Lynch Syndrome

NCT02775461Prospective observationalCohortIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiPancreas cancer
Chronic pancreatitis
Pancreatic cyst
Family history of pancreas cancer
Genetic mutations

NCT01585805Phase IIRandomizedGemcitabine, cisplatin with or without veliparib or veliparib aloneNational Cancer InstituteBRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier
Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma
Pancreatic adenocarcinoma
Recurrent pancreatic carcinoma
Stage III pancreatic cancer
Stage IV pancreatic cancer

NCT01102569Prospective observationalCohortColumbia UniversityBRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier

NCT00438906Prospective observationalCohortHuman synthetic secretinJohns Hopkins UniversityPancreatic neoplasm
Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome

NCT01233505Phase IInterventionalVeliparib, oxaliplatin, capecitabineNational Cancer InstituteAdvanced solid tumors
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier

NCT02703545Prospective observationalCohortJohns Hopkins UniversityPeutz-Jeghers Syndrome
Familial pancreas cancer
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier
Hereditary pancreatitis

NCT00714701Prospective observationalCohortSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer CenterEarly pancreatic neoplasia
Familial pancreatic neoplasia

NCT00892736Phase IInterventionalVeliparibNational Cancer InstituteAdvanced solid tumors
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier
Estrogen receptor negative
HER2/Neu negative

NCT01339650Phase IInterventionalABT-767AbbVieAdvanced solid tumors
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier

NCT01078662Phase IIInterventionalOlaparibAstraZenecaAdvanced solid tumors
BRCA1 mutation carrier
BRCA2 mutation carrier

5. Conclusions

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most deadly cancers worldwide, and despite new methods of early diagnosis, surgery, and drug discovery, tumour cells tend to scatter and metastasise to vital organs, thereby reducing survival significantly. It is also highly resistant to treatments and responds poorly to chemoradiotherapy; indeed, chemoradiotherapy is used in most of cases as a palliative therapy. Therefore, patients are encouraged to participate in clinical trials regardless of disease stage.

Some studies attribute the increasing incidence of sporadic pancreatic cancer to the ageing of the population. However, several studies have reported different factors associated with this neoplasm. Obesity, cigarette smoking, high alcohol intake, and chronic pancreatitis are the most relevant factors [69].

On the other hand, it is estimated that 10% of pancreatic cancer cases are due to an inherited syndrome [11, 12] caused by mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes [10]. Most of the clinical studies that relate pancreatic cancer to BRCA2 mutations have been performed on Ashkenazim. Although this fact limits the findings’ applicability to other populations, there is nonetheless great potential in the study of the heritability of BRCA2 mutation and pancreatic cancer incidence [41, 42].

Several preclinical and clinical studies have suggested the potential use of BRCA2 mutations as biomarkers for DNA damage agents’ response like platinum-based chemotherapy and PARPi. Clinical trials have evaluated BRCA2 as a predictive biomarker for use in platinum-based therapies but they were mainly retrospective and with a scarce cohort of patients. Thus, further multicenter prospective studies using larger cohorts are required to investigate multitarget therapies and their potential to minimize resistance to therapy.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no conflict of interests.


The authors thank Oliver Shaw (IIS-FJD) for editing the manuscript for English usage, clarity, and style.


