Forthe first time,we evaluated the incidence of CHEK2 mutations in a case-control study of BC among Iranian women. Unfortunately, only 30% of BC risk factors are known and the additional causes of most cases are unknown (Dolan & Glasser 2000
). BRCA1 and BRCA2 susceptibility genes have been identified in BC in previous studies (Miki et al. 1994; Wooster et al. 1995). In addition, the genes CHEK2, ATM, PALB2 (the partner and localizer of the BRCA2 gene) BRIP (BRCA1-interactingprotein gene), and NCOA3 (Nuclear Receptor Coactivator 3) are considered as predisposing genes increasingthe risk of BC (Jahani & Ghotbi 2002). Therefore, we analyzed any CHEK2 mutation as well asassociation between these mutations and breast cancer in Iranian women.
Initially, we analyzed these mutations in an equal number (100) of breast cancer and control cases. We found IVS2 + 1G > A missense variant in a positive case of CHEK2 mutation IVS2 + 1G > A, which was associated with hereditary breast cancer and the other that was found to have a sporadic nature (2 out of 100 patients) (p = 0.48). By examining the results of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium using chi-square test, our results have no statistically significant relationship (p = 0/48) in our society.
We showed that this mutation was present with a very low frequency in breast cancer patients and healthy controls of the Iranian population. Similar results have reported that the CHEK2 IVS2 + 1G > A variants are associated with BC risk (Bogdanova et al. 2005; Consortium 2004). None of these 100 samples had CHEK2 1100delC (Sodha et al. 2006), I157T (Strachan & Read 1996), and del5395bp mutations. Our results are similar to those reporting that there is no association between CHEK2 1100delC (Rashid 2005; Ndawula et al. 2014), I157T (Kilpivaara et al. 2004; Bayram et al. 2012), and del5395bp (Mohelnikova-Duchonova et al. 2010; Cybulski et al. 2007) variations and breast cancer risk and our cases were not selected based on family history.
CHK2 IVS2 + 1G > A mutation has a lower geographic distribution (Cybulski et al. 2007; Bogdanova et al. 2005) whereas the I157T mutation shows a higher geographic distribution (Cybulski et al. 2004a; Cybulski et al. 2004b). This variant has been reported in ethnically diverse populations and is associated with a modest risk for developing BC among German and Belarusian populations (Bogdanova et al. 2005). Also, the protein-truncating variant IVS2 + 1G > A mutation is detected in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe, German, and Byelorussian populations (Cybulski et al. 2007; Bogdanova et al. 2007)as well as Polish cancer patients (Cybulski et al. 2004b).
There are only few studies in some countries investigating the possible relationship between IVS2 + 1G > A CHEK2 gene mutation and an increased risk of breast cancer (Bogdanova et al. 2005). It should be noted that the rare occurrence of IVS2 + 1G > A mutation may be related to lack of sufficient studies reported from different geographical regions (Einarsdóttir et al. 2006).
These results confirm the geographical and ethnic differences between populations and the need for further investigations in different nations.
Although it is widely accepted that the risk of BC may be higher for women who have both a CHEK2 gene mutation and a family history of BC (Cybulski et al. 2011), our results fail to clearly demonstrate a role for CHEK2 mutation IVS2 + 1G > A in inherited susceptibility to breast cancer similar to other studies (Bogdanova et al. 2005; Liu et al., 2012).This may be explained by an interaction of CHEK2 mutations with susceptibility alleles in other genes to increase the inherited BC prevalence (Kilpivaara et al. 2004; Consortium 2004).
The I157T mutation has not been identified in different populations (Consortium 2004; Einarsdóttir et al. 2006). Moreover, no increased risk of breast cancer due to I157T CHEK2 gene mutation was observed in Moroccan population (ElAmrani et al. 2014). I157T had a lower incidence in some countries when compared to 1100delC mutation in patients with breast cancer (Consortium 2004; Meijers-Heijboer et al. 2003).
