@article{ManchiaAdliAkulaetal.2013,
  author    = {Manchia, Mirko and Adli, Mazda and Akula, Nirmala and Arda, Raffaella and Aubry, Jean-Michel and Backlund, Lena and Banzato, Claudio E. M. and Baune, Bernhard T. and Bellivier, Frank and Bengesser, Susanne and Biernacka, Joanna M. and Brichant-Petitjean, Clara and Bui, Elise and Calkin, Cynthia V. and Cheng, Andrew Tai Ann and Chillotti, Caterina and Cichon, Sven and Clark, Scott and Czerski, Piotr M. and Dantas, Clarissa and Del Zompo, Maria and DePaulo, J. Raymond and Detera-Wadleigh, Sevilla D. and Etain, Bruno and Falkai, Peter and Fris{\´e}n, Louise and Frye, Mark A. and Fullerton, Jan and Gard, S{\´e}bastien and Garnham, Julie and Goes, Fernando S. and Grof, Paul and Gruber, Oliver and Hashimoto, Ryota and Hauser, Joanna and Heilbronner, Urs and Hoban, Rebecca and Hou, Liping and Jamain, St{\´e}phane and Kahn, Jean-Pierre and Kassem, Layla and Kato, Tadafumi and Kelsoe, John R. and Kittel-Schneider, Sarah and Kliwicki, Sebastian and Kuo, Po-Hsiu and Kusumi, Ichiro and Laje, Gonzalo and Lavebratt, Catharina and Leboyer, Marion and Leckband, Susan G. and L{\´o}pez Jaramillo, Carlos A. and Maj, Mario and Malafosse, Alain and Martinsson, Lina and Masui, Takuya and Mitchell, Philip B. and Mondimore, Frank and Monteleone, Palmiero and Nallet, Audrey and Neuner, Maria and Nov{\´a}k, Tom{\´a}s and O'Donovan, Claire and {\"O}sby, Urban and Ozaki, Norio and Perlis, Roy H. and Pfennig, Andrea and Potash, James B. and Reich-Erkelenz, Daniela and Reif, Andreas and Reininghaus, Eva and Richardson, Sara and Rouleau, Guy A. and Rybakowski, Janusz K. and Schalling, Martin and Schofield, Peter R. and Schubert, Oliver K. and Schweizer, Barbara and Seem{\"u}ller, Florian and Grigoroiu-Serbanescu, Maria and Severino, Giovanni and Seymour, Lisa R. and Slaney, Claire and Smoller, Jordan W. and Squassina, Alessio and Stamm, Thomas and Steele, Jo and Stopkova, Pavla and Tighe, Sarah K. and Tortorella, Alfonso and Turecki, Gustavo and Wray, Naomi R. and Wright, Adam and Zandi, Peter P. and Zilles, David and Bauer, Michael and Rietschel, Marcella and McMahon, Francis J. and Schulze, Thomas G. and Alda, Martin},
  title     = {Assessment of Response to Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Bipolar Disorder: A Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) Report},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {6},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0065636},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130938},
  pages     = {e65636},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Objective: The assessment of response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder (BD) is complicated by variable length of treatment, unpredictable clinical course, and often inconsistent compliance. Prospective and retrospective methods of assessment of lithium response have been proposed in the literature. In this study we report the key phenotypic measures of the "Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder" scale currently used in the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) study. Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine ConLiGen sites took part in a two-stage case-vignette rating procedure to examine inter-rater agreement [Kappa (\(\kappa\))] and reliability [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)] of lithium response. Annotated first-round vignettes and rating guidelines were circulated to expert research clinicians for training purposes between the two stages. Further, we analyzed the distributional properties of the treatment response scores available for 1,308 patients using mixture modeling. Results: Substantial and moderate agreement was shown across sites in the first and second sets of vignettes (\(\kappa\) = 0.66 and \(\kappa\) = 0.54, respectively), without significant improvement from training. However, definition of response using the A score as a quantitative trait and selecting cases with B criteria of 4 or less showed an improvement between the two stages (\(ICC_1 = 0.71\) and \(ICC_2 = 0.75\), respectively). Mixture modeling of score distribution indicated three subpopulations (full responders, partial responders, non responders). Conclusions: We identified two definitions of lithium response, one dichotomous and the other continuous, with moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement and reliability. Accurate phenotypic measurement of lithium response is crucial for the ongoing ConLiGen pharmacogenomic study.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SilvestriBarrowdaleMulliganetal.2016,