  1. R. Wooster, S. L. Neuhausen, J. Mangion et al., “Localization of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA2, to chromosome 13q12-13,” Science, vol. 265, no. 5181, pp. 2088–2090, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. D. L. Thull and V. G. Vogel, “Recognition and management of hereditary breast cancer syndromes,” Oncologist, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 13–24, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. N. Collins, R. McManus, R. Wooster et al., “Consistent loss of the wild type allele in breast cancers from a family linked to the BRCA2 gene on chromosome 13q12-13,” Oncogene, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1673–1675, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
  4. H. T. Lynch, P. Watson, S. Tinley et al., “An update on DNA-based BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic counseling in hereditary breast cancer,” Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, vol. 109, no. 2, pp. 91–98, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. C. E. Bronner, S. M. Baker, P. T. Morrison et al., “Mutation in the DNA mismatch repair gene homologue hMLH1 is associated with hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer,” Nature, vol. 368, no. 6468, pp. 258–261, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. K. A. Foster, P. Harrington, J. Kerr et al., “Somatic and germline mutations of the BRCA2 gene in sporadic ovarian cancer,” Cancer Research, vol. 56, no. 16, pp. 3622–3625, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  7. S. Chen and G. Parmigiani, “Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 1329–1333, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. D. Ford and D. F. Easton, “The genetics of breast and ovarian cancer,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 805–812, 1995. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. M. Schutte, L. T. Da Costa, S. A. Hahn et al., “Identification by representational difference analysis of a homozygous deletion in pancreatic carcinoma that lies within the BRCA2 region,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 92, no. 13, pp. 5950–5954, 1995. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. P. Tonin, P. Ghadirian, C. Phelan et al., “A large multisite cancer family is linked to BRCA2,” Journal of Medical Genetics, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 982–984, 1995. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. H. T. Lynch, R. E. Brand, C. A. Deters, T. G. Shaw, and J. F. Lynch, “Hereditary pancreatic cancer,” Pancreatology, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 466–471, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. A. C. Tersmette, G. M. Petersen, G. J. A. Offerhaus et al., “Increased risk of incident pancreatic cancer among first-degree relatives of patients with familial pancreatic cancer,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 738–744, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
  13. D. M. Parkin, E. Laara, and C. S. Muir, “Estimates of the worldwide frequency of sixteen major cancers in 1980,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 184–197, 1988. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. S. Raimondi, P. Maisonneuve, and A. B. Lowenfels, “Epidemiology of pancreatic cancer: an overview,” Nature Reviews Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 699–708, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. C. Bosetti, P. Bertuccio, E. Negri, C. La Vecchia, M. P. Zeegers, and P. Boffetta, “Pancreatic cancer: overview of descriptive epidemiology,” Molecular Carcinogenesis, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 3–13, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. S. C. Larsson, L. Bergkvist, and A. Wolk, “Consumption of sugar and sugar-sweetened foods and the risk of pancreatic cancer in a prospective study,” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 84, no. 5, pp. 1171–1176, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
  17. P. Maisonneuve and A. B. Lowenfels, “Risk factors for pancreatic cancer: a summary review of meta-analytical studies,” International Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 186–198, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. T. P. Yeo, “Demographics, epidemiology, and inheritance of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma,” Seminars in Oncology, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 8–18, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. S. C. Larsson and A. Wolk, “Red and processed meat consumption and risk of pancreatic cancer: meta-analysis of prospective studies,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 106, no. 3, pp. 603–607, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. P. Ghadirian, J. Baillargeon, A. Simard, and C. Perret, “Food habits and pancreatic cancer: a case-control study of the Francophone community in Montreal, Canada,” Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 895–899, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
  21. A. F. S. Amaral, M. Porta, D. T. Silverman et al., “Pancreatic cancer risk and levels of trace elements,” Gut, vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 1583–1588, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. WHO, WHO Guidelines: Water Quality and Health Strategy 2013–2020, WHO, 2016,