We did not find the 1100delC mutation in Iranian population, which is in line with previous studies and led us to propose that the c.1100delC may not contribute to BC susceptibility in Asian (Choi et al. 2008; Song et al. 2006; Bell et al. 2007; Lee & Ang 2008; Rajkumar et al. 2003) countries and North America (González-Hormazábal et al. 2008), compared to the pattern observed in Northern and Eastern European countries (ElAmrani et al., 2014). On the other hand, these countries have a traditionally common origin compared to other countries.
These findings are in agreement with the hypothesis that the existence of a c.1100delC frequency gradient from these regions is caused by an ancestrally common origin in the North (ElAmrani et al., 2014). This gradient may be more accentuated in the Middle East countries, which may explain the absence of this mutation among Iranian population.
CHEK2 del5395bp gene mutation increases the risk of breast cancer in some countries (Cybulski et al., 2007; Bąk et al., 2014).
Both protein-truncating mutations (CHK2 1100delC, I157T, and IVS2 + 1G > A) are reported to be associated with breast, prostate, thyroid, kidney, and bladder cancer (Cybulski et al., 2004b). In contrast, several studies have shown no association between these mutations and susceptibility to cancer (González-Hormazábal et al., 2008; Osorio et al., 2004). Interestingly, two different investigators have reported that the CHEK2 I157Tmutation seems to be protective against lung cancer in patients from Eastern Europe (Cybulski et al., 2008).
Obviously, a similar type of study with a higher number of samples could be useful to show the possible increase in frequency of CHEK2 mutation and may lead to faster diagnosis of patients with breast cancer. On the basis of results obtained from different countries with bigger samples, the association between increased risk of breast cancer and CHEK2 gene mutation has been confirmed.
Several reasons could explain this situation. Firstly, the number of individuals recruited in this study was comparatively small and some relations may have been missed as a result of limited study. Secondly, it was a hospital-based investigation and the study populations were selected from a single organization (Tehran University, Milad Hospital); therefore, the selection bias was inevitable, and the participants may not have presented the common ethnic characteristics of the whole Iranian society. Thirdly, the sample size used in our study was preferred according to several previous studies (ElAmrani et al. 2014; Meijers-Heijboer et al. 2003; Choi et al. 2008; Song et al. 2006; Bell et al. 2007; Lee & Ang 2008; Rajkumar et al. 2003; González-Hormazábal et al. 2008; Bąk et al. 2014; Osorio et al. 2004; Cybulski et al. 2008; Iniesta et al. 2010), and it is therefore essential for our current findings to be confirmed in a larger independent study. Fourthly, the present study only focused on a single gene with no considerations on gene-environment and gene-gene interactions, which can influence the characteristic susceptibility to BC.
In conclusion, for the first time, we identified one out of four different CHEK2 alterations in two patients (2%) and the occurrence of 1100delC, I157T, and del5395bp mutations in CHEK2 gene, which are usually absent or are present at really low frequency in breast cancer patients and healthy controls of the Iranian population.
As a result, we concluded that it is not a suitable predictive test for other CHEK2 mutations in a clinical setting for breast cancer among Iranian population. On the other hand, further studies examining the total coding sequence of CHEK2 must be performed. Our study reveals this relationship, and although the number of patients was low, the patients and controls were fully age-matched.
Moreover, many large-scale studies are needed to confirm our results, particularly in patients with different ethnic origins for better understanding of CHEK2 1100delC, IVS2 + 1G > A, del5395bp, and I157T mutations and susceptibility to breast cancer. However, the overall number of detected variants in our study was relatively small, and a number of associations may have been missed as a result of limited study scale. The authors suggest further studies regarding the gene-gene interaction between CHEK2 gene and other tumor suppressor genes to demonstrate the cancer risk in Iranian women. Finally, in agreement with previous studies, except for IVS2 + 1G > A mutation (which is usually observed rarely), the other three CHEK2 mutations do not play an important role in the breast cancer risk in Iran