  author    = {Silvestri, Valentina and Barrowdale, Daniel and Mulligan, Anna Marie and Neuhausen, Susan L. and Fox, Stephen and Karlan, Beth Y. and Mitchell, Gillian and James, Paul and Thull, Darcy L. and Zorn, Kristin K. and Carter, Natalie J. and Nathanson, Katherine L. and Domchek, Susan M. and Rebbeck, Timothy R. and Ramus, Susan J. and Nussbaum, Robert L. and Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. and Rantala, Johanna and Yoon, Sook-Yee and Caligo, Maria A. and Spugnesi, Laura and Bojesen, Anders and Pedersen, Inge Sokilde and Thomassen, Mads and Jensen, Uffe Birk and Toland, Amanda Ewart and Senter, Leigha and Andrulis, Irene L. and Glendon, Gord and Hulick, Peter J. and Imyanitov, Evgeny N. and Greene, Mark H. and Mai, Phuong L. and Singer, Christian F. and Rappaport-Fuerhauser, Christine and Kramer, Gero and Vijai, Joseph and Offit, Kenneth and Robson, Mark and Lincoln, Anne and Jacobs, Lauren and Machackova, Eva and Foretova, Lenka and Navratilova, Marie and Vasickova, Petra and Couch, Fergus J. and Hallberg, Emily and Ruddy, Kathryn J. and Sharma, Priyanka and Kim, Sung-Won and Teixeira, Manuel R. and Pinto, Pedro and Montagna, Marco and Matricardi, Laura and Arason, Adalgeir and Johannsson, Oskar Th and Barkardottir, Rosa B. and Jakubowska, Anna and Lubinski, Jan and Izquierdo, Angel and Pujana, Miguel Angel and Balma{\~n}a, Judith and Diez, Orland and Ivady, Gabriella and Papp, Janos and Olah, Edith and Kwong, Ava and Nevanlinna, Heli and Aittom{\"a}ki, Kristiina and Segura, Pedro Perez and Caldes, Trinidad and Van Maerken, Tom and Poppe, Bruce and Claes, Kathleen B. M. and Isaacs, Claudine and Elan, Camille and Lasset, Christine and Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique and Barjhoux, Laure and Belotti, Muriel and Meindl, Alfons and Gehrig, Andrea and Sutter, Christian and Engel, Christoph and Niederacher, Dieter and Steinemann, Doris and Hahnen, Eric and Kast, Karin and Arnold, Norbert and Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda and Wand, Dorothea and Godwin, Andrew K. and Evans, D. Gareth and Frost, Debra and Perkins, Jo and Adlard, Julian and Izatt, Louise and Platte, Radka and Eeles, Ros and Ellis, Steve and Hamann, Ute and Garber, Judy and Fostira, Florentia and Fountzilas, George and Pasini, Barbara and Giannini, Giuseppe and Rizzolo, Piera and Russo, Antonio and Cortesi, Laura and Papi, Laura and Varesco, Liliana and Palli, Domenico and Zanna, Ines and Savarese, Antonella and Radice, Paolo and Manoukian, Siranoush and Peissel, Bernard and Barile, Monica and Bonanni, Bernardo and Viel, Alessandra and Pensotti, Valeria and Tommasi, Stefania and Peterlongo, Paolo and Weitzel, Jeffrey N. and Osorio, Ana and Benitez, Javier and McGuffog, Lesley and Healey, Sue and Gerdes, Anne-Marie and Ejlertsen, Bent and Hansen, Thomas V. O. and Steele, Linda and Ding, Yuan Chun and Tung, Nadine and Janavicius, Ramunas and Goldgar, David E. and Buys, Saundra S. and Daly, Mary B. and Bane, Anita and Terry, Mary Beth and John, Esther M. and Southey, Melissa and Easton, Douglas F. and Chenevix-Trench, Georgia and Antoniou, Antonis C. and Ottini, Laura},
  title     = {Male breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: pathology data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2},
  series = {Breast Cancer Research},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Breast Cancer Research},
  number    = {15},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13058-016-0671-y},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-164769},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background BRCA1 and, more commonly, BRCA2 mutations are associated with increased risk of male breast cancer (MBC). However, only a paucity of data exists on the pathology of breast cancers (BCs) in men with BRCA1/2 mutations. Using the largest available dataset, we determined whether MBCs arising in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers display specific pathologic features and whether these features differ from those of BRCA1/2 female BCs (FBCs). Methods We characterised the pathologic features of 419 BRCA1/2 MBCs and, using logistic regression analysis, contrasted those with data from 9675 BRCA1/2 FBCs and with population-based data from 6351 MBCs in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Results Among BRCA2 MBCs, grade significantly decreased with increasing age at diagnosis (P = 0.005). Compared with BRCA2 FBCs, BRCA2 MBCs were of significantly higher stage (P for trend = 2 × 10-5) and higher grade (P for trend = 0.005) and were more likely to be oestrogen receptor-positive [odds ratio (OR) 10.59; 95 \% confidence interval (CI) 5.15-21.80] and progesterone receptor-positive (OR 5.04; 95 \% CI 3.17-8.04). With the exception of grade, similar patterns of associations emerged when we compared BRCA1 MBCs and FBCs. BRCA2 MBCs also presented with higher grade than MBCs from the SEER database (P for trend = 4 × 10-12). Conclusions On the basis of the largest series analysed to date, our results show that BRCA1/2 MBCs display distinct pathologic characteristics compared with BRCA1/2 FBCs, and we identified a specific BRCA2-associated MBC phenotype characterised by a variable suggesting greater biological aggressiveness (i.e., high histologic grade). These findings could lead to the development of gender-specific risk prediction models and guide clinical strategies appropriate for MBC management.},
  language  = {en}
}