  23. J. Ferlay, E. Steliarova-Foucher, J. Lortet-Tieulent et al., “Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 1374–1403, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. A. Schulte, N. Pandeya, J. Fawcett et al., “Association between family cancer history and risk of pancreatic cancer,” Cancer Epidemiology, vol. 45, pp. 145–150, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. J. P. Evans, W. Burke, R. Chen et al., “Familial pancreatic adenocarcinoma: association with diabetes and early molecular diagnosis,” Journal of Medical Genetics, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 330–335, 1995. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. M. Wagner, C. Redaelli, M. Lietz, C. A. Seiler, H. Friess, and M. W. Büchler, “Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma,” British Journal of Surgery, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 586–594, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. A. Cucchetti, G. Ercolani, G. Taffurelli et al., “A comprehensive analysis on expected years of life lost due to pancreatic cancer,” Pancreatology, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 449–453, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. D. P. Kelsen, R. Portenoy, H. Thaler, Y. Tao, and M. Brennan, “Pain as a predictor of outcome in patients with operable pancreatic carcinoma,” Surgery, vol. 122, no. 1, pp. 53–59, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. C. Abaji, I. Cousineau, and A. Belmaaza, “BRCA2 regulates homologous recombination in response to DNA damage: implications for genome stability and carcinogenesis,” Cancer Research, vol. 65, no. 10, pp. 4117–4125, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. S. K. Sharan, M. Morimatsu, U. Albrecht et al., “Embryonic lethality and radiation hypersensitivity mediated by Rad51 in mice lacking Brca2,” Nature, vol. 386, no. 6627, pp. 804–810, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. D.-S. Lim and P. Hasty, “A mutation in mouse rad51 results in an early embryonic lethal that is suppressed by a mutation in p53,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 7133–7143, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. F. Connor, D. Bertwistle, P. Joseph Mee et al., “Tumorigenesis and a DNA repair defect in mice with a truncating Brca2 mutation,” Nature Genetics, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 423–431, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. L. S. Friedman, F. C. Thistlethwaite, K. J. Patel et al., “Thymic lymphomas in mice with a truncating mutation in BRCA2,” Cancer Research, vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 1338–1343, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  34. M. E. Moynahan, A. J. Pierce, and M. Jasin, “BRCA2 is required for homology-directed repair of chromosomal breaks,” Molecular Cell, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 263–272, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. K. M. Murphy, K. A. Brune, C. Griffin et al., “Evaluation of candidate genes MAP2K4, MADH4, ACVR1B, and BRCA2 in familial pancreatic cancer: deleterious BRCA2 mutations in 17%,” Cancer Research, vol. 62, no. 13, pp. 3789–3793, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  36. M. Goggins, M. Schutte, J. Lu et al., “Germline BRCA2 gene mutations in patients with apparently sporadic pancreatic carcinomas,” Cancer Research, vol. 56, no. 23, pp. 5360–5364, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  37. L. Huang, C. Wu, D. Yu et al., “Identification of common variants in BRCA2 and MAP2K4 for susceptibility to sporadic pancreatic cancer,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1001–1005, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. M. Goggins, R. H. Hruban, and S. E. Kern, “BRCA2 is inactivated late in the development of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia: evidence and implications,” American Journal of Pathology, vol. 156, no. 5, pp. 1767–1771, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. M. Rowley, A. Ohashi, G. Mondal et al., “Inactivation of Brca2 promotes Trp53-associated but inhibits KrasG12D-dependent pancreatic cancer development in mice,” Gastroenterology, vol. 140, no. 4, pp. 1303–1313, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. F. Skoulidis, L. D. Cassidy, V. Pisupati et al., “Germline Brca2 heterozygosity promotes KrasG12D-driven carcinogenesis in a murine model of familial pancreatic cancer,” Cancer Cell, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 499–509, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. J. P. Struewing, P. Hartge, S. Wacholder et al., “The risk of cancer associated with specific mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 among Ashkenazi Jews,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 336, no. 20, pp. 1401–1408, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. C. Oddoux, J. P. Struewing, C. M. Clayton et al., “The carrier frequency of the BRCA2 6174delT mutation among Ashkenazi Jewish individuals is approximately 1%,” Nature Genetics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 188–190, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. S. A. Hahn, B. Greenhalf, I. Ellis et al., “BRCA2 germline mutations in familial pancreatic carcinoma,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 214–221, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. F. J. Couch, M. R. Johnson, K. G. Rabe et al., “The prevalence of BRCA2 mutations in familial pancreatic cancer,” Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 342–346, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. A. K. Rustgi, “Familial pancreatic cancer: genetic advances,” Genes and Development, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. T. A. Kunkel and D. A. Erie, “DNA mismatch repair,” Annual Review of Biochemistry, vol. 74, pp. 681–710, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. J. Jiricny, “The multifaceted mismatch-repair system,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 335–346, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. X. Dong, Y. Li, K. R. Hess, J. L. Abbruzzese, and D. Li, “DNA mismatch repair gene polymorphisms affect survival in pancreatic cancer,” Oncologist, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 61–70, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. N. Habbe, P. Langer, M. Sina-Frey, and D. K. Bartsch, “Familial pancreatic cancer syndromes,” Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 417–430, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. G. Luo, Y. Lu, K. Jin