» Articles » PMID: 38652271

Exploring the Effect of BRCA1/2 Status on Chemotherapy-induced Hematologic Toxicity in Patients with Ovarian Cancer

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2024 Apr 23
PMID 38652271
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: BRCA1/2 are integral to the DNA repair mechanism and their germline pathogenic variants (gBRCA) result in a high risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer. Patients with gBRCA mutations showed increased sensitivity to DNA cross-linking agent but might have increased treatment-related toxicities. Thus, we hypothesized that gBRCA mutation ovarian cancer patients who underwent platinum-based chemotherapy might be at higher risk of developing chemotherapy-induced hematologic toxicity.

Methods: This study enrolled 160 patients with ovarian cancer who received frontline platinum-based chemotherapy between 2011 and 2019 in Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital. Incidence rate and severity of chemotherapy-induced hematologic toxicity (neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia) was compared for BRCA mutation and wild patients.

Results: 160 women, including 62 BRCA1/2 (38 BRCA1, and 25 BRCA2) mutation group, and 98 noncarriers, were analyzed. A higher frequency of G2 anemia was noted in the BRCA -mutant group (22% vs. 1%, p = 0.07). Furthermore, G3 anemia was significantly common among BRCA group (12.9% vs. 3%, p = 0.02). In the subgroup analysis according to BRCA1/2 status, BRCA1 mutated patients showed a significantly higher frequency of G1 anemia than BRCA2 (89% vs. 60%, p = 0.01). In terms of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, BRCA mutated patients and noncarriers had similar hematologic toxicity.

Conclusion: Germline BRCA mutations were associated with a higher frequency of G2/3 anemia in ovarian cancer patients who underwent first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Moreover, the BRCA1 mutation appeared to be more strongly associated with the incidence of chemotherapy-induced anemia. Our findings warrant further investigation in larger, prospective studies to confirm these current findings and determine whether preventive interventions may be necessary.

References
1.
Banerjee S, Kaye S . New strategies in the treatment of ovarian cancer: current clinical perspectives and future potential. Clin Cancer Res. 2013; 19(5):961-8. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2243. View

2.
Daly M, Axilbund J, Buys S, Crawford B, Farrell C, Friedman S . Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010; 8(5):562-94. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0043. View

3.
Turner N, Tutt A, Ashworth A . Hallmarks of 'BRCAness' in sporadic cancers. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004; 4(10):814-9. DOI: 10.1038/nrc1457. View

4.
Nielsen F, Hansen T, Sorensen C . Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: new genes in confined pathways. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016; 16(9):599-612. DOI: 10.1038/nrc.2016.72. View

5.
Helleday T, Petermann E, Lundin C, Hodgson B, Sharma R . DNA repair pathways as targets for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008; 8(3):193-204. DOI: 10.1038/nrc2342. View