et al., “Pancreatic cancer: BRCA mutation and personalized treatment,” Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy, vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 1223–1231, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. Z. H. Siddik, “Cisplatin: mode of cytotoxic action and molecular basis of resistance,” Oncogene, vol. 22, no. 47, pp. 7265–7279, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. G. R. Oliver, E. Sugar, D. Laheru, and L. A. Diaz, “Family history of cancer and sensitivity to platinum chemotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma,” in Proceedings of the Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, abstract 180, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  53. A. Sonnenblick, L. Kadouri, L. Appelbaum et al., “Complete remission, in BRCA2 mutation carrier with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, treated with cisplatin based therapy,” Cancer Biology and Therapy, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 165–168, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. B. Tran, G. Zogopoulos, A. Borgida, S. Holter, S. Gallinger, and M. J. Moore, “Platinum-based chemotherapy (pt-chemo) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (pc) associated with brca mutations: a translational case series,” Journal of Clinical Oncology (ASCO Meeting 2012), vol. 30, abstract 217, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  55. T. Golan, Z. S. Kanji, R. Epelbaum et al., “Overall survival and clinical characteristics of pancreatic cancer in BRCA mutation carriers,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 111, no. 6, pp. 1132–1138, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. N. Waddell, M. Pajic, A.-M. Patch et al., “Whole genomes redefine the mutational landscape of pancreatic cancer,” Nature, vol. 518, no. 7540, pp. 495–501, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. J.-M. Lee, J. A. Ledermann, and E. C. Kohn, “PARP inhibitors for BRCA1/2 mutation-associated and BRCA-like malignancies,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 25, no. 1, Article ID mdt384, pp. 32–40, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. N. McCabe, C. J. Lord, A. N. J. Tutt, N. M. B. Martin, G. C. M. Smith, and A. Ashworth, “BRCA2-deficient CAPAN-1 cells are extremely sensitive to the inhibition of poly (ADP-Ribose) polymerase: an issue of potency,” Cancer Biology and Therapy, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 934–936, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. L. Porcelli, A. E. Quatrale, P. Mantuano et al., “Optimize radiochemotherapy in pancreatic cancer: PARP inhibitors a new therapeutic opportunity,” Molecular Oncology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 308–322, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. Y. Wang, Y. Kuramitsu, K. Tokuda et al., “Gemcitabine induces poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP-1) degradation through autophagy in pancreatic cancer,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 10, Article ID e109076, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. D. A. Jacob, M. Bahra, J. M. Langrehr et al., “Combination therapy of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor 3-aminobenzamide and gemcitabine shows strong antitumor activity in pancreatic cancer cells,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 738–748, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. M. A. Lowery, D. P. Kelsen, Z. K. Stadler et al., “An emerging entity: pancreatic adenocarcinoma associated with a known brca mutation: clinical descriptors, treatment implications, and future directions,” Oncologist, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1397–1402, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. M. J. Pishvaian, H. Wang, T. Zhuang et al., “A phase I/II study of ABT-888 in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin (Ox) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC),” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 31, supplement 4, abstract 147, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  64. E. M. O'Reilly, M. A. Lowery, M. F. Segal et al., “Phase IB trial of cisplatin (C), gemcitabine (G), and veliparib (V) in patients with known or potential BRCA or PALB2-mutated pancreas adenocarcinoma (PC),” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 32, no. 5s, supplement, abstract 4023, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  65. A. V. Biankin, N. Waddell, K. S. Kassahn et al., “Pancreatic cancer genomes reveal aberrations in axon guidance pathway genes,” Nature, vol. 491, no. 7424, pp. 399–405, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. D. D. Von Hoff, T. J. Ervin, F. P. Arena et al., “Results of a randomized phase III trial (IMPaCT) of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with PET and CA19-9 correlates,” in Proceedings of the ASCO Annual Meeting, abstract 4005, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  67. L. A. Chantrill, A. M. Nagrial, C. Watson et al., “Precision medicine for advanced pancreas cancer: the individualized molecular pancreatic cancer therapy (IMPaCT) Trial,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 2029–2037, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. W. Sakai, E. M. Swisher, B. Y. Karlan et al., “Secondary mutations as a mechanism of cisplatin resistance in BRCA2-mutated cancers,” Nature, vol. 451, no. 7182, pp. 1116–1120, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. U. Nöthlings, L. R. Wilkens, S. P. Murphy, J. H. Hankin, B. E. Henderson, and L. N. Kolonel, “Meat and fat intake as risk factors for pancreatic cancer: the multiethnic cohort study,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 97, no. 19, pp. 1458–1465, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2016 Javier Martinez-Useros and Jesus Garcia-Foncillas